Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
As a simple peasant, I've never lain awake at night worrying about the trade deal with South Korea. It's too disconnected from our daily lives for it to impact us. I can't imagine the simple hook that makes it a big issue for the masses, only for the shallow commentariat.
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
Price (tarrifs) quality (meeting approved standards) and delivery (no customs delays) are all pretty key, in any deal.
Funny how the company I work for has had its best growth over the past fifteen years where we have no deals then isn’t it?
Boris and his allies must be very miserable about Brexit. The great cultural war they intended to unleash on the back of it has been left completely obsolete in the COVID-19 landscape. For them, Brexit is now all problems and no fun. I bet they just wish it would go away.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
Price (tarrifs) quality (meeting approved standards) and delivery (no customs delays) are all pretty key, in any deal.
Funny how the company I work for has had its best growth over the past fifteen years where we have no deals then isn’t it?
We have extensive deals, not just with the EU, but also via the EU.
Whilst I doubt the reduced air traffic has made a difference to the weather systems, without a doubt its meant far less cloud around Heathrow and Gatwick. I cannot remember such a prolonged spell of wall to wall sunshine around here. We might get the odd day, but cloud inevitably builds up on most days.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories: - Stockholm - Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million. (1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.
Be interesting to see where the care homes are
Apparently dispersed through the country, as social care for the elderly is devolved to county councils. Unless the elderly specifically move to Stockholm County when they get old, one wouldn't expect any concentration there much beyond the proportionate population concentration.
Old article about Covid in regions of Stockholm... hopefully there’s a more recent one about
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
YOU people do not seem to be able to take it in, the EU is not going to be a patsy to England. They will look after the EU and once you dummies get it then it will be far too late. All you will have is gruel and your blue passports, enjoy the fruit picking.
They are not looking after the EU at present, in any shape or form
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By 2024 the matter will be resolved one way or another
I agree to the extent that I believe that Brexit will not feature as a prominent issue in 2024 -less so than at any election since 2010
Brexit won't as it has been done, rejoining the single market will though as Starmer and the LDs and SNP will all push for that
I do not expect that the EU will be at the fore of a 2024 election campaign - it will be relegated to a minor issue on a par with the elections of 1992 - 2010 inclusive.
We will be trading with the EU most likely on WTO terms by 2024, if that proves successful then no it will not be a big issue, if it is less successful then a return to the single market will be a big issue
I doubt that even in the latter scenario that it will be a major issue - any more than was the case at the elections of 1970 , 1966 and 1964.
Good to see you have such confidence in WTO terms then Justin
The UK was outside the EEC at the time of those elections, but had the clear ambition of wishing to join in due course. Barely mentioned in the campaigns though - unlike February 1974 when Enoch Powell was able to increase its salience.
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway. S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.
I bet it has been a distraction. Targets should be kept for the gun range IMO. I have never come across one in other matters that has led to anything but needless stress, false measurement, linguistic contortions and poor outcomes.
They can be great if used to inspire (the BHAGs like 'we shall land a man on the moon and return him safely to earth by the end of this decade'), deadly when used to reward 'performance'.
I hammer into participants in my biorisk workshops that metrics should only be used for learning purposes, and targets solely for goal orientation and inspiration purpose; but neither should be used for either performance measurement or remuneration calculations.
Yes, broadbrush, strategic, visionary "targets" can work. The two types that don't are for managing performance (as you note) and those created for capricious or essentially PR reasons. And the "don't work" category in my experience accounts for most of them. In fact "don't work" is flattering. They are often toxic.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
According to the Israeli professor the virus should disappear in about 20 days' time.
I mentioned a couple of weeks back that the curve charts of infections & deaths showed a remarkably consistent pattern of changing rates of growth across a lot of countries. What Issac Ben Israel suggests is that it doesn't matter as much as may be thought about the degree to which you take restrictive measures.
He doesn't suggest that measures taken did not and do have an effect but where he steers into potentially enticing but also risky propositions is that 1) this virus has a short and predictable period of growth peak severity and decline and 2) you don't need to shut the whole show down to manage it, its got a pattern which its broadly going to follow whatever you do.
Israel itself has come out ok but it went for quite a shutdown, it also happens to have pretty good weather this time of year which may suggest the climate played its part. We may well have a great laboratory for climate variations that in the coming months. Its called New Zealand.
Trump now says he was being sarcastic, so his defenders can relax and stop trying to defend his inject disinfectant remarks.
Of course, you now have to defend him being such an egoistic troll that he thought it was appropriate "sarcasm" . But don't waste your time, nobody who has seen the video (which is worth seeing, even by trump's standards it's quite incredible) is going to believe that he was being sarcastic.
“The EU will not agree to any future economic partnership that does not include a balanced, sustainable and long-term solution on fisheries, that should be crystal clear to the UK.” Mr Barnier said he was “seriously concerned” as to whether or not the negotiations would yield an agreement and warned if not, both sides would be required to introduce customs checks.
The UK team, conversely, called on the EU to start getting serious and “accept reality” that Britain would be an independent coastal state at the end of the year.
“On fisheries, the EU’s mandate appears to require us to accept a continuance of the current quotas agreed under the Common Fisheries Policy.
“We will only be able to make progress here on the basis of the reality that the UK will have the right to control access to its waters at the end of this year.”
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
I note that the Government has quietly pulled the Immigration Bill. The question: "Is this a good moment to bar the source of care workers who make up a fifth of the workforce?" answers itself. The argument that measuring entitlement to immigration by salary is Tory short-sightedness is suddenly much easier to make than it used to be.
As men, in general, have a poorer immune system than women (missing a piece of chromosome 23) and are therefore more suspectible to Covid-19, surely the solution to the partial lifting of the lockdown is for the women to go out to work while the men stay at home and look after the children?
Yes, that'd be a fun solution. And for extra protection, require both sexes to wear burqas.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
As a simple peasant, I've never lain awake at night worrying about the trade deal with South Korea. It's too disconnected from our daily lives for it to impact us. I can't imagine the simple hook that makes it a big issue for the masses, only for the shallow commentariat.
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
C2s are gone for Labour, they voted more Tory than even ABs did at the last general election.
For Starmer to become PM he needs middle class, pro single market Remainers and DEs.
