The government’s plan was to use the Internal Market Bill to galvanise its base and spark a culture war with Labour, the Lords and the judiciary. It may have miscalculated.
I don't know why you keep going on about the Government wanting to start a culture war.
I don't see evidence of that.
The whole “the right want a culture war” discussion was started a few months ago by the likes of Antifa and the Twitter mobs in the States.
It’s always been the left who want a culture war, and they now seem rather upset that, having started it, they’re being outplayed at their own game. There’s not as many left wing culture warriors as Twitter led them to believe.
What they mean is: we want the Right to respond to our provocations and commit to a culture war with us.
I'm no fan of this Government. But it wasn't them who started defacing and pulling down statues and attacking our history and heritage.
Critics would be on stronger ground if they confined their criticism to its moves against the judiciary, which is a potential cause for concern (although it isn't if it includes some sensible rights and appeals reform to close loopholes and contradictions where it really takes the piss at the moment).
To people parroting the Govt line on this - they do, I presume, realise that the claimed EU “threat” to blockade food imports to Northern Ireland is, in effect, a threat to blockade food imports to the Republic?
Probably not something they are really interested in doing...?
Blockade British food and yes that is exactly the threat. That they would cut out our food exports to them (which would be abusive and start a trade war but within their rights) but also to NI.
It's interesting how you believe EU rumours when they're posted by the papers but Government rumours are only true if they come from a Government member directly
Read between the lines from what Barnier wrote himself and it's clear they made that threat.
What do you mean 'read between the lines'?
It means your wilful misinterpretation is that the EU will threaten to starve the island of Ireland in a futile attempt to force the hand of the plucky Cummings.
Rubbish!
Blockading British exports isn't starving Ireland. You're wilfully misrepresenting the issue.
For someone so erudite when it comes to discussing the state of US politics, it is uncanny that you can switch to withering nonsense in a heartbeat when it comes to Johnson and the EU.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
I think the UK negotiators will be very, very happy to do that. As the FT says in the article, the Japan provisions are much closer to what the UK is asking for than what the EU is.
The UK as an opening gambit offering less than what they're prepared to is sound negotiations when the opposition are being maximalist in their demands.
So you are happy with some form of state aid restrictions?
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
To people parroting the Govt line on this - they do, I presume, realise that the claimed EU “threat” to blockade food imports to Northern Ireland is, in effect, a threat to blockade food imports to the Republic?
Probably not something they are really interested in doing...?
Blockade British food and yes that is exactly the threat. That they would cut out our food exports to them (which would be abusive and start a trade war but within their rights) but also to NI.
The point being that the non existent threat is deliberately intended to imply that the EU is using the threat of Northern Ireland starving to get their way.
I think that our government are being cute. But the EU has used Northern Ireland from the very start as a wedge to make life difficult. Are people really going to import goods into Britain, send it to Northern Ireland just to get it into the sacred single market? For sale in the RoI, I can just about see, but beyond that it's bonkers. So sorry for not shedding too many tears for the EU who are now being played at their own game.
The only way to stand up to a bully is to be a bully. The UK reputation in the wider context does concern me though. I suspect the government thinks that other nations will cut us a break in the knowledge of what we are going through.
What, self imposed stupidity?
I agree that there is an aura of stupidity around the referendum result and what has followed, with no end in sight. But I would think that. I think there should have been a confirmatory referendum. But we are where we are and we need to do the best thing for the country by foul means or fair as long as our long term reputation can take it. It seems to me that those up in arms about this latest government tactic are coming close to batting for the opposition and I see parallels with last year`s shite-fest. Starmer needs to be careful, but he knows that.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
I think the UK negotiators will be very, very happy to do that. As the FT says in the article, the Japan provisions are much closer to what the UK is asking for than what the EU is.
The UK as an opening gambit offering less than what they're prepared to is sound negotiations when the opposition are being maximalist in their demands.
So you are happy with some form of state aid restrictions?
Can't speak for Philip, but I am. They are an essential part of neither party in an agreement advantaging their domestic companies. Most times state aid rules favour UK companies because the UK has historically subsidised industry a lot less than other major countries, but what the EU is asking for goes well beyond what is reasonable.
Like the new look but I wonder why the decision was taken to have comments separated from the main website and accessible from two places? It is a security consideration so Mike doesn't need to manage login details?
To people parroting the Govt line on this - they do, I presume, realise that the claimed EU “threat” to blockade food imports to Northern Ireland is, in effect, a threat to blockade food imports to the Republic?
Probably not something they are really interested in doing...?
Blockade British food and yes that is exactly the threat. That they would cut out our food exports to them (which would be abusive and start a trade war but within their rights) but also to NI.
The point being that the non existent threat is deliberately intended to imply that the EU is using the threat of Northern Ireland starving to get their way.
I think that our government are being cute. But the EU has used Northern Ireland from the very start as a wedge to make life difficult. Are people really going to import goods into Britain, send it to Northern Ireland just to get it into the sacred single market? For sale in the RoI, I can just about see, but beyond that it's bonkers. So sorry for not shedding too many tears for the EU who are now being played at their own game.
Its not about RoW importing into the UK then into the EU via the back door. Its about stuff made in the UK imported into the EU as happens every day. A single market is precisely that - single. One set of rules, so its not just RoI, its the EU.
Who is "being played at their own game?" Its not them who are going to suffer with no deal
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Had a quick look at the new front page before signing in via Vanilla - I prefer Vanilla - but the new minimalist design chimes with the post-pandemic zeitgeist in the recognition life is for living at the spiritual rather than physical or material level. Confinement enforces contemplation as the futility of our materialist experience confounds us via the technology that shows us a world of egalitarian unattainability and reminders of what we have lost.
So that's my contribution for the Pretentious Bollocks Post of the Year Award - I realise the competition is plentiful but that must get me on the shortlist?
