Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
Always first with the news........even when it's four days old. But thanks for letting us know who Derek Hatton is.
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
The LPF stuff has never been seen in a trade agreement? We're asking for something that hasn't been seen before in a trade agreement. We want to leave the EEA but still be able to trade on EEA terms with the EEA from outside the EEA. If we were agreeing tariffs and quotas then LPF would not be relevant.
No, we are asking for goods trade to be the same as the Canada or Japan deals with the EU, which don’t contain ratchet provisions on labour law.
It literally doesn't matter what we are "asking for".
Actually in trade terms it does, if we get the same tariffs as the Canada/EU deal but the EU insists on different governance it's a breach of MFN rules. It's why the EU has refused the Canada route as soon as we asked for it, as has been said many times the UK has repeatedly asked the EU for a deal with tariffs.
Exactly. So it doesn't matter what we ask for if the EU do not want to give it to us.
And this is where no deal becomes a realistic option and I still think it's massively underpriced. Signing up to the LPF as it the EU are saying right now is never going to happen, so either they water that down, accept the Canada style tariffs or we no deal. Those are the three options available, of those I think no deal is at least a 50% chance.
Yes that's how it looks. We should consider what WTO terms means. Those terms are actually up to the UK to decide, but bearing in mind that the EU is now just one other trading partner among all countries. We do not have to replicate current EU tariff-quotas, though that would be administratively easiest. We could, for example, unilaterally abolish all tariffs and quotas. This would be the best outcome for UK consumers. On the other hand, if we think that some domestic activities need protection (I would ask: why?) we should design the tariff-quota regime to suit our domestic industries. For example, there would be no justification for tariffs on e.g. citrus fruits (up to 16% currently).
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
Oh boo f*cking hoo. This was supposed to be the "easiest deal in the world". This is all on you guys.
The point is that the EU are trying to impose ratchet mechanisms on UK law, that don’t appear in their own trade deals with other nations such as Canada and Japan.
The EU were massively in favour of giving us a ‘Canada’ agreement, until we said that was what we wanted.
Like I said, boo f*cking hoo. This is a consequence of leaving - having to deal with the big boys. Don't like it? Well it's tough isn't it.
I didn't see any of this on the side of a bus.
Okay, No deal then.
From where are companies in the EU going to find finance next year, given that the vast majority of it currently comes from London?
The same as now, they capitalise a subsidiary, get it a credit rating and raise the money as a domestic company. That's how everyone else does it anyway.
S'ok - most people are quick to explain how this or that sector will face such and such, or no problems when they don't have the foggiest clue about how that sector works.
For @Sandpit as an example I believe he was one on here who with great perspicacity identified the flaws in the govt's track and trace app. But business finance? Perhaps not so much.
Just like you and me on, say, fishing or industrial light machinery (I hope I don't impugn your knowledge...).
It does raise some interesting scenarios wrt selling senior notes and jurisdictional issues, especially given that the ECJ would try and get involved. Does the senior debt sold by the subsidiary subordinate everything else held by the parent?
I'm honestly not sure. Hopefully the clever lawyers have figured it all out.
Indeed. And of course the brouhaha about euro clearing did invoke a "be careful what you wish for" for the ECB.
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
British Airways is partly Spanish Airways now after the merger with Iberia so that does not really apply, if it needed a bailout the Spanish Government would also be involved
I don't know (Is there one? It would be fascinating to find out), but I can imagine it including:
Europe holds more of the cards. Europe has is pretty much ready and Britain isn't for January, deal or no deal. Is it going to be worth us selling stuff to the British, anyway? If they double-cross us on the Withdraw Agreement, the final deal needs to be nailed down hard. If les rosbifs want to trade with us, that's lovely, but they don't get a blank cheque. If they undercut us, now or in the future, we decide what tarrifs to put on. souveraineté, n'est-ce pas?
I don't think it's unpatriotic as a Briton to point those likely opinions out. It also doesn't really matter if they're correct opinions, if their the opinions that our opposite numbers hold. There isn't some equivalent of a teacher on playground duty that the UK can run off to and say "Europe won't play with me and it's not fair".
They sold us £374bn of stuff in 2019, about the same as their largest export market the US. I'm sure they can just find other places to flog their stuff.
We're still going to buy it. It's just going to be more expensive. We have an insatiable demand for goods that isn't going to disappear overnight in 3.5 weeks time.
How much will remainers pay in a new EU sales tax, on say Spainsh/French/Italian wines over New World, to prove their fealty?
Me personally? I tend to drink New World wines rather than continental, so....
I also imagine that the management of firms announcing redundancies because of tarriff and regulatory barriers will be asking those who voted leave to head out the door first. Not. Because the world doesn't work like that and Tres Difficile is just channeling his handle.