After a few years of no free movement but WTO terms things might also look a bit different
"Given how few things there are to bet on at the moment I was expecting betting markets on the timescale of the shutdown."
I guess it has been said 100 times alrady, but I'm not sure how you could have a definite event which defines "End of lockdown". Even schools would return on different days.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
My partner takes and needs anti-seizure medication. Matt Hancock was not prepared to guarantee that medicine supplies could all be met in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Anti-seizure medication was one of the medicines at risk. Nothing in the last three months inspires confidence in the government’s ability to deliver even promises made on logistics.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
The sex dfiference is enormous with COVID-19. It evens up a little in the very old age group as by then, there's very few men left. Sexism. Something must be done.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
And the EU is willing to damage EU countries to do so.
Of course it wont be the likes of Barnier and other EU fatcats who will lose out.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way
they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
And at each twist and turn they have seemingly believed this would scare us, and bring us to heel.
Instead of which they are now one final move away from a sequence running from Feb 16 through Mar, June, Oct 19, Jan 20, and now possibly June 20 from fulfilling the ERG’s wildest fantasy. They will have manoeuvred us by accident, and against their stated desires, from a full member with a couple of opt outs ( paying reliable into the net kitty of course) to a state with arguably less relationship than Canada or the Ukraine.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
A good trade deal with China perhaps?
Australia, Canada, African and other Asian nations like India and the USA of course, our largest single export destination
India are going for India first, the USA for USA first, the idea that we can get good trade deals from them whilst giving the cold shoulder to the EU &
China is simply ridiculous.
Some of the people on here are nuts, they live in a fantasy world of Rule Britannia, you could not make up the rubbish they come away with.
I have been in hundreds of meetings all over the world since the 80’s talking about selling UK manufactured goods. The sum total of how many times I’ve been asked about a trade deal is zero. Price quality delivery are far far far more important.
I’ve never believed the bollocks of the sky will fall if we vote to leave/leave the Eu/leave the single market or whatever other horseshit the remain camp has thrown up in increasingly desperate attempts to thwart us going, and anyway it’s all a walk in the park compared with the present situation.
So jog on.
As a simple peasant, I've never lain awake at night worrying about the trade deal with South Korea. It's too disconnected from our daily lives for it to impact us. I can't imagine the simple hook that makes it a big issue for the masses, only for the shallow commentariat.
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
C2s are gone for Labour, they voted more Tory than even ABs did at the last general election.
For Starmer to become PM he needs middle class, pro single market Remainers and DEs.
After a few years of no free movement but WTO terms things might also look a bit different
One nation Labour it is then. I agree that a coalition of the poor/professionals makes sense but in reality they are going to need votes from all classes.
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
I note that the Government has quietly pulled the Immigration Bill. The question: "Is this a good moment to bar the source of care workers who make up a fifth of the workforce?" answers itself. The argument that measuring entitlement to immigration by salary is Tory short-sightedness is suddenly much easier to make than it used to be.
And rural areas are crying out for people to pick this year’s fruit and veg
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy.
But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
That Irish border is going to be fun when we’re not exactly too zealous about tracking what’s leaving Liverpool or Stranraer, isn’t it?
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy.
But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
That Irish border is going to be fun when we’re not exactly too zealous about tracking what’s leaving Liverpool or Stranraer, isn’t it?
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
Yeah, we hold all the cards, even more so post- Coronavirus. Dream-on!
According to the Israeli professor the virus should disappear in about 20 days' time.
I mentioned a couple of weeks back that the curve charts of infections & deaths showed a remarkably consistent pattern of changing rates of growth across a lot of countries. What Issac Ben Israel suggests is that it doesn't matter as much as may be thought about the degree to which you take restrictive measures.
He doesn't suggest that measures taken did not and do have an effect but where he steers into potentially enticing but also risky propositions is that 1) this virus has a short and predictable period of growth peak severity and decline and 2) you don't need to shut the whole show down to manage it, its got a pattern which its broadly going to follow whatever you do.
Israel itself has come out ok but it went for quite a shutdown, it also happens to have pretty good weather this time of year which may suggest the climate played its part. We may well have a great laboratory for climate variations that in the coming months. Its called New Zealand.
Just because (according to Dr Trump at least) the sun kills the virus on contact doesn’t mean that cold weather can conjure up infections out of nowhere.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
And the EU is willing to damage EU countries to do so.
Of course it wont be the likes of Barnier and other EU fatcats who will lose out.
Yes, that's the point. The EU aren't negotiating with the interests of their members or their members' populations at heart, they're negotiating with the interests of the union itself at heart.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
My partner takes and needs anti-seizure medication. Matt Hancock was not prepared to guarantee that medicine supplies could all be met in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Anti-seizure medication was one of the medicines at risk. Nothing in the last three months inspires confidence in the government’s ability to deliver even promises made on logistics.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
Alastair I am so sorry about your partner and it is not fair to suggest anything like you have in this piece. I understand your genuine concerns and worry for him
Ironically covid 19 is much more of a threat to Airbus than brexit especially when Airbus have guaranteed wing manufacture here in North Wales. It is rumoured that Airbus will have at least a 40% drop in demand post covid resulting in thousands of lost jobs in France, Germany and the UK
Covid has changed everything and the EU have failed in so many aspects. They are in real danger of failing to see the warning signs that are flashing now but it is not too late for Barnier to come to his senses and negotiate a Canada style deal or similar
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy.
But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the
table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
That Irish border is going to be fun when we’re not exactly too zealous about tracking what’s leaving Liverpool or Stranraer, isn’t it?
cheap unofficial exports is a livable problem
Always was. It’s was only blown up as a stick to beat us with.
On another subject, hasn't it been pleasant ti give arguments about tge EU a rest for a few weeks? Arguments about the merits of lockdown, which is literally a matter of life and death are carried out so much more thoughtfully and civilly.
That's fair, although I certainly get the impression that journalists, even though they know that context, think they are a lot more trusted by the public than they are. Especially the partisan ones who think they are the only ones holding anyone to account.
We are way short of the rubbish that passes for media in the US, though. Drive around the states and the abject crap put out on American radio stations has to be heard to be believed.
On another subject, hasn't it been pleasant ti give arguments about tge EU a rest for a few weeks? Arguments about the merits of lockdown, which is literally a matter of life and death are carried out so much more thoughtfully and civilly.