Both the right and the left need a culture war, because we live in the age of identity. Working-class populist and patriotic-Thatcherism and Reaganism was an early form of rightwing identity politics, coinciding with the new leftwing identity politics from the later 1970s . Arguably "anti-elite" Nixonism was an even earlier form of identity politics , coinciding with the 1960s left, as well.
To people parroting the Govt line on this - they do, I presume, realise that the claimed EU “threat” to blockade food imports to Northern Ireland is, in effect, a threat to blockade food imports to the Republic?
Probably not something they are really interested in doing...?
Blockade British food and yes that is exactly the threat. That they would cut out our food exports to them (which would be abusive and start a trade war but within their rights) but also to NI.
It's interesting how you believe EU rumours when they're posted by the papers but Government rumours are only true if they come from a Government member directly
Read between the lines from what Barnier wrote himself and it's clear they made that threat.
What do you mean 'read between the lines'?
It means your wilful misinterpretation is that the EU will threaten to starve the island of Ireland in a futile attempt to force the hand of the plucky Cummings.
Rubbish!
Blockading British exports isn't starving Ireland. You're wilfully misrepresenting the issue.
They aren't blockading our exports. We're not creating the system to produce the 213m pieces of red tape that you Tories so love which will allow our exporters to legally export under our own laws.
Its not the EU mandating the creation of this mass of red tape or the GVMS or a fucking permit without which its illegal for UK trucks to drive into Kent from Surrey. That would be Michael Gove, not Michael Barnier.
Thanks - I am not surprised Apple has thought ahead. I suspect they would like to be far away from NVIDIA who I understand they do not get on with.
It's not that Apple thought ahead about the ownership of ARM, but that Apple couldn't get a CPU fast enough from ARM. ARM used to offer a rather narrow range of CPUs, now the range of performance is much wider. Apple bought a company called P.A. Semi and had them design their own CPU (Swift which was used in the A6) in order to get a faster CPU. That independence from ARM is a side effect, not the reason for designing the CPU.
Anyway, Apple and Nvidia have fallen out in the past, so Apple drifting away from ARM looks quite probable in the medium to long term.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
I think the UK negotiators will be very, very happy to do that. As the FT says in the article, the Japan provisions are much closer to what the UK is asking for than what the EU is.
The UK as an opening gambit offering less than what they're prepared to is sound negotiations when the opposition are being maximalist in their demands.
So you are happy with some form of state aid restrictions?
Absolutely of course!
Just as the Government have proposed they would be happy with too.
What I am not OK with is dynamic alignment with EU rules or the EU getting a say on our tax rates etc
Can you please explain what positivity means in this context and what the y-axis scale is. I find it hard to believe the ONS would publish a graph without labelling the axes, which is a basic in statistics even at school level.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
You are categorically and 100% wrong. The Japanese state aid restrictions are nothing like what we have with the EU and are pretty standard pro forma international state aid rules which is what our negotiators have said should happen.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
I think the UK negotiators will be very, very happy to do that. As the FT says in the article, the Japan provisions are much closer to what the UK is asking for than what the EU is.
The UK as an opening gambit offering less than what they're prepared to is sound negotiations when the opposition are being maximalist in their demands.
So you are happy with some form of state aid restrictions?
Absolutely of course!
Just as the Government have proposed they would be happy with too.
What I am not OK with is dynamic alignment with EU rules or the EU getting a say on our tax rates etc
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
Of course. Did you...? Would love to see how some of the "wins" get sold to red wall punters hoping for a better life. Good News! We've signed a deal making it cheaper to carry on importing all of the value added components which you get to screw together providing you continue to provide cheap enough flexible labour. You don't actually provide any value to Hitachi other than a cheap place to screw foreign bits together and this deal enables them to exploit you until someone cheaper comes along.
And when that happens? The deal prevents your government from intervening with state aid to sustain jobs. Yay.
The government’s plan was to use the Internal Market Bill to galvanise its base and spark a culture war with Labour, the Lords and the judiciary. It may have miscalculated.
I don't know why you keep going on about the Government wanting to start a culture war.
I don't see evidence of that.
The whole “the right want a culture war” discussion was started a few months ago by the likes of Antifa and the Twitter mobs in the States.
It’s always been the left who want a culture war, and they now seem rather upset that, having started it, they’re being outplayed at their own game. There’s not as many left wing culture warriors as Twitter led them to believe.
What they mean is: we want the Right to respond to our provocations and commit to a culture war with us.
I'm no fan of this Government. But it wasn't them who started defacing and pulling down statues and attacking our history and heritage.
Critics would be on stronger ground if they confined their criticism to its moves against the judiciary, which is a potential cause for concern (although it isn't if it includes some sensible rights and appeals reform to close loopholes and contradictions where it really takes the piss at the moment).
What's wrong with attacking our history and heritage? Are you suggesting that Britain never did anything bad in the past? Or simply that we're not allowed to talk about it? People are always trying to rewrite history - the Coulston statue, put up 174 years after he died, being a prime example. It's a perfectly natural and necessary process to engage with the past and seek to reinterpret what happened and what it means - in fact that is literally what the academic discipline of history consists of. More broadly, how fragile do you have to be in your love of your country that you get triggered by any attempt to highlight historic injustices?
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
Of course. Did you...? Would love to see how some of the "wins" get sold to red wall punters hoping for a better life. Good News! We've signed a deal making it cheaper to carry on importing all of the value added components which you get to screw together providing you continue to provide cheap enough flexible labour. You don't actually provide any value to Hitachi other than a cheap place to screw foreign bits together and this deal enables them to exploit you until someone cheaper comes along.
And when that happens? The deal prevents your government from intervening with state aid to sustain jobs. Yay.