There would be a degree of irony if Leavers were fired first thanks to difficulties causing by leaving... but thankfully the world does not work that way, because if it did, us Remainers would probably have been first against the wall when the Brexit Revolution happened
The banks have been putting in measures for months, this from September, another profitable revenue stream lost for the UK economy, but at least we'll be sovereign.
Thousands of Britons living in the EU will have their UK bank accounts closed by the end of the year because of the UK’s failure to agree a post-Brexit trade deal.
Lloyds, Barclays and Coutts have informed retail and business customers that they will lose their accounts before or when the Brexit transition period ends on 31 December and more banks are expected to follow suit.
Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Halifax and Bank of Scotland, has contacted its 13,000 customers in the Netherlands, Slovakia, Germany, Ireland and Portugal, warning them they must make alternative arrangements as the bank is no longer allowed to offer services.
I don't know (Is there one? It would be fascinating to find out), but I can imagine it including:
Europe holds more of the cards. Europe has is pretty much ready and Britain isn't for January, deal or no deal. Is it going to be worth us selling stuff to the British, anyway? If they double-cross us on the Withdraw Agreement, the final deal needs to be nailed down hard. If les rosbifs want to trade with us, that's lovely, but they don't get a blank cheque. If they undercut us, now or in the future, we decide what tarrifs to put on. souveraineté, n'est-ce pas?
I don't think it's unpatriotic as a Briton to point those likely opinions out. It also doesn't really matter if they're correct opinions, if their the opinions that our opposite numbers hold. There isn't some equivalent of a teacher on playground duty that the UK can run off to and say "Europe won't play with me and it's not fair".
They sold us £374bn of stuff in 2019, about the same as their largest export market the US. I'm sure they can just find other places to flog their stuff.
We're still going to buy it. It's just going to be more expensive. We have an insatiable demand for goods that isn't going to disappear overnight in 3.5 weeks time.
How much will remainers pay in a new EU sales tax, on say Spainsh/French/Italian wines over New World, to prove their fealty?
Better than that, we drop all import duty on wine and it’s cheaper for everyone in the UK.
The EU external tarriffs are huge for certain imports.
In the 1990s violent crime fell by 56% in New York city under Giuliani's Mayoralty compared to only 28% across the US as a whole, property crimes fell by 65% in the city but only 26% nationally.
New York city was in many parts a violent crime ridden hellhole under his predecessors Mayors Ed Koch and David Dinkins, especially once you got outside the most wealthy bits of Manhattan and towards the Bronx and it was not safe to walk alone at night in many parts, Giuliani changed that
But the relevant comparator is not the country generally, since big cities experienced far higher falls (from higher peaks) than the rest of the nation. It's other big cities. And the more you look at the numbers, the less important Giuliani's role is. He was inaugurated in 1993, when crime in New York was already dropping dramatically. Its peak year was 1990. And the big increase in police numbers was agreed by his predecessor.
Once you allow for those factors, New York's performance is about average, or maybe slightly better, but certainly not as good as you make it out to be.
Giuliani was a good mayor.
Just because he's a nob now doesn't mean he was a nob then.
He was the best thing that happened to New York in decades, at the time.
A total and utter tw@ now though, two decades later.
You could say the same for Donald Trump, on both counts.
I don't know (Is there one? It would be fascinating to find out), but I can imagine it including:
Europe holds more of the cards. Europe has is pretty much ready and Britain isn't for January, deal or no deal. Is it going to be worth us selling stuff to the British, anyway? If they double-cross us on the Withdraw Agreement, the final deal needs to be nailed down hard. If les rosbifs want to trade with us, that's lovely, but they don't get a blank cheque. If they undercut us, now or in the future, we decide what tarrifs to put on. souveraineté, n'est-ce pas?
I don't think it's unpatriotic as a Briton to point those likely opinions out. It also doesn't really matter if they're correct opinions, if their the opinions that our opposite numbers hold. There isn't some equivalent of a teacher on playground duty that the UK can run off to and say "Europe won't play with me and it's not fair".
They sold us £374bn of stuff in 2019, about the same as their largest export market the US. I'm sure they can just find other places to flog their stuff.
If you are a small business in Strasbourg, you can just pop stuff in the post to Southampton right now. And vice-versa. After January 1, there's a pile of extra paperwork to fill in. If the time cost of completing the forms (or the money cost of getting someone to do it for you) exceeds the profit on the deal, are you going to bother? It's not obvious that you should. So you'll sell it to someone in Seville instead, even though there's less raw profit in that.