In another subject, any news on Kim Jong Il?
Yes, he died in 2011.
On Kim Jong Un, nothing definite yet afaik.
Edit - this article is quite interesting on the little we do know and the possible implications of it.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way
they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
And at each twist and turn they have seemingly believed this would scare us, and bring us to heel.
Instead of which they are now one final move away from a sequence running from Feb 16 through Mar, June, Oct 19, Jan 20, and now possibly June 20 from fulfilling the ERG’s wildest fantasy. They will have manoeuvred us by accident, and against their stated desires, from a full member with a couple of opt outs ( paying reliable into the net kitty of course) to a state with arguably less relationship than Canada or the Ukraine.
And maybe one day I’ll understand how that’s in our best interests.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
And dyson spent £20 million on this project, £0 to the taxpayer.
In Leicester our overflow ICU in main theatres and recovery is nearly empty now, though the proper one is full.
Interesting chat with a cardiology friend. They are finding x ray changes of covid-19 in swab negative patients. Perhaps the myocardial problems are not as unusual as thought. Early days though.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way
they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
And at each twist and turn they have seemingly believed this would scare us, and bring us to heel.
Instead of which they are now one final move away from a sequence running from Feb 16 through Mar, June, Oct 19, Jan 20, and now possibly June 20 from fulfilling the ERG’s wildest fantasy. They will have manoeuvred us by accident, and against their stated desires, from a full member with a couple of opt outs ( paying reliable into the net kitty of course) to a state with arguably less relationship than Canada or the Ukraine.
And maybe one day I’ll understand how that’s in our best interests.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
My partner takes and needs anti-seizure medication. Matt Hancock was not prepared to guarantee that medicine supplies could all be met in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Anti-seizure medication was one of the medicines at risk. Nothing in the last three months inspires confidence in the government’s ability to deliver even promises made on logistics.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
Alastair I am so sorry about your partner and it is not fair to suggest anything like you have in this piece. I understand your genuine concerns and worry for him
Ironically covid 19 is much more of a threat to Airbus than brexit especially when Airbus have guaranteed wing manufacture here in North Wales. It is rumoured that Airbus will have at least a 40% drop in demand post covid resulting in thousands of lost jobs in France, Germany and the UK
Covid has changed everything and the EU have failed in so many aspects. They are in real danger of failing to see the warning signs that are flashing now but it is not too late for Barnier to come to his senses and negotiate a Canada style deal or similar
So I’m just to suck up the possibility of pain or death for my partner so you can blindly cheerlead the Conservative party? OK.
How desperate is the Guardian getting with its increasingly bizarre attempts to put a negative slant on any bit of “information” it is “leaked” that consists of no story whatsoever?
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
Yeah, we hold all the cards, even more so post- Coronavirus. Dream-on!
That is a glib answer to a very real issue.
I want a deal but Barnier is not recognising the real danger that come June we may well notify them we leave on WTO in accordance with the ending of transistion with no deal
Extending transistion is not permitted under UK law so in order to even do that the government would have to make a case to the country that we will have to pay billions more to the EU, be tied into their rules inhibiting our own ability to decide our tax and state aid rules in dealing with the covid aftermath, and then pass an act to agree the extension against an 80 seat majority for getting brexit done
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
Exactly. Skynet is self aware and fighting to defend itself whatever, to borrow an analogy.
And dyson spent £20 million on this project, £0 to the taxpayer.
In Leicester our overflow ICU in main theatres and recovery is nearly empty now, though the proper one is full.
Interesting chat with a cardiology friend. They are finding x ray changes of covid-19 in swab negative patients. Perhaps the myocardial problems are not as unusual as thought. Early days though.
Foxy, I've had doubts about the swab method of sample collection from the start and believe this may be a major cause of the very high PCR false negatives. I think two things might be at play here:
1. improper swabbing resulting in poor samples 2. potential for infections with very little viral presence in the nasal areas
That's fair, although I certainly get the impression that journalists, even though they know that context, think they are a lot more trusted by the public than they are. Especially the partisan ones who think they are the only ones holding anyone to account.
We are way short of the rubbish that passes for media in the US, though. Drive around the states and the abject crap put out on American radio stations has to be heard to be believed.
What we need to encourage is the burrowing into the actual facts.
For example, Foxy has pointed out here, something that has been missed completely by the national media -
In some hospitals, there is no PPE shortage for the COVID wards, but there is a large COVID risk in the non-COVID wards. Which are sometimes short of PPE, since the COVID wards have priority.
This is a large, valid and useful story. Probably talking to x number of doctors would have revealed it. Why not?
According to the Israeli professor the virus should disappear in about 20 days' time.
I mentioned a couple of weeks back that the curve charts of infections & deaths showed a remarkably consistent pattern of changing rates of growth across a lot of countries. What Issac Ben Israel suggests is that it doesn't matter as much as may be thought about the degree to which you take restrictive measures.
He doesn't suggest that measures taken did not and do have an effect but where he steers into potentially enticing but also risky propositions is that 1) this virus has a short and predictable period of growth peak severity and decline and 2) you don't need to shut the whole show down to manage it, its got a pattern which its broadly going to follow whatever you do.
Israel itself has come out ok but it went for quite a shutdown, it also happens to have pretty good weather this time of year which may suggest the climate played its part. We may well have a great laboratory for climate variations that in the coming months. Its called New Zealand.
Covid is everywhere from the Arctic Circle to Cape Horn, so what makes NZ special (except that it has virtually no cases at all, which makes it look rather a poor laboratory)?
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
I think that's a misconception. The EU has always pointed out that there's a spectrum of different guest membership schemes available. Each one with its own distinct balance of membership obligations and privileges. The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
My partner takes and needs anti-seizure medication. Matt Hancock was not prepared to guarantee that medicine supplies could all be met in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Anti-seizure medication was one of the medicines at risk. Nothing in the last three months inspires confidence in the government’s ability to deliver even promises made on logistics.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
Alastair I am so sorry about your partner and it is not fair to suggest anything like you have in this piece. I understand your genuine concerns and worry for him
Ironically covid 19 is much more of a threat to Airbus than brexit especially when Airbus have guaranteed wing manufacture here in North Wales. It is rumoured that Airbus will have at least a 40% drop in demand post covid resulting in thousands of lost jobs in France, Germany and the UK
Covid has changed everything and the EU have failed in so many aspects. They are in real danger of failing to see the warning signs that are flashing now but it is not too late for Barnier to come to his senses and negotiate a Canada style deal or similar
So I’m just to suck up the possibility of pain or death for my partner so you can blindly cheerlead the Conservative party? OK.