Tariff reductions on semi-manufactured goods is a win for the North which has a lower cost base than basically all of Japan even after shipping.
Dave's arse must be in agony, given that level of fence-sitting!
I think he's being diplomatic and very clear.
Dave was a class act.
The thing is that, if you told Dave that you had misgivings about something and that it was a last resort, he'd probablyinterpret that as "Don't Do This, Certainly Not Now, Unless You're Wearing Your Lucky Underpants". Because, although a gambler, Dave is also a Girly Swot.
Say that to the current management, and they'd think "Bring It On".
I see Cameron is adding his voice against the Internal Markets Bill. That's all the living prime ministers, and probably in spirit Thatcher and all her postwar predecessors, too.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
You are categorically and 100% wrong. The Japanese state aid restrictions are nothing like what we have with the EU and are pretty standard pro forma international state aid rules which is what our negotiators have said should happen.
You mean the FT are wrong:
"The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules."
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
Yep - I noted the bit that says ", trade experts said it will be hard to say exactly how far the U.K.-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement pushes beyond Japan’s deal with the EU until they get their hands on the details of the text." and saw that you are stating things that may not actually be true (i.e. this deal could offer nothing more than the EU deal did) but we don't actually know.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
You are categorically and 100% wrong. The Japanese state aid restrictions are nothing like what we have with the EU and are pretty standard pro forma international state aid rules which is what our negotiators have said should happen.
You mean the FT are wrong:
"The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules."
It's called a negotiating position. If the EU take a 9/10 position the government will take the 1/10 position and aim to meet somewhere in the middle. The Japan agreement on state aid is about 4 or 5/10, if the EU agrees to something like that the government will take it. 100% certainty.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
You are categorically and 100% wrong. The Japanese state aid restrictions are nothing like what we have with the EU and are pretty standard pro forma international state aid rules which is what our negotiators have said should happen.
You mean the FT are wrong:
"The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules."
No I'm suggesting the FT is right and that you're misreading it.
You said it is tougher than the ones we "have with the EU". Do you think what we are proposing to the EU (a negotiating position) is what we "have with" them?
I note that you missed the most important part of the article.
"But some lawyers also stressed that the subsidy rules in the Japan bilateral deal were still weak compared with the detailed and invasive EU state aid regime.
James Webber, a partner at the law firm Shearman & Sterling, said: “It’s a concession of sorts by the UK, but if this is where the negotiations end up, it will be much closer to the UK’s view of the world than the EU's.”"
Do you understand the concept of negotiations? That what we are offering to them is not what we have or necessarily will agree?
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
It's a decent deal and good to have. The UK got a lot of what it wanted from it, albeit less than what it had with the EU deal. The benefits in the article are relative to not having a deal at all, which is the default position now we are leaving the EU.
The two areas where the new FTA goes beyond the EU deal: Forbidding data localisation, which Japan wants and is embedded in the CPTPP agreement that the UK wants to join. The EU doesn't specifically require data localisation (like eg China) but it does have strong data privacy laws (as does Japan, so the difference may really be philosophical). Disallows interventions on digital for cultural reasons (eg a certain amount of content needs to be originated locally or in French)
The big area where it doesn't go as far as the EU deal: Tariff Rate quotas where you can import a certain amount of a sensitive product at an affordable tariff. The UK loses its share of EU quotas and doesn't get UK quotas to make up. It will mean UK exporters will no longer be able to export certain products to Japan that they do now.
I see Cameron is adding his voice against the Internal Markets Bill. That's all the living prime ministers, and probably in spirit Thatcher and all her postwar predecessors, too.
We're in a big enough mess without people raising the spirit of Margaret Thatcher!
There is probably much truth in the observation that Britain is terrified of the rest of Europe uniting against it, and that Brexit may have stemmed in part from this kind of paranoia. Of course the irony is that Brexit achieves the very thing that these people are afraid of, leaving us weak and isolated. Even the Irish are on the other side now, and maybe the Scots too soon (we live in hope). Well played Little Englanders, you really are geniuses.
That article is absolutely right. Brexit, and its effect of dragging people into irrationality, has almost nothing whatsoever to do with 'imperial nostalgia', and actually very little (pace@AlastairMeeks) to do with racism or xenophobia. It is much more to do with a fantasy of sovereignty which (as we are seeing in the negotiations, of lack of them) can never exist in the modern world.
Whether we like it or not, the EU exists, it's a regulatory superpower, it's our biggest trading partner, it supplies a large proportion of our food, it is one of the three big economic blocks. The idea of us going it alone, pretending it isn't any of these things, is pure fantasy.
Gosh very classy new look for the site. I feel a touch intimidated. Will not stop me commenting on this topic though - the rebellion of Geoffrey Cox QC. It's a problem for Johnson. Although I'm of the view that Cummings (and therefore Johnson) actively want opposition to what they are noisily pretending to be planning to do - tear up the WA and No Deal - the opposition they want is that of the dreaded "liberal Remainer elite". This means Starmer, Davey, Blair, Major, Heseltine, the Lords, Miller, sundry lawyers, all the old favourites. Cox is a lawyer, of course, so that's a tick, but being a Leaver he is decidedly not one of the Enemies Of The People variety. He is also, and this is a matter of scientific fact rather than opinion, a HUGE voice in the party.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
I think the UK negotiators will be very, very happy to do that. As the FT says in the article, the Japan provisions are much closer to what the UK is asking for than what the EU is.
The UK as an opening gambit offering less than what they're prepared to is sound negotiations when the opposition are being maximalist in their demands.
So you are happy with some form of state aid restrictions?
Absolutely of course!
Just as the Government have proposed they would be happy with too.
What I am not OK with is dynamic alignment with EU rules or the EU getting a say on our tax rates etc
Doubly so, when the EU’s attitude to their own state aid rules is observed more in the breach than the compliance.