Of course, the same happens the other way. So both UK and EU economies become a bit more closed, a bit more autarkic. Not the end of the world, but everyone's horizons close a bit, which is a shame. And goods find it a bit harder to get to the place that values them most. And that's what a free market is all about, because every bit of freely-entered-into trade benefits both the buyer and seller.
I don't think some people on here understand any of this. If we get a deal that imposes tariffs and checks then instead of "here's the item price, here's the transport price, ok? Stick in in the van" its "here's the item price, here's the UK import admin price, here's the UK import transit price, here's the surcharge for delays and sundry costs, here's the tariff you'l need to pay, OK?"
I can't see that your company in Strasbourg will bother hiring extra staff to deal with all the bullshit red tape for the UK - they'll contract it out and pass on the cost. As they will pass on the higher transport costs. We can still buy the thing, it will just cost a fair bit more as it will take longer and have reams of paperwork.
In my case our products made in Romania are going to have a zero tariff. So all we'll have to pay are the extra paperwork and logistics costs and lost opportunity cost of our short life products losing life stuck in customs delays. So more expensive despite zero tariffs and consumers will pay the bill.
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
The LPF stuff has never been seen in a trade agreement? We're asking for something that hasn't been seen before in a trade agreement. We want to leave the EEA but still be able to trade on EEA terms with the EEA from outside the EEA. If we were agreeing tariffs and quotas then LPF would not be relevant.
No, we are asking for goods trade to be the same as the Canada or Japan deals with the EU, which don’t contain ratchet provisions on labour law.
It literally doesn't matter what we are "asking for".
Except that it does, because the alternative, which the British government are prepared to run with, is no deal at all, with the EU totally cut off from London finance.
Well then I look forward to the EU caving to our every demand.
Yes indeed! Just wait until BMW and Volkswagen twist the Commission's arms and give the UK every we want.
The banks have been putting in measures for months, this from September, another profitable revenue stream lost for the UK economy, but at least we'll be sovereign.
Thousands of Britons living in the EU will have their UK bank accounts closed by the end of the year because of the UK’s failure to agree a post-Brexit trade deal.
Lloyds, Barclays and Coutts have informed retail and business customers that they will lose their accounts before or when the Brexit transition period ends on 31 December and more banks are expected to follow suit.
Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Halifax and Bank of Scotland, has contacted its 13,000 customers in the Netherlands, Slovakia, Germany, Ireland and Portugal, warning them they must make alternative arrangements as the bank is no longer allowed to offer services.
And yes, various trade magazines (including, er, The Trade Magazine) have been describing for months the various measures firms have been putting in place to ensure a seamless transition whatever the negotiations.
All costs of course but nothing that @Sandpit would notice or care about.
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
Always first with the news........even when it's four days old. But thanks for letting us know who Derek Hatton is.
Erhhhh, by 4 days old you mean only just revealed in the media he was one of the individuals involved.
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
There was an interesting piece on Times Radio hosted Digby Jones, massive Brexiteer, and a Kent based wholesale florist. The wholesale florist has an easy to understand business model: get orders from florist shops, which are normally time constrained as they ordering for events, purchase the required flowers at the Amsterdam flower market, ship the flowers to her distribution point in Kent and distribute them from there to the florists in time for their events.
She is suddenly confronted with four new barriers and costs to her business:
Delay. She has to start out earlier from Holland to get the flowers across the Channel. Flowers are a perishable product.
Disruption. If roads are blocked in Kent she will need to look to ship via other routes, eg Harwich, with logistical difficulties and extra expense.
Customs and other costs, which will need to be passed onto the customer but which she can't calculate at this point because the information isn't there.
Her own additional paperwork to be completed on top of her existing tasks
The devastating thing is that she was very reasonable: this is stuff I have to deal with, there is no point complaining about it. Digby Jones was reduced to claiming that she can get a competitive advantage by being on top of the red tape.
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
We knew this last week. Has anything new happened? Funny how property developers are in the news so often: Derek Hatton; Donald Trump.
Mr. Cooke, Russell was very impressive but the fastest lap disparity is misleading. Russell's was on low fuel, with the fastest car, and with fresh tyres of the fastest compound.
He may have got the fastest lap anyway but the margin was larger than it ought to be due to the new soft tyres.
Oh, he had the advantages, but he still had to play his cards. Bottas certainly hasn't done so this season. Even with those advantages, a second+ per lap on the entire field is still pretty impressive.
Bottas has repeatedly demonstrated his inability to pass. "The Mercedes isn't great in traffic" say the commentators. Except it is when Hamilton or Russell need to slice through traffic. Its just Bottas who can't do it.
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
Oh boo f*cking hoo. This was supposed to be the "easiest deal in the world". This is all on you guys.
The point is that the EU are trying to impose ratchet mechanisms on UK law, that don’t appear in their own trade deals with other nations such as Canada and Japan.