Just what do you want me to say Alastair
You are trying to use emotional blackmail to change my support for the conservative party, and to what end. If I rejected the party you would still have millions to continue your unpleasant emotional blackmail
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
My partner takes and needs anti-seizure medication. Matt Hancock was not prepared to guarantee that medicine supplies could all be met in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Anti-seizure medication was one of the medicines at risk. Nothing in the last three months inspires confidence in the government’s ability to deliver even promises made on logistics.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
Alastair I am so sorry about your partner and it is not fair to suggest anything like you have in this piece. I understand your genuine concerns and worry for him
Ironically covid 19 is much more of a threat to Airbus than brexit especially when Airbus have guaranteed wing manufacture here in North Wales. It is rumoured that Airbus will have at least a 40% drop in demand post covid resulting in thousands of lost jobs in France, Germany and the UK
Covid has changed everything and the EU have failed in so many aspects. They are in real danger of failing to see the warning signs that are flashing now but it is not too late for Barnier to come to his senses and negotiate a Canada style deal or similar
So I’m just to suck up the possibility of pain or death for my partner so you can blindly cheerlead the Conservative party? OK.
Just what do you want me to say Alastair
You are trying to use emotional blackmail to change my support for the conservative party, and to what end. If I rejected the party you would still have millions to continue your unpleasant emotional blackmail
You regard support for the Conservative party as paramount, as is clear from that comment.
Plenty of people queuing up to kick the European Union but all it shows is the difference between federal and central organisations.
The EU is made up of sovereign Governments who will naturally take different decisions when confronted by a crisis of this nature which affects each of them differently.
The federal USA has the same issues - you have individual states taking different stances on lock downs so New York is different from South Dakota and as we see the Governor of Nevada does one thing and the Mayor of Las Vegas (which is actually Downtown Vegas not the Strip) wants everything re-opened.
It would be as if Surrey decided one level of lock down and Hampshire another - pubs opened in Norfolk but were closed in Suffolk. In the UK we have a more centralised system so England, Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland all act broadly in concert and what goes for one part of England goes for all of England.
Neither the Mayor of London nor the Leader of Cornwall Council have the power to lift or ease the lock down unilaterally in their areas - they are all dependent on the decisions taken at Westminster.
That may be appropriate given how the virus is behaving - it may not - but it's not about giving the EU a kicking. It doesn't have the power to impose the same lock down policy on Poland, Finland and Spain or on us if we were still members.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
I think that's a misconception. The EU has always pointed out that there's a spectrum of different guest membership schemes available. Each one with its own distinct balance of membership obligations and privileges. The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
So why is a Canada-style agreement taken off the table? And spare me the proximity argument.
According to the Israeli professor the virus should disappear in about 20 days' time.
Odds of that happening must be astronomical.
Maybe China aren't lying when they say deaths are no longer occurring.
Other than locking down another city of 10 million people.
That was on the BBC live page the other day, and I'm sure it said it was due to a death or deaths, alongside it was another "no deaths in China" story. It seems a bit odd that they don't comment when stories directly contradict one another.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
The current members are the ones deciding the approach. Do you think they are deliberately trying to intimidate themselves?
Plenty of people queuing up to kick the European Union but all it shows is the difference between federal and central organisations.
The EU is made up of sovereign Governments who will naturally take different decisions when confronted by a crisis of this nature which affects each of them differently.
The federal USA has the same issues - you have individual states taking different stances on lock downs so New York is different from South Dakota and as we see the Governor of Nevada does one thing and the Mayor of Las Vegas (which is actually Downtown Vegas not the Strip) wants everything re-opened.
It would be as if Surrey decided one level of lock down and Hampshire another - pubs opened in Norfolk but were closed in Suffolk. In the UK we have a more centralised system so England, Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland all act broadly in concert and what goes for one part of England goes for all of England.
Neither the Mayor of London nor the Leader of Cornwall Council have the power to lift or ease the lock down unilaterally in their areas - they are all dependent on the decisions taken at Westminster.
That may be appropriate given how the virus is behaving - it may not - but it's not about giving the EU a kicking. It doesn't have the power to impose the same lock down policy on Poland, Finland and Spain or on us if we were still members.
Wales are threatening to head off in a different direction:
Although it’s hard to escape the sense this is more due to a sense of panic that Welsh Labour’s support is slipping and their desire to project Drakeford as a strong and independent figure, rather than any realistic appraisal of the likely results.
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
What are a few more avoidable deaths to a diehard Conservative slavishly loyal to the government?
You need a new line Alastair.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
My partner takes and needs anti-seizure medication. Matt Hancock was not prepared to guarantee that medicine supplies could all be met in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Anti-seizure medication was one of the medicines at risk. Nothing in the last three months inspires confidence in the government’s ability to deliver even promises made on logistics.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
Alastair I am so sorry about your partner and it is not fair to suggest anything like you have in this piece. I understand your genuine concerns and worry for him
Ironically covid 19 is much more of a threat to Airbus than brexit especially when Airbus have guaranteed wing manufacture here in North Wales. It is rumoured that Airbus will have at least a 40% drop in demand post covid resulting in thousands of lost jobs in France, Germany and the UK
Covid has changed everything and the EU have failed in so many aspects. They are in real danger of failing to see the warning signs that are flashing now but it is not too late for Barnier to come to his senses and negotiate a Canada style deal or similar
So I’m just to suck up the possibility of pain or death for my partner so you can blindly cheerlead the Conservative party? OK.
Just what do you want me to say Alastair
You are trying to use emotional blackmail to change my support for the conservative party, and to what end. If I rejected the party you would still have millions to continue your unpleasant emotional blackmail
You regard support for the Conservative party as paramount, as is clear from that comment.