Almost any deal with the EU on state aid would involve them constantly taking us to arbitration - for doing exactly the same things they do themselves internally.
There is probably much truth in the observation that Britain is terrified of the rest of Europe uniting against it, and that Brexit may have stemmed in part from this kind of paranoia. Of course the irony is that Brexit achieves the very thing that these people are afraid of, leaving us weak and isolated. Even the Irish are on the other side now, and maybe the Scots too soon (we live in hope). Well played Little Englanders, you really are geniuses.
Misses the point how insular Britain is. 95% of brexit votes were driven 100% by perceptions of what is happening in the UK by people who couldn't find France on a map.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
It's a decent deal and good to have. The UK got a lot of what it wanted from it, albeit less than what it had with the EU deal. The benefits in the article are relative to not having a deal at all, which is the default position now we are leaving the EU.
The two areas where the new FTA goes beyond the EU deal: Forbidding data localisation, which Japan wants and is embedded in the CPTPP agreement that the UK wants to join. The EU doesn't specifically require data localisation (like eg China) but it does have strong data privacy (as does Japan, so the difference may really be philosophical). Disallows interventions on digital for cultural reasons (eg a certain amount of content needs to be originated locally or in French)
Actually for the "new economy" we got a lot more than we wanted. For finance and data we've got much better access to Japan for our companies (and vice versa of course) than the EU deal and I don't think it will be fixed in time forever, where there are new benefits to be had both parties will want to do a quick renegotiation that is mutually beneficial. Whatever tariff and quota issues there are for agriculture are far, far outweighed by what we get for finance and other services.
I see Cameron is adding his voice against the Internal Markets Bill. That's all the living prime ministers, and probably in spirit Thatcher and all her postwar predecessors, too.
The blockade narrative is total rubbish and more lies from this corrupt government . The EU just want to know what food standards the UK will apply as they do with all third countries . Do people seriously think the EU should agree to a deal before knowing that .
That article is absolutely right. Brexit, and its effect of dragging people into irrationality, has almost nothing whatsoever to do with 'imperial nostalgia', and actually very little (pace@AlastairMeeks) to do with racism or xenophobia. It is much more to do with a fantasy of sovereignty which (as we are seeing in the negotiations, of lack of them) can never exist in the modern world.
Whether we like it or not, the EU exists, it's a regulatory superpower, it's our biggest trading partner, it supplies a large proportion of our food, it is one of the three big economic blocks. The idea of us going it alone, pretending it isn't any of these things, is pure fantasy.
Yet somehow Canada manages to go it alone not being part of the USA's superstate. Funny that.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
You are categorically and 100% wrong. The Japanese state aid restrictions are nothing like what we have with the EU and are pretty standard pro forma international state aid rules which is what our negotiators have said should happen.
You mean the FT are wrong:
"The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules."
No I'm suggesting the FT is right and that you're misreading it.
You said it is tougher than the ones we "have with the EU". Do you think what we are proposing to the EU (a negotiating position) is what we "have with" them?
I note that you missed the most important part of the article.
"But some lawyers also stressed that the subsidy rules in the Japan bilateral deal were still weak compared with the detailed and invasive EU state aid regime.
James Webber, a partner at the law firm Shearman & Sterling, said: “It’s a concession of sorts by the UK, but if this is where the negotiations end up, it will be much closer to the UK’s view of the world than the EU's.”"
Do you understand the concept of negotiations? That what we are offering to them is not what we have or necessarily will agree?
So why is section 43 of the Internal Market Bill all about state aid? Does that mean that we are proposing to breal international law and renege on treaty commitments as a negotiatinhg ploy?
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
It's a decent deal and good to have. The UK got a lot of what it wanted from it, albeit less than what it had with the EU deal. The benefits in the article are relative to not having a deal at all, which is the default position now we are leaving the EU.
The two areas where the new FTA goes beyond the EU deal: Forbidding data localisation, which Japan wants and is embedded in the CPTPP agreement that the UK wants to join. The EU doesn't specifically require data localisation (like eg China) but it does have strong data privacy (as does Japan, so the difference may really be philosophical). Disallows interventions on digital for cultural reasons (eg a certain amount of content needs to be originated locally or in French)
Actually for the "new economy" we got a lot more than we wanted. For finance and data we've got much better access to Japan for our companies (and vice versa of course) than the EU deal and I don't think it will be fixed in time forever, where there are new benefits to be had both parties will want to do a quick renegotiation that is mutually beneficial. Whatever tariff and quota issues there are for agriculture are far, far outweighed by what we get for finance and other services.
My understanding of the finance chapter is that it mainly sets up a dialogue for potential future agreements where that dialogue was happening anyway. It was a UK ask that was partially addressed by the FTA.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
You fool, the government has proposed exactly that but the EU are insisting on dynamic alignment with the UK. It's the EU that are at fault here, whether or not you want to see it.
Barner indicated he was moving away from that "maximalist" position and was waiting for a UK response in the other direction.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
You are categorically and 100% wrong. The Japanese state aid restrictions are nothing like what we have with the EU and are pretty standard pro forma international state aid rules which is what our negotiators have said should happen.
You mean the FT are wrong:
"The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules."
No I'm suggesting the FT is right and that you're misreading it.
You said it is tougher than the ones we "have with the EU". Do you think what we are proposing to the EU (a negotiating position) is what we "have with" them?
I note that you missed the most important part of the article.
"But some lawyers also stressed that the subsidy rules in the Japan bilateral deal were still weak compared with the detailed and invasive EU state aid regime.
James Webber, a partner at the law firm Shearman & Sterling, said: “It’s a concession of sorts by the UK, but if this is where the negotiations end up, it will be much closer to the UK’s view of the world than the EU's.”"
