How to make sense of the increasing number of UK-EU trade disruption stories?

In short - outside of a single market product checks and people working restrictions are inevitable. And outside a customs union you will have tariffs and / or rules of origin.

Detail ---> 1/

The UK decided to leave a Customs Union. Within that Customs Union, no tariffs, just a common external tariff or preferential rates for bilateral deals or developing countries. Hence, distribution hubs in one country for all make a lot of sense. 2/

Outside a Customs Union our choice was tariffs under WTO rules or remove them subject to rules of origin with a deal. We chose the latter, but it means we can't just import from China, rebadge, and get zero tariffs from the EU. As we could until December 31. 3/

Net result of being outside of the Customs Union - it no longer makes sense for the UK to be a distribution hub for the whole of Europe. Particularly when so many neighbouring countries remain in it. No trade deal changes that. 4/

Now, product checks, of the sort causing problems for food exporters (see Scottish seafood). In the single market, we shared regulations, so a safe product in the UK was safe in France. No inspections. We chose to leave that system, as we want to change some regulations. 5/

🚨🇬🇧🇪🇺🚛🍤🐟🥬📦✈️🇬🇧🇪🇺🚨
So here it is. After the euphoria, the @FinancialTimes @FTMag long read of how @BorisJohnson did his Trade deal with the EU. Tl:dr...not so much “build back better”, more “build back the borders” - stay with me/1.

@FTMag @BorisJohnson The really under-appreciated part of this story is the extent to which the Johnson government, having won its 80 seat majority promising to "Get Brexit Done" then explicitly and actively chose the hardest possible version of #brexit in defiance of commercial interests /2

@FTMag @BorisJohnson Our story begins in January last year when David Frost commenced what Whitehall insiders call a "Star Chamber" process to strip away anything that might be considered more than a "Canada-style" deal - regardless of the fact that UK doesn't trade with EU like Canada! /3

@FTMag @BorisJohnson So what did that mean in practice?

Well, for example leaving EU aviation safety agency (EASA); Chemicals agency (ECHA), not getting a waiver of 'safety and security' declarations for hauliers, not seeking special arrangements for animal products...on and on it goes /4

@FTMag @BorisJohnson Didn't industry object? Well yes it did - but those who yelled too hard found themselves shut out of the door.

Did Whitehall object? Yes it did - Defra and Beis and Treasury all tried at some level to temper the revolutionary fury. But mostly failed. /5

1. Brexit. Like Christmas with Covid or dunking your head in a bucket of ice cold water or running your toes over with a lawnmower. What fun we did not have. But here we all are. Forced to play the worst ever drunken party game.

THREAD

2. So as we while away our time, whooping it up from lockdown, wondering at the next national crisis, let us ponder this week’s existential question: how can a Brexit deal be so close and yet so far away?

3. Is it close? Is it far away? Are we doomed or saved? And even if we’re saved are we in fact doomed?

It’s all too much. Like playing zenga with no twig things or scrabble with no letters. My head is spinning. Pass me the whisky and egg my nog.

4. To generalize (why not, everyone else does) Brexit commentary tends to fall into two illustrious camps both full of the wisest of sages.

5. The first reflects upon Mr Johnson’s character and political track record, the many hard as you like pronouncements emanating from various government orifices and the most peculiar composition of the Conservative Party, to arrive at an understandably unhappy conclusion.

[thread] I would be able to move on from brexit if......

We had been told the UK holds some cards and not all of them

That it would be a difficult deal and not the easiest deal in history

That we would have liabilities to pay and these would be a substantial amount and that they are not zero and they do not buy us a trade deal

That we do not have "many solutions" to the NI border and that at the last having exhausted drones, blimps, random country examples that don't solve it and oh yes unspecified technology instead a border in the Irish Sea that no unionist can support is the answer

Update from MEP @PeterLiese, health spokesman for the largest party in the EU Parliament (thread):

He maintains #AstraZeneca is treating people in EU as "2nd class citizens" and that doses have gone from the EU to the UK.

"They gave 3 different explanations in less than a week"

Carrot: He's says objections are with AZ behaviour, not vaccine's efficacy

"There's been a lot of talk about AZ being a bad vaccine - very strange fake news in German media. It's definitely not true"

"If someone offered me AZ, and it’s my turn, I wouldn’t hesitate for a minute"

“The AstraZeneca vaccine has not as good data as the vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna but still it is a good vaccine. In October, we would have been happy to have a vaccine that has an efficiency well above 50%."

Stick: "AZ gave 3⃣ different explanations in less than a week why there is a shortage of supply on the European continent and why they want to deliver only 31 million doses instead of 80 million that they committed to in the contract until the end of March."

1⃣ "1st explanation was different supply chains. This is wrong because in contract with the EU, two plants in the UK are mentioned for the supply on the continent and at least until a few days ago the final finishing of the vaccine [for UK] has been in a plant in Dessau, Germany"

Along the way I wrote about considering Johnson’s Brexit decision as a choice between clichéd narratives. What would read / play best? Well...

It is absolutely no surprise to me that he ended up choosing the ending that would most easily portray him as the hero who saved the day.

The tricky part of this narrative is convincing re the ‘not giving in’ part. Hence all the bluster about standing tough and being happy to walk away.

And yet.

I’m old enough to remember when we wouldn’t accept any LPF provisions, any state aid constraints and we wanted all our fish back right now. Otherwise it’s an ‘Australia’ style Brexit.