You are talking to someone who is a liberal one nation conservative who has twice voted labour as HYUFD constantly reminds me and do not see any other party as relevant to take us through covid and yes, brexit, but hopefully with a deal
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Indeed, the heady cocktail of the financial aftermath of the Coronavirus pandemic and a trade-agreement-free Brexit should make for one massive hangover.
It's pretty clear that's where we are heading to. I genuinely don't understand what benefits the government believes it will deliver over an extension, but I imagine I am in a minority on that. It will be fascinating to see how we all cope.
I guess the Government views the Coronavirus aftermath as a handy cloak for a WTO trade arrangement.
A statement that comes to mind is this: 'No Deal Brexit would have been fantastic but for Covid-19'!
Quite. If you’re tanking by double digits in 2020, WTO is a rounding figure, at worst.
The EU are going to overplay their hand yet again if they are not careful. They are playing chicken with an opponent that doesn’t care. Add in they were getting nowhere on their budget pre (!) corona, and the tables are a lot more even than a year ago.
Barnier sounded a bit non plussed today, as if he’s pressing the buttons he pressed with May and doesn’t understand why it’s not working.
Barnier is still in the stop UK succeeding at all cost mode and the EU ever since Cameron have always given the impression that they do not have to negotiate seriously as we need them more than they need us
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
Yeah, we hold all the cards, even more so post- Coronavirus. Dream-on!
That is a glib answer to a very real issue.
I want a deal but Barnier is not recognising the real danger that come June we may well notify them we leave on WTO in accordance with the ending of transistion with no deal
Extending transistion is not permitted under UK law so in order to even do that the government would have to make a case to the country that we will have to pay billions more to the EU, be tied into their rules inhibiting our own ability to decide our tax and state aid rules in dealing with the covid aftermath, and then pass an act to agree the extension against an 80 seat majority for getting brexit done
Brexit is done. There will be no extension or FTA. One day someone will explain why this is the best option. It’s not happened yet.
According to the Israeli professor the virus should disappear in about 20 days' time.
Odds of that happening must be astronomical.
It clearly won't be worldwide, but localised outbreaks are probably on that timescale.
It is the pattern of epidemics, to burn out after about 3 months. We saw it in China and Iran for example. The problem then becomes the whack a mole of fresh outbreaks.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
I think that's a misconception. The EU has always pointed out that there's a spectrum of different guest membership schemes available. Each one with its own distinct balance of membership obligations and privileges. The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
So why is a Canada-style agreement taken off the table? And spare me the proximity argument.
Given the fact that the UK economy is already much, much more connected to the pan-european economy, the UK is aiming for a new legal status that can sustain a significant share of that entanglement. That's much more than CETA could provide and requires much more adherence to common regulation.
Plenty of people queuing up to kick the European Union but all it shows is the difference between federal and central organisations.
The EU is made up of sovereign Governments who will naturally take different decisions when confronted by a crisis of this nature which affects each of them differently.
The federal USA has the same issues - you have individual states taking different stances on lock downs so New York is different from South Dakota and as we see the Governor of Nevada does one thing and the Mayor of Las Vegas (which is actually Downtown Vegas not the Strip) wants everything re-opened.
It would be as if Surrey decided one level of lock down and Hampshire another - pubs opened in Norfolk but were closed in Suffolk. In the UK we have a more centralised system so England, Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland all act broadly in concert and what goes for one part of England goes for all of England.
Neither the Mayor of London nor the Leader of Cornwall Council have the power to lift or ease the lock down unilaterally in their areas - they are all dependent on the decisions taken at Westminster.
That may be appropriate given how the virus is behaving - it may not - but it's not about giving the EU a kicking. It doesn't have the power to impose the same lock down policy on Poland, Finland and Spain or on us if we were still members.
Wales are threatening to head off in a different direction:
Although it’s hard to escape the sense this is more due to a sense of panic that Welsh Labour’s support is slipping and their desire to project Drakeford as a strong and independent figure, rather than any realistic appraisal of the likely results.
I heard Drakeford today and he was all over the place trying to say that he hoped his roadmap would contribute to the debate but accepted that all four parts of the union would follow the same policies.
To be honest I have no liking for him but he doesn't really say anything that HMG would
I suspect not - as with Nicola Sturgeon, this is part of preparing the public for the notion of lock down restrictions easing.
As the thread header suggested, fear still stalks and rules the land with the majority willing to stay indoors in the belief only by staying at home can they stay healthy because no one wants this virus and for all the statistical outpourings on here about how most people under 40 aren't a risk, there have been deaths and people generally don't want to bet their lives.
How do you break that fear when it was so strongly and thoroughly instilled in us not so long ago? It won't be easy - walking round in masks keeping apart from each other won't feel like "normal" and no one can pretend it is normal. The very fact of the continued restrictions implies there's still a threat and that will only continue to stoke the fear.
I do think we should try to walk down this road once - there's a lot of talk about mass testing but for all the hyperbole we seem a long way from me as a non-essential worker being able to get a test near my home.
Doesn't it rather confirm that the Government *is* being guided by the science? Cummings is Boris' closest policy advisor. If he didn't attend SAGE but did still advise the Government that would be a bigger concern surely.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits,
but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about
scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
I think that's a misconception. The EU has always pointed out that there's a spectrum of different guest membership schemes available. Each one with its own distinct balance of membership obligations and privileges. The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
So why is a Canada-style agreement taken off the table? And spare me the proximity argument.
Given the fact that the UK economy is already much, much more connected to the pan-european economy, the UK is aiming for a new legal status that can sustain a significant share of that entanglement. That's much more than CETA could provide and requires much more adherence to common regulation.
Canada doesn't have a back door to the EU in the form of the Irish land border, and it doesn't need frictionless RoRo traffic at Dover. Different circumstances, different processes, different legal provisions required.
Doesn't it rather confirm that the Government *is* being guided by the science? Cummings is Boris' closest policy advisor. If he didn't attend SAGE but did still advise the Government that would be a bigger concern surely.
On another subject, hasn't it been pleasant ti give arguments about tge EU a rest for a few weeks? Arguments about the merits of lockdown, which is literally a matter of life and death are carried out so much more thoughtfully and civilly.
In another subject, any news on Kim Jong Il?
Yes, he died in 2011.
On Kim Jong Un, nothing definite yet afaik.