Do you understand the concept of negotiations? That what we are offering to them is not what we have or necessarily will agree?
So why is section 43 of the Internal Market Bill all about state aid? Does that mean that we are proposing to breal international law and renege on treaty commitments as a negotiatinhg ploy?
Because the pre-existing EU rules are to quote the FT "invasive" and there is a suggestion the EU would abuse the NI Protocol to reach into GB too.
What the UK is seeking is a standard state aid agreement like used in CETA rather than dynamic alignment - we have suggested as an opening gambit WTO terms but have agreed with the Japanese a standard agreement. What we have agreed with the Japanese matches the principles of what we have said we would agree but isn't the opening salvo in negotiations. What people are struggling to understand there is beyond me, it is really pretty simple.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
The UK-Japan trade deal is probably a good case study. The UK gave much less of a shit about the old economy (agriculture, mining etc...) and accepted worse terms there but pushed for and got better terms on the new economy (finance, data, services) using the EU deal as a benchmark. It's precisely what leavers said would happen with independent trade deals and this is using the existing EU deal as framework, as we push forwards with a fully independent trade policy I expect this will be the strategy going forwards. Bad news for farmers, no news for manufacturers and good news for services.
It's amusing to see that the government has (commendably) got Japan to accept that we can designate new geographical indications (GIs) and that they will recognise them, despite the fact that the Brexiteers resent the EU insisting on exactly the same (it's called 'dynamic alignment' in the jargon).
It’s a term that’s never before appeared in English law appearing, undefined, for the first time. So no one knows what it means in this context.
Whoopee doo, nor has xylophone. Any ambiguity "in this context" will be resolved in due course by judicial decisions, cos that's how English law works. The shitshow is surely bad enough that points as weak as that can be passed over in silence.
Do 50 MPs really want to lose their careers so early in the Parliament? Press on!
You have clocked that it's legally experienced Leavers rebelling this time rather than obstructionist Remainers, right?
Doesn't make them right though. They're playing into the EU's hands if they do rebel.
I'm afraid they are right.
If you read Geoffrey Cox's article you'll see he addresses the point of dealing with the EU:
"But the duty of good faith is a two-way street. The EU faces a precisely equal obligation and if, as reported, it has sought to use the Northern Ireland protocol as a lever in the trade negotiations, for example by suggesting that it might decline to extend to our farmers the same recognition for the purpose of imports of animal products that it has in place with Africa and Central Asia, thus marooning Northern Ireland from its main market in Great Britain, then its behaviour is open to very severe criticism. I well recall the careful protestations made by Michel Barnier about “dedramatising” the border he advocated in the Irish Sea, and the solemn undertaking in the protocol to facilitate trade between Northern Ireland and the UK and to avoid controls.
The UK might understandably feel that such an approach from the EU should not simply be accepted without challenge. There are clear and lawful responses available to Her Majesty’s government, but both the spirit and the letter of the law require that these should be undertaken solely to accelerate progress in negotiations not as a means to force their abandonment.
These include triggering the agreed independent arbitration procedure set out in the withdrawal agreement and, in extremis, these might legitimately extend to taking temporary and proportionate measures, where they are urgently necessary to protect the fundamental interests of the UK (in my view if, and only if, specifically approved at the time by the House of Commons,) for the period until that arbitration has concluded.
What ministers should not do, however provoked or frustrated they may feel, is to take or use powers permanently and unilaterally to rewrite portions of an agreement into which this country freely entered just a few months ago."
The problem with using the dispute process is that it would show that the UK government does not have a case. It has still to provide any evidence that what it claims the EU is doing is actually what the EU is doing. The way to get around having to provide evidence is to bypass any need to do so. Hence the legislation.
The UK-Japan trade deal is probably a good case study. The UK gave much less of a shit about the old economy (agriculture, mining etc...) and accepted worse terms there but pushed for and got better terms on the new economy (finance, data, services) using the EU deal as a benchmark. It's precisely what leavers said would happen with independent trade deals and this is using the existing EU deal as framework, as we push forwards with a fully independent trade policy I expect this will be the strategy going forwards. Bad news for farmers, no news for manufacturers and good news for services.
.. but negligible in the overall scheme of things, compared with what we are losing with the EU.
*sigh* To the people who started gloating about this deal did I not say "wait to see the detail"? Its a deal. It replicates what we have now albeit at greater cost. It ties us into the thing we are leaving the EU to untie ourselves from.
Let me guess. The government haven't read the details of the agreement. Getting an agreement to propagandise was more important than the detail.
I don't what is worse - this bunch of incompetent wazzocks. Or the people tugging the forelock insisting they are doing a good job.
If the UK doesn't get a deal the UK will be criticised as will Brexit more broadly.
If the UK does get a deal the UK will be criticised for not getting a deal "as good" as it would have done through the EU as will Brexit more broadly.
See the common theme?
There's actually quite a few extra benefits in this deal - particularly on services and GIs, see politico article here - so one shouldn't be too churlish about it:
Is it being churlish? We were leaving the EU to get a better deal. So to ask if any deal gained is better or worse is simply holding a mirror up to what was promised. It is of course a Good Thing that we have a deal in place, even if I have to laugh at the details.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
Did you even read the article I linked to?
It's a decent deal and good to have. The UK got a lot of what it wanted from it, albeit less than what it had with the EU deal. The benefits in the article are relative to not having a deal at all, which is the default position now we are leaving the EU.