Prof Valsamis Mitsilegas tells NI committee that the agreement on JHA is dynamic, as EU values UK inputs, and EU law will evolve over time, and value of system to UK will mean adaptation

Prof Steve Peers of Esssex Uni. Tells NI cttee that deal keeps 3/4 of previous arrangement, missing quarter is SIS II and some other capabilities in data exchange. Says quite a lot has been preserved by two sides, esp compared to no deal situation

Simon Hoare MP - is the deal adequate to challenge of policing NI, and IRL: Dr Gemma Davies (Northumbria law school). Says Data Protection issues v complex, PSNI/AGS co-operation might be better facilitated by specific agreement (not going beyond EU agreement, but clarifying)

Colin Murray tells NI cttee that Norway/Iceland extradition arrangements with EU put in place 10 years ago, now working in ways comparable to EU arrest warrant. Operational issues get easier to fix over time.

Colin Murray says there are break clauses in the TCA, and the police element could break down in a relatively short period (in theory).

Brexit- Moving On:
Those who saw membership of the EU as being in UK’s best interests are told that they are going through the stages of grief. Eventually Brexit acceptance will come and we are told to hurry up about it (by "Spartans" who trumpet never surrendering) /1

But there is no need for grief. Brexit is not a permanent condition. States can apply for membership. Brexiters have a task: either delivering on their promises or persuading people to forget them. We have a task: creating the conditions for a successful application to join. /2

I want to be practical about this. What needs to be done?

1. We must advocate for membership within the UK.
2. We must help ensure that the UK meets the conditions for membership.
3. We must maintain good relations with the EU. /3

Advocacy: Good advocacy is founded on careful preparation and good information. We will need to be clear about the adverse impacts of Brexit as they occur. We will need to be clear about the developing benefits of membership (and honest about the EU’s difficulties) /4

We need to be where people will hear us: on social media, by providing expertise available for the traditional media and by lobbying politicians. We need to help amplify those speaking for us. Which bring us to a question; do we have the advocates we need? /5

#SLE_IanDunt 30 minutes to the start of our "Evening with Ian Dunt". Information here: https://t.co/9bLxOtCr56
Log-in tickets from https://t.co/iKcwmQh7gZ. See you soon!

We will be live tweeting on this thread ...

Blimey; 19 pages of Zoom logins, 25 on each!

A crucial moment in the first page of the story of how to get back into the EU

Borders for goods: the Single Market removes checks on goods; relies a lot of people putting in the right information at the right time

TRAGIC..
"And so it came to pass that alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson travelled to Brussels to personally take charge of the Brexit trade deal negotiations. He alone could break the deadlock, put the dastardly Eurocrats in their place and snatch victory

Here’s a fundamental Brexit truth I don’t think we’ve discussed enough: the reason why Brexit has been on the front pages for so much of the past few years doesn’t actually have that much to do with Brexit. Let me explain:

Of course the UK’s relationship with the EU is of enormous economic, social & legal importance, past, present and future. Of course the trade deal matters, as will immigration rules and all the rest. But the real, real reason Brexit has been such a big deal is something else:

Brexit is first and foremost a story about the Tory party, which happens to be the party of government. Brexit mattered these past four and a half years because it deposed two prime ministers. It decided elections. It was an issue of immense political significance.

Yes, clearly underlying this there was economics and chewy discussion about N Ireland and the UK’s place in the world. But much as I’d like (as an economics/policy geek) to pretend THAT was why it dominated the news agenda, in reality it was big news because it could fell PMs

That political soap opera has so dominated the front pages that the (to me at least) much more interesting story about Brexit itself has been rather drowned out. What is that story? That the UK is heading towards what, a few years ago, everyone would have called a “hard Brexit”

When Jacob Rees Mogg threw dead fish into the Thames at WETminster, I thought, like most of you, he was making a point on behalf of the Fishing INDUSTRY.

It was only yesterday that we all learned he was acting on behalf of the FISH.

Fish happiness, not Brexit, was the goal!

In the year before #Brexit started -
(note: Brexit was not done, it's just begun)
- I worried about those most impacted.

My logic was while those wishing to remain would be most disappointed, they would also be most prepared.

#BrexitDeal would hurt its supporters.
Starting ☝️

Two reasons were anticipated.

1. Famously the economic consequences would hurt Leave voters the most (albeit no one expected the madness of combining #Brexit with #Covid19)

2. Sovereignty and independence would be reversed; we'd end up with less of both (as we have).

Number 3?

We didn't spend enough time on No.3. Few anticipated only 15 days of #Brexit would be needed.

Also a dilemma. It would have needed remainers to be listened to. Or leavers to question #Brexit.

3. What happens: A small leave group realise the con; disagree with Leave Mainstream?

No 3: And now
Mogg boasts of having fish back while:

* The fishing industry is in arms; screaming betrayal
* Some fisheries are already bankrupting
* Because fish we can't sell is rotting

Yet Jake's happy the fish are happy.
Almost as if ☝️ he had nothing to do with this

I’m feeling really sad today thinking about what we’ve lost over the last 5 years. But this is mixed with proud knowledge I, and many around me, did all we could to avert this disaster unfolding. This is a short thread to give a shout out to some of them 1/

First up is @GreenPartyMolly - I’ve already rung her today to say this and more. But she was both astute and persuasive in her tireless work before and after the referendum. I remain proud to have worked for her and supported her.

Second up is @ewgjones - one of the few who threw himself into election mode before the referendum and saw the pragmatic need for a persuasive targeted GreenerIn campaign. Without him @SW_GreenerIN probably wouldn’t have happened (or certainly looked very different)

Third up is my former colleague @aw_bell who pivoted quicker than anyone I knew through the grief of 2016 to try & make the best of the awful situation post referendum. He metaphorically shook me awake when I kinda wanted to hide under a duvet (and I think he did this for many)

Fourth up is Joe Williams - friend who helped set up @Bristol4Europe (who really led the national response post referendum). He was a calculated head in a room who dared to think big when others were panicking.