Edit - this article is quite interesting on the little we do know and the possible implications of it.
Canada doesn't have a back door to the EU in the form of the Irish land border, and it doesn't need frictionless RoRo traffic at Dover. Different circumstances, different processes, different legal provisions required.
As has been said then, very regretably it will be WTO
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits,
but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about
scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
I think that's a misconception. The EU has always pointed out that there's a spectrum of different guest membership schemes available. Each one with its own distinct balance of membership obligations and privileges. The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
So why is a Canada-style agreement taken off the table? And spare me the proximity argument.
Given the fact that the UK economy is already much, much more connected to the pan-european economy, the UK is aiming for a new legal status that can sustain a significant share of that entanglement. That's much more than CETA could provide and requires much more adherence to common regulation.
So we’ll go WTO then.
That seems to be the plan. We will have to wait to find out whether the WTO will still be there as a fallback option in the future.
And dyson spent £20 million on this project, £0 to the taxpayer.
In Leicester our overflow ICU in main theatres and recovery is nearly empty now, though the proper one is full.
Interesting chat with a cardiology friend. They are finding x ray changes of covid-19 in swab negative patients. Perhaps the myocardial problems are not as unusual as thought. Early days though.
Foxy, I've had doubts about the swab method of sample collection from the start and believe this may be a major cause of the very high PCR false negatives. I think two things might be at play here:
1. improper swabbing resulting in poor samples 2. potential for infections with very little viral presence in the nasal areas
Grateful for your thoughts on both possibilities.
I think poor swab technique is common (being done at many drive throughs, and I did my own too!)
It is common experience from the beginning that patients could have several negative swabs before testing positive, Dr Wen Liang, the original Wuhan doctor who raised alarm for example. It was also well described in all the early papers, hence the Chinese use of Chest CT scans for early diagnosis.
I think washings taken at broncoscopy yield more reliable results, but rarely done here. CT neither.
You regard support for the Conservative party as paramount, as is clear from that comment.
You are talking to someone who is a liberal one nation conservative who has twice voted labour as HYUFD constantly reminds me and do not see any other party as relevant to take us through covid and yes, brexit, but hopefully with a deal
I think we're back to a situation where Labour is an acceptable, if unwise, voting choice. (2007 was the last time)
If the LDs get themselves organised (I can't imagine anyone knows what they're up to!) we'll have a functioning democracy again.
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
I note that the Government has quietly pulled the Immigration Bill. The question: "Is this a good moment to bar the source of care workers who make up a fifth of the workforce?" answers itself. The argument that measuring entitlement to immigration by salary is Tory short-sightedness is suddenly much easier to make than it used to be.
It was always nonsense because what we needed isnt lots of immigrants earning £30-£50k - those jobs have plenty of interest from people already here. The jobs that arent getting filled are mostly above and below those ranges, above for specialist positions where there are gaps and below because the jobs tend to be neither fun nor well paid so people dont want to do them. But the jobs need to be done, so immigration in the hundreds of thousands will continue to be needed.
Canada doesn't have a back door to the EU in the form of the Irish land border, and it doesn't need frictionless RoRo traffic at Dover. Different circumstances, different processes, different legal provisions required.
The Withdrawal Agreement ensured no hard border in Ireland
The talks should just end. They are entirely pointless. There will be no transition extension. There will be no FTA. We are best off preparing for the consequences of that now.
Our Brexit stockpile turned into our Covid stockpile. It will be exhausted by actual real Brexit day.
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits, but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
The current members are the ones deciding the approach. Do you think they are deliberately trying to intimidate themselves?
This might not be as illogical as you're implying!
I don't know if you've ever studied game theory but have you ever come across the concept of "burning money"? I don't mean à la the KLF, but sometimes it's beneficial to deliberately damage your own pay-offs because you can reach a better equilibrium this way. It works successfully in games like Bach or Stravinsky aka Opera or Football aka Battle of the Sexes. It is essentially the same as intertemporal commitment problems like the smoker or swearer trying to give up, who knows that tomorrow their incentives will encourage them to take it up again, so they try to alter their future incentives eg via a swear jar or its cigarette equivalent. One might even argue it's particularly relevant to governments seeking intertemporal commitment because they know that the country they govern will, in future, be run by other people with different opinions and incentives, so they would like to find ways to bind them.
Doesn't it rather confirm that the Government *is* being guided by the science? Cummings is Boris' closest policy advisor. If he didn't attend SAGE but did still advise the Government that would be a bigger concern surely.
On another subject, hasn't it been pleasant ti give arguments about tge EU a rest for a few weeks? Arguments about the merits of lockdown, which is literally a matter of life and death are carried out so much more thoughtfully and civilly.
In another subject, any news on Kim Jong Il?
Yes, he died in 2011.
On Kim Jong Un, nothing definite yet afaik.
Edit - this article is quite interesting on the little we do know and the possible implications of it.
Thanks. I thought that Kim didn't sound right. I actually started with Kim Il Sung before deleting it. Anyway, interesting article.
You did slightly better than one American ambassador to Beijing, who on seeing the then North Korean boss at a function spoke of having met ‘Kim Jong the Second.’
Starmer would agree to the EU terms, Boris would not.
So the choice at the next general election will either be to rejoin the single market or a FTA that is aligned with the single market in most respects anyway, or a harder Brexit with Boris on WTO terms if the EU will not back down
By the next GE we will have had Hard Brexit for 3 years. Any EEA style deal would be quite a change, but would do little to preserve existing cross channel trade. After 3 years the damage would probably be fairly complete.
By then we might well have new trade deals and expanded exports beyond the EEA
I thought the Brexiteers are looking to stop trade with China? And the US are looking to stop trade with everyone unless it is on their terms.
Who can we cross off the list next?
Only xenophobes are wanting to stop trade with China, not Brexiteers. A potential trade deal with China - and other economies - has long been touted as a potential benefit of Brexit. Including by our very own now Prime Minister during the referendum campaign.
Touting it as a benefit of Brexit is not sufficient. To do a long term beneficial trade deal with China you need to accept their way of politics is different, and that saving face is very important, so avoid going for the favourable press headlines that come with attacking them for coronavirus.
Now they are in charge, Brexiteer choices will have to start becoming consistent. If China is the goal fine, then train the cabinet in how to deal with China and sack those who prefer to grandstand.