The two areas where the new FTA goes beyond the EU deal: Forbidding data localisation, which Japan wants and is embedded in the CPTPP agreement that the UK wants to join. The EU doesn't specifically require data localisation (like eg China) but it does have strong data privacy (as does Japan, so the difference may really be philosophical). Disallows interventions on digital for cultural reasons (eg a certain amount of content needs to be originated locally or in French)
Actually for the "new economy" we got a lot more than we wanted. For finance and data we've got much better access to Japan for our companies (and vice versa of course) than the EU deal and I don't think it will be fixed in time forever, where there are new benefits to be had both parties will want to do a quick renegotiation that is mutually beneficial. Whatever tariff and quota issues there are for agriculture are far, far outweighed by what we get for finance and other services.
My understanding of the finance chapter is that it mainly sets up a dialogue for potential future agreements where that dialogue was happening anyway. It was a UK ask that was partially addressed by the FTA.
Barnier has no power to do anything, the EU leaders made no indication of that change so the government is absolutely right not to budge until his Barnier gets backing for it from Berlin and Paris. This is exactly the trap that May fell into, Barnier makes concessions, we move our position, he goes to Berlin they refuse to budge and he comes back and says "actually I need more movement from you".
Honestly, sometimes I do think you're an EU plant.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
But IDS supports it - which should tell you everything we need to know
The UK-Japan trade deal is probably a good case study. The UK gave much less of a shit about the old economy (agriculture, mining etc...) and accepted worse terms there but pushed for and got better terms on the new economy (finance, data, services) using the EU deal as a benchmark. It's precisely what leavers said would happen with independent trade deals and this is using the existing EU deal as framework, as we push forwards with a fully independent trade policy I expect this will be the strategy going forwards. Bad news for farmers, no news for manufacturers and good news for services.
Only if we get a deal with the EU that favours services.
Can you please explain what positivity means in this context and what the y-axis scale is. I find it hard to believe the ONS would publish a graph without labelling the axes, which is a basic in statistics even at school level.
I created the graph from the ONS data on positivity
Well that guarantees the DUP will vote with the government then, even if Tory rebels vote with the SDLP
I too think the DUP will too vote with the Gov't on this (Regardless of the SDLP's move), which brings the starting majority effectively being 96. Can't see why any other parties would.
There is probably much truth in the observation that Britain is terrified of the rest of Europe uniting against it, and that Brexit may have stemmed in part from this kind of paranoia. Of course the irony is that Brexit achieves the very thing that these people are afraid of, leaving us weak and isolated. Even the Irish are on the other side now, and maybe the Scots too soon (we live in hope). Well played Little Englanders, you really are geniuses.
Before the Act of Union England fought more wars with Scotland than any other nation bar France.
The UK-Japan trade deal is probably a good case study. The UK gave much less of a shit about the old economy (agriculture, mining etc...) and accepted worse terms there but pushed for and got better terms on the new economy (finance, data, services) using the EU deal as a benchmark. It's precisely what leavers said would happen with independent trade deals and this is using the existing EU deal as framework, as we push forwards with a fully independent trade policy I expect this will be the strategy going forwards. Bad news for farmers, no news for manufacturers and good news for services.
.. but negligible in the overall scheme of things, compared with what we are losing with the EU.
I'm not suggesting that trade deals with other countries are mutually exclusive though. Please point to where I have?
Even you must see how dynamic alignment on the LPF is a non-starter for the UK, if the EU doesn't budge then it will be no deal.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
Cameron is making the same point that I did a few days ago. The clause does not break the WA. It simply gives Ministers the power to break the agreement in the event that they think that is necessary. Of course, should such a scenario arise Parliament could pass the relevant legislation at that time. Why is it thought necessary to pass it now and leave it to Ministerial discretion rather than the discretion of Parliament? I really don't understand why we are having this wholly confected row now.
A mobile coronavirus testing centre failed to turn up in Bolton, leaving dozens waiting hours for an appointment, before eventually being sent home without being tested.
Mobile testing at the Last Drop Village, in Bromley Cross, had been offered to a number of patients, with appointments set for Saturday morning (September 12).
Although patients stuck to their end of the deal, it then became clear that the mobile testing unit would not be arriving at all.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
Cameron is making the same point that I did a few days ago. The clause does not break the WA. It simply gives Ministers the power to break the agreement in the event that they think that is necessary. Of course, should such a scenario arise Parliament could pass the relevant legislation at that time. Why is it thought necessary to pass it now and leave it to Ministerial discretion rather than the discretion of Parliament? I really don't understand why we are having this wholly confected row now.
To show the EU we are serious at standing up for ourselves in the negotiations?
And if the EU have threatened as claimed UK food trade with NI then it makes sense to pass this now. If the EU haven't threatened that then this passing actually won't mean much so what is the big deal?
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
But IDS supports it - which should tell you everything we need to know
The muck I scrape off my shoe has more intelligence than IDS.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
Cameron is making the same point that I did a few days ago. The clause does not break the WA. It simply gives Ministers the power to break the agreement in the event that they think that is necessary. Of course, should such a scenario arise Parliament could pass the relevant legislation at that time. Why is it thought necessary to pass it now and leave it to Ministerial discretion rather than the discretion of Parliament? I really don't understand why we are having this wholly confected row now.
As Shagger thinks the Japan trade deal is marvellous can I propose a way forward to break the impasse over state aid? Simple copy the state aid agreement just reached with the Japanese and paste it into the document for the EU.
Simples!
I think the UK negotiators will be very, very happy to do that. As the FT says in the article, the Japan provisions are much closer to what the UK is asking for than what the EU is.
The UK as an opening gambit offering less than what they're prepared to is sound negotiations when the opposition are being maximalist in their demands.
So you are happy with some form of state aid restrictions?
Philip is happy with anything Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings tells him he should be happy with. I am beginning to think he actually is Dominic Cummings, but then.....(what I am thinking is too unkind to write!)
The UK-Japan trade deal is probably a good case study. The UK gave much less of a shit about the old economy (agriculture, mining etc...) and accepted worse terms there but pushed for and got better terms on the new economy (finance, data, services) using the EU deal as a benchmark. It's precisely what leavers said would happen with independent trade deals and this is using the existing EU deal as framework, as we push forwards with a fully independent trade policy I expect this will be the strategy going forwards. Bad news for farmers, no news for manufacturers and good news for services.
.. but negligible in the overall scheme of things, compared with what we are losing with the EU.
I wouldn't say that. The UK got a lot of what it wants while Japan got essentially everything. But nevertheless a decent deal for the UK.
Japan has done services for automotive and machinery FTAs before, eg with India. This one isn't that because Japanese access to the UK market for automotive and machinery is nailed down while UK financial services access to the Japanese market is aspirational. It eliminates the quid pro quo. The UK won't be able to use UK market access as leverage.
That article is absolutely right. Brexit, and its effect of dragging people into irrationality, has almost nothing whatsoever to do with 'imperial nostalgia', and actually very little (pace@AlastairMeeks) to do with racism or xenophobia. It is much more to do with a fantasy of sovereignty which (as we are seeing in the negotiations, of lack of them) can never exist in the modern world.
Whether we like it or not, the EU exists, it's a regulatory superpower, it's our biggest trading partner, it supplies a large proportion of our food, it is one of the three big economic blocks. The idea of us going it alone, pretending it isn't any of these things, is pure fantasy.
Yet somehow Canada manages to go it alone not being part of the USA's superstate. Funny that.
Not really. For example, Canada has no right to refuse to recognise the conformity assessment bodies of the US. This is exactly the kind of limitation of sovereignty which the Brexiteers tell us is unconscionable.
There is probably much truth in the observation that Britain is terrified of the rest of Europe uniting against it, and that Brexit may have stemmed in part from this kind of paranoia. Of course the irony is that Brexit achieves the very thing that these people are afraid of, leaving us weak and isolated. Even the Irish are on the other side now, and maybe the Scots too soon (we live in hope). Well played Little Englanders, you really are geniuses.
Before the Act of Union England fought more wars with Scotland than any other nation bar France.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
But IDS supports it - which should tell you everything we need to know
The muck I scrape off my shoe has more intelligence than IDS.
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
Cameron is making the same point that I did a few days ago. The clause does not break the WA. It simply gives Ministers the power to break the agreement in the event that they think that is necessary. Of course, should such a scenario arise Parliament could pass the relevant legislation at that time. Why is it thought necessary to pass it now and leave it to Ministerial discretion rather than the discretion of Parliament? I really don't understand why we are having this wholly confected row now.
To show the EU we are serious at standing up for ourselves in the negotiations?
And if the EU have threatened as claimed UK food trade with NI then it makes sense to pass this now. If the EU haven't threatened that then this passing actually won't mean much so what is the big deal?
Any sovereign state or Institution, including the EU, has the right to revoke a treaty agreement at any point. This is one of the fundamental differences between domestic law and international law. They may have agreed that certain penalties arise in the event of such breach or the penalty may be left in the discretion of the counterparty. In this case if we breach these parts of the WA it would be for the EU to decide whether they were withdrawing the rights granted to NI under the WA. This is completely unnecessary row at this point and is putting the government in a very bad place. It is also seriously damaging to our long term interests as we want to be taken as a country of our word. It's beyond stupid.
Can you please explain what positivity means in this context and what the y-axis scale is. I find it hard to believe the ONS would publish a graph without labelling the axes, which is a basic in statistics even at school level.
I created the graph from the ONS data on positivity
Interestingly, they don't label their version either.
Ah Ok, your graph was proportion of COV2 tests which are positive. Thank you. I was thinking this was some kind of economic indicator as it said "survey".
A mobile coronavirus testing centre failed to turn up in Bolton, leaving dozens waiting hours for an appointment, before eventually being sent home without being tested.
Mobile testing at the Last Drop Village, in Bromley Cross, had been offered to a number of patients, with appointments set for Saturday morning (September 12).
Although patients stuck to their end of the deal, it then became clear that the mobile testing unit would not be arriving at all.
My colleague in Manchester has spent the last 4 days trying to book an appointment, he's been offered a slot in Gloucester!
I understand this even less than I understand most stuff these days. A testing unit needs a box of swabs, a nurse, envelopes to put the swabs in, and access to a postbox. You could fit one into a Smart car. Why is there not one on every high street?
So with Cameron now not supporting the amendment either that means every living former Tory leader bar IDS is opposed to the government on this (Howard and May and Major have made clear their opposition and Hague last week said the government should concede to the EU on state aid and get a deal)
Cameron is making the same point that I did a few days ago. The clause does not break the WA. It simply gives Ministers the power to break the agreement in the event that they think that is necessary. Of course, should such a scenario arise Parliament could pass the relevant legislation at that time. Why is it thought necessary to pass it now and leave it to Ministerial discretion rather than the discretion of Parliament? I really don't understand why we are having this wholly confected row now.
And why Remain supporting Brandon Lewis presented it in such an inflammatory way.
Comments
I'm no fan of this Government. But it wasn't them who started defacing and pulling down statues and attacking our history and heritage.
Critics would be on stronger ground if they confined their criticism to its moves against the judiciary, which is a potential cause for concern (although it isn't if it includes some sensible rights and appeals reform to close loopholes and contradictions where it really takes the piss at the moment).
Customers waiting, time to earn a crust.
As I said on another post the government is citing state aid as one of the reasons it needs to bin off the EU. Yet it has signed a Japan deal with even stricter restrictions on state aid than we have with the EU...
https://twitter.com/danobrien20/status/1305080470582038528?s=20
Who is "being played at their own game?" Its not them who are going to suffer with no deal
Had a quick look at the new front page before signing in via Vanilla - I prefer Vanilla - but the new minimalist design chimes with the post-pandemic zeitgeist in the recognition life is for living at the spiritual rather than physical or material level. Confinement enforces contemplation as the futility of our materialist experience confounds us via the technology that shows us a world of egalitarian unattainability and reminders of what we have lost.