I'm sorry I completely disagree. Business is business and politics is politics.
China does care about face but they don't need or care for supplicants and grovelers. In order to get a good trade deal we just need a deal that can be to the benefit of both parties while respecting each others uniqueness. We won't be trying to force our politics on them, they won't be trying to force their politics on us.
That's the difference to the EU. The EU are trying to make us supplicants. They do want to force their politics on us and their courts on us in a way they don't with any other trade partner outside of Europe. That doesn't work and we need to say a firm no to that until they grow up and drop that idiocy. But other nations won't expect that any more than the EU expected Canada to accept that.
I disagree.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
Yes, of course. The EU needs to make clear that club members enjoy benefits of club membership that non-members cannot enjoy. That's the whole point of having a club.
But Matt, that is not what the EU is trying to do here. They are posturing that if you leave the club, not only won't you be eligible for member benefits,
but we'll make sure you won't even have as good a deal as certain other non-members. So it is more than just club membership benefits, it is about
scaring the current members into not even thinking about leaving.
I think that's a misconception. The EU has always pointed out that there's a spectrum of different guest membership schemes available. Each one with its own distinct balance of membership obligations and privileges. The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
So why is a Canada-style agreement taken off the table? And spare me the proximity argument.
Given the fact that the UK economy is already much, much more connected to the pan-european economy, the UK is aiming for a new legal status that can sustain a significant share of that entanglement. That's much more than CETA could provide and requires much more adherence to common regulation.
So we’ll go WTO then.
That seems to be the plan. We will have to wait to find out whether the WTO will still be there as a fallback option in the future.
I think the WTO is pretty defunct already, with Trump refusing to allow appointments to adjudication tribunals rendering them inquorate.
It will be everyone for themselves after Covid-19, equivalent to the 1930s trade wars after the Wall St Crash.
Comments
I'm worried Starmer will go all Free Movement. Could that ever be profitable at all, never mind post-pandemic? Maybe for seat gains here and there and whip up the Guardianistas, but Labour need to appeal to C2's and DE's again to hit the Tories properly. I don't think Labour support can come back there with bylines of "Starmer Competent at PMQ's," although he will be.
Funny how the company I work for has had its best growth over the past fifteen years where we have no deals then isn’t it?
However, the dynamics have changed and changed in a way never imagined. The EU have failed their member states over covid as each country fights for itself, hence Macron hijacking British PPE and Italy becoming seriously anti EU over lack of support
June will come and all Boris has to do is to announce we cannot agree to pay billions more into the EU, we cannot be responsible for their debts, and we cannot be restricted by Brussels and the ECJ in taking domestic UK decisions on how we deal with this economic armageddon and especially state aid and EU taxation rules
It is not where we want to be but Barnier needs to get real, or see no deal brexit occur and all the downside that would involve to the EU
Barnier no longer holds all the aces. Now is the time for him to get real
https://www.thelocal.se/20200407/these-are-the-stockholm-districts-worst-affected-by-the-coronavirus
In any case hopefully a useful local resource
Microsoft Word now flags double spaces as errors, ending the great space debate.
One-spacers take the victory in an end of an era.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/24/21234170/microsoft-word-two-spaces-period-error-correction-great-space-debate
Honestly I view people who put a double space after a full stop in the same category as people who put pineapples on pizzas.
You will not provoke me with that tired old argument
And by the way, thank you for your suggestion that I contact my credit card company re BA's evasion over my full refund in the flights they have cancelled to Vancouver in mid may. I received a very helpful letter from the Nationwide but also, after waiting one and a half hours on the line, a BA customer service rep was excellent and promised a full refund in 14 days. It has actually come through in four days
He doesn't suggest that measures taken did not and do have an effect but where he steers into potentially enticing but also risky propositions is that 1) this virus has a short and predictable period of growth peak severity and decline and 2) you don't need to shut the whole show down to manage it, its got a pattern which its broadly going to follow whatever you do.
Israel itself has come out ok but it went for quite a shutdown, it also happens to have pretty good weather this time of year which may suggest the climate played its part. We may well have a great laboratory for climate variations that in the coming months. Its called New Zealand.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52409359
Only a quarter of ventaliators in use.
And dyson spent £20 million on this project, £0 to the taxpayer.
Of course, you now have to defend him being such an egoistic troll that he thought it was appropriate "sarcasm" . But don't waste your time, nobody who has seen the video (which is worth seeing, even by trump's standards it's quite incredible) is going to believe that he was being sarcastic.
“The EU will not agree to any future economic partnership that does not include a balanced, sustainable and long-term solution on fisheries, that should be crystal clear to the UK.” Mr Barnier said he was “seriously concerned” as to whether or not the negotiations would yield an agreement and warned if not, both sides would be required to introduce customs checks.
The UK team, conversely, called on the EU to start getting serious and “accept reality” that Britain would be an independent coastal state at the end of the year.
“On fisheries, the EU’s mandate appears to require us to accept a continuance of the current quotas agreed under the Common Fisheries Policy.
“We will only be able to make progress here on the basis of the reality that the UK will have the right to control access to its waters at the end of this year.”
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/uk-politics/2168158/brexit-european-union-continue-to-demand-access-to-uk-waters/
For Starmer to become PM he needs middle class, pro single market Remainers and DEs.
After a few years of no free movement but WTO terms things might also look a bit different
I guess it has been said 100 times alrady, but I'm not sure how you could have a definite event which defines "End of lockdown". Even schools would return on different days.
You were concerned when a relative at Airbus might have had his job threatened by no-deal Brexit. You’re entirely comfortable with my partner having to take his chances. Because his possible pain or death is irrelevant as compared with blindly backing the Conservative party.
You have some hard thinking to do about your morality.
I think the EU wants to make it clear that there is no "better" deal on the table if you leave them, and that (sadly) dominates their thinking.
The sex dfiference is enormous with COVID-19. It evens up a little in the very old age group as by then, there's very few men left. Sexism. Something must be done.
Is life institutionally racist?
Of course it wont be the likes of Barnier and other EU fatcats who will lose out.