So that's my contribution for the Pretentious Bollocks Post of the Year Award - I realise the competition is plentiful but that must get me on the shortlist?
Its not the EU mandating the creation of this mass of red tape or the GVMS or a fucking permit without which its illegal for UK trucks to drive into Kent from Surrey. That would be Michael Gove, not Michael Barnier.
Anyway, Apple and Nvidia have fallen out in the past, so Apple drifting away from ARM looks quite probable in the medium to long term.
Just as the Government have proposed they would be happy with too.
What I am not OK with is dynamic alignment with EU rules or the EU getting a say on our tax rates etc
Dammit busy this morning with real life but will come back when I can to you.
And when that happens? The deal prevents your government from intervening with state aid to sustain jobs. Yay.
He’s disagreeing w Boris
“The mans a noble patriot”
Say that to the current management, and they'd think "Bring It On".
"The UK’s new trade deal with Japan commits it to tougher restrictions on state aid than the ones it is currently offering the EU in the Brexit talks, potentially undermining its negotiating position with Brussels.
In the bilateral UK-Japan agreement announced in principle on Friday, London and Tokyo have agreed to replicate the restrictions on subsidies in the EU-Japan deal that went into effect last year. That agreement prohibits the governments from indefinitely guaranteeing the debts of struggling companies or providing an open-ended bailout without a clear restructuring plan in place.
By contrast, the UK has repeatedly told the EU that it must have total freedom over state aid after the end of the Brexit transition period with complete autonomy over future subsidy decisions, subject to WTO rules."
https://www.ft.com/content/edb7d155-56b4-4065-9f83-31b2247fa178
https://order-order.com/2020/09/14/read-in-full-erg-briefing-note-to-mps-on-internal-market-bill/
(Yes, the spelling is atrocious)
Absolutely shameful.
You said it is tougher than the ones we "have with the EU". Do you think what we are proposing to the EU (a negotiating position) is what we "have with" them?
I note that you missed the most important part of the article.
"But some lawyers also stressed that the subsidy rules in the Japan bilateral deal were still weak compared with the detailed and invasive EU state aid regime.
James Webber, a partner at the law firm Shearman & Sterling, said: “It’s a concession of sorts by the UK, but if this is where the negotiations end up, it will be much closer to the UK’s view of the world than the EU's.”"
Do you understand the concept of negotiations? That what we are offering to them is not what we have or necessarily will agree?
Never underestimate their brilliance.
The two areas where the new FTA goes beyond the EU deal: Forbidding data localisation, which Japan wants and is embedded in the CPTPP agreement that the UK wants to join. The EU doesn't specifically require data localisation (like eg China) but it does have strong data privacy laws (as does Japan, so the difference may really be philosophical). Disallows interventions on digital for cultural reasons (eg a certain amount of content needs to be originated locally or in French)
The big area where it doesn't go as far as the EU deal: Tariff Rate quotas where you can import a certain amount of a sensitive product at an affordable tariff. The UK loses its share of EU quotas and doesn't get UK quotas to make up. It will mean UK exporters will no longer be able to export certain products to Japan that they do now.
Whether we like it or not, the EU exists, it's a regulatory superpower, it's our biggest trading partner, it supplies a large proportion of our food, it is one of the three big economic blocks. The idea of us going it alone, pretending it isn't any of these things, is pure fantasy.
Almost any deal with the EU on state aid would involve them constantly taking us to arbitration - for doing exactly the same things they do themselves internally.
But I agree that the wording is clumsy.
What the UK is seeking is a standard state aid agreement like used in CETA rather than dynamic alignment - we have suggested as an opening gambit WTO terms but have agreed with the Japanese a standard agreement. What we have agreed with the Japanese matches the principles of what we have said we would agree but isn't the opening salvo in negotiations. What people are struggling to understand there is beyond me, it is really pretty simple.
Honestly, sometimes I do think you're an EU plant.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/dvc981/prvwrapper/datadownload.xlsx
Interestingly, they don't label their version either.
The Irish were even neutral in WW2
Even you must see how dynamic alignment on the LPF is a non-starter for the UK, if the EU doesn't budge then it will be no deal.
A mobile coronavirus testing centre failed to turn up in Bolton, leaving dozens waiting hours for an appointment, before eventually being sent home without being tested.
Mobile testing at the Last Drop Village, in Bromley Cross, had been offered to a number of patients, with appointments set for Saturday morning (September 12).
Although patients stuck to their end of the deal, it then became clear that the mobile testing unit would not be arriving at all.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/coronavirus-testing-nightmare-mobile-unit-18927199
My colleague in Manchester has spent the last 4 days trying to book an appointment, he's been offered a slot in Gloucester!
And if the EU have threatened as claimed UK food trade with NI then it makes sense to pass this now. If the EU haven't threatened that then this passing actually won't mean much so what is the big deal?
Like when Spurs dumped serial non winner Poch for the serial winner Jose?
Japan has done services for automotive and machinery FTAs before, eg with India. This one isn't that because Japanese access to the UK market for automotive and machinery is nailed down while UK financial services access to the Japanese market is aspirational. It eliminates the quid pro quo. The UK won't be able to use UK market access as leverage.
They may have agreed that certain penalties arise in the event of such breach or the penalty may be left in the discretion of the counterparty. In this case if we breach these parts of the WA it would be for the EU to decide whether they were withdrawing the rights granted to NI under the WA.
This is completely unnecessary row at this point and is putting the government in a very bad place. It is also seriously damaging to our long term interests as we want to be taken as a country of our word. It's beyond stupid.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-54070281