Instead of which they are now one final move away from a sequence running from Feb 16 through Mar, June, Oct 19, Jan 20, and now possibly June 20 from fulfilling the ERG’s wildest fantasy. They will have manoeuvred us by accident, and against their stated desires, from a full member with a couple of opt outs ( paying reliable into the net kitty of course) to a state with arguably less relationship than Canada or the Ukraine.
Plus there's no shortage of PPE in Nottinghamshire.
Ironically covid 19 is much more of a threat to Airbus than brexit especially when Airbus have guaranteed wing manufacture here in North Wales. It is rumoured that Airbus will have at least a 40% drop in demand post covid resulting in thousands of lost jobs in France, Germany and the UK
Covid has changed everything and the EU have failed in so many aspects. They are in real danger of failing to see the warning signs that are flashing now but it is not too late for Barnier to come to his senses and negotiate a Canada style deal or similar
In another subject, any news on Kim Jong Il?
This is worth a read:
https://unherd.com/2020/04/can-british-media-steer-clear-of-the-american-sewer/?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3
On Kim Jong Un, nothing definite yet afaik.
Edit - this article is quite interesting on the little we do know and the possible implications of it.
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2020/04/unanswered-questions-surrounding-kim-jong-un
Interesting chat with a cardiology friend. They are finding x ray changes of covid-19 in swab negative patients. Perhaps the myocardial problems are not as unusual as thought. Early days though.
I want a deal but Barnier is not recognising the real danger that come June we may well notify them we leave on WTO in accordance with the ending of transistion with no deal
Extending transistion is not permitted under UK law so in order to even do that the government would have to make a case to the country that we will have to pay billions more to the EU, be tied into their rules inhibiting our own ability to decide our tax and state aid rules in dealing with the covid aftermath, and then pass an act to agree the extension against an 80 seat majority for getting brexit done
1. improper swabbing resulting in poor samples
2. potential for infections with very little viral presence in the nasal areas
Grateful for your thoughts on both possibilities.
For example, Foxy has pointed out here, something that has been missed completely by the national media -
In some hospitals, there is no PPE shortage for the COVID wards, but there is a large COVID risk in the non-COVID wards. Which are sometimes short of PPE, since the COVID wards have priority.
This is a large, valid and useful story. Probably talking to x number of doctors would have revealed it. Why not?
Covid is everywhere from the Arctic Circle to Cape Horn, so what makes NZ special (except that it has virtually no cases at all, which makes it look rather a poor laboratory)?
The problem is that HMG seems to aspire to a level of market access that doesn't reconcile with the level of obligations it is prepared to agree to.
You are trying to use emotional blackmail to change my support for the conservative party, and to what end. If I rejected the party you would still have millions to continue your unpleasant emotional blackmail
Plenty of people queuing up to kick the European Union but all it shows is the difference between federal and central organisations.
The EU is made up of sovereign Governments who will naturally take different decisions when confronted by a crisis of this nature which affects each of them differently.
The federal USA has the same issues - you have individual states taking different stances on lock downs so New York is different from South Dakota and as we see the Governor of Nevada does one thing and the Mayor of Las Vegas (which is actually Downtown Vegas not the Strip) wants everything re-opened.
It would be as if Surrey decided one level of lock down and Hampshire another - pubs opened in Norfolk but were closed in Suffolk. In the UK we have a more centralised system so England, Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland all act broadly in concert and what goes for one part of England goes for all of England.
Neither the Mayor of London nor the Leader of Cornwall Council have the power to lift or ease the lock down unilaterally in their areas - they are all dependent on the decisions taken at Westminster.
That may be appropriate given how the virus is behaving - it may not - but it's not about giving the EU a kicking. It doesn't have the power to impose the same lock down policy on Poland, Finland and Spain or on us if we were still members.
Canada.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-52396683
Although it’s hard to escape the sense this is more due to a sense of panic that Welsh Labour’s support is slipping and their desire to project Drakeford as a strong and independent figure, rather than any realistic appraisal of the likely results.
It is the pattern of epidemics, to burn out after about 3 months. We saw it in China and Iran for example. The problem then becomes the whack a mole of fresh outbreaks.
To be honest I have no liking for him but he doesn't really say anything that HMG would
As the thread header suggested, fear still stalks and rules the land with the majority willing to stay indoors in the belief only by staying at home can they stay healthy because no one wants this virus and for all the statistical outpourings on here about how most people under 40 aren't a risk, there have been deaths and people generally don't want to bet their lives.
How do you break that fear when it was so strongly and thoroughly instilled in us not so long ago? It won't be easy - walking round in masks keeping apart from each other won't feel like "normal" and no one can pretend it is normal. The very fact of the continued restrictions implies there's still a threat and that will only continue to stoke the fear.
I do think we should try to walk down this road once - there's a lot of talk about mass testing but for all the hyperbole we seem a long way from me as a non-essential worker being able to get a test near my home.
So we’ll go WTO then.
That's really the defence...
Different circumstances, different processes, different legal provisions required.
And Dom...
I thought that Kim didn't sound right. I actually started with Kim Il Sung before deleting it. Anyway, interesting article.
It is common experience from the beginning that patients could have several negative swabs before testing positive, Dr Wen Liang, the original Wuhan doctor who raised alarm for example. It was also well described in all the early papers, hence the Chinese use of Chest CT scans for early diagnosis.
I think washings taken at broncoscopy yield more reliable results, but rarely done here. CT neither.
If the LDs get themselves organised (I can't imagine anyone knows what they're up to!) we'll have a functioning democracy again.
I don't know if you've ever studied game theory but have you ever come across the concept of "burning money"? I don't mean à la the KLF, but sometimes it's beneficial to deliberately damage your own pay-offs because you can reach a better equilibrium this way. It works successfully in games like Bach or Stravinsky aka Opera or Football aka Battle of the Sexes. It is essentially the same as intertemporal commitment problems like the smoker or swearer trying to give up, who knows that tomorrow their incentives will encourage them to take it up again, so they try to alter their future incentives eg via a swear jar or its cigarette equivalent. One might even argue it's particularly relevant to governments seeking intertemporal commitment because they know that the country they govern will, in future, be run by other people with different opinions and incentives, so they would like to find ways to bind them.
Not just scientists.
It will be everyone for themselves after Covid-19, equivalent to the 1930s trade wars after the Wall St Crash.