The EU were massively in favour of giving us a ‘Canada’ agreement, until we said that was what we wanted.
Like I said, boo f*cking hoo. This is a consequence of leaving - having to deal with the big boys. Don't like it? Well it's tough isn't it.
I didn't see any of this on the side of a bus.
Okay, No deal then.
From where are companies in the EU going to find finance next year, given that the vast majority of it currently comes from London?
The same as now, they capitalise a subsidiary, get it a credit rating and raise the money as a domestic company. That's how everyone else does it anyway.
S'ok - most people are quick to explain how this or that sector will face such and such, or no problems when they don't have the foggiest clue about how that sector works.
For @Sandpit as an example I believe he was one on here who with great perspicacity identified the flaws in the govt's track and trace app. But business finance? Perhaps not so much.
Just like you and me on, say, fishing or industrial light machinery (I hope I don't impugn your knowledge...).
I’m an IT guy with an interest in international business finance. I’d never claim to be an expert on that subject though. There have been loads of recent discussions here about how screwed the EU would be if cut off from London though.
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
They don't need to, being mostly retired on fixed incomes, sitting and watching working age people actually suffer the changes.
Is my guess also.
In the past couple of years the EU has brought forward legislation that fundamentally affects the antiques and art market without any understanding of it, or real need for it.
Staying in would have been more disruptive for my business than leaving.
I get that. Of course there are areas where it's an embuggerance and I think you explained it to me some time ago. Happy if you would like to remind me what exactly it is but it seemed IIRC to be absolutely valid.
But in aggregate for the UK economy is more what I was talking about.
Still, at least we can finally jettison Droite de Suite after all this time.
I hope so! Put me off buying some Kyffin Williams' drawings last week.
The bigger problem was requiring import licensing for certain goods *because terror funding*. It was sledgehammer to crack a corn kernel stuff that even the reps from whichever security service was asked about it couldn't quite see the point of.
I fully recognise that for some businesses selling stuff to Strassbourg is currently the same as selling it to Stockport. It will be a pain to disrupt that, of course, but frankly many businesses have been dealing with customs and import/export regs for decades.
It is a process to go through - and my view has always been that the long term benefits of being outside of the customs union will outweigh the short term and ongoing costs...
FWIW apart from No Deal, the other thing that Boris is doing is causing the City of London to lose its lustre is his attacks and potential castration of the judiciary.
One of the reasons the financial services sector (as well as the legal sector) was such a success is that investors knew we had a long established strong independent judiciary that would be impartial and free from interference from the government.
Now that's going as well, they IMB ain't helped either. A government that would abrogate an international treaty isn't a place you really feel confident in using their banking services.
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
I'm fairly convinced that David Cameron's understanding of it was closer to thinking we'd "just leave" than to the reality of it at the time when he decided to hold a referendum.
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
We knew this last week. Has anything new happened? Funny how property developers are in the news so often: Derek Hatton; Donald Trump.
Did we? This is the first mention I can see of it in the media.
I can see it briefly mentioned in the Times actually yesterday.
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
We knew this last week. Has anything new happened? Funny how property developers are in the news so often: Derek Hatton; Donald Trump.
Did we? This is the first mention I can see of it in the media.
Yep, it was in the paper on Friday.
And I'm still amazed we're not hearing more made of it to be honest....
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
There was an interesting piece on Times Radio hosted Digby Jones, massive Brexiteer, and a Kent based wholesale florist. The wholesale florist has an easy to understand business model: get orders from florist shops, which are normally time constrained as they ordering for events, purchase the required flowers at the Amsterdam flower market, ship the flowers to her distribution point in Kent and distribute them from there to the florists in time for their events.
She is suddenly confronted with four new barriers and costs to her business:
Delay. She has to start out earlier from Holland to get the flowers across the Channel. Flowers are a perishable product.
Disruption. If roads are blocked in Kent she will need to look to ship via other routes, eg Harwich, with logistical difficulties and extra expense.
Customs and other costs, which will need to be passed onto the customer but which she can't calculate at this point because the information isn't there.
Her own additional paperwork to be completed on top of her existing tasks
The devastating thing is that she was very reasonable: this is stuff I have to deal with, there is no point complaining about it. Digby Jones was reduced to claiming that she can get a competitive advantage by being on top of the red tape.
There is of course a huge emerging industry of people to help you with the red tape a la PPI claims. Now, is that a good thing? Not for the consumer who will have to pay for it all although it will generate work for those involved.
Phone rings: "Hello have you been involved in an attempt to import goods from the EU?"
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
I couldn't care a baboon's bawhair about him. I'm much more worried about family members who rely on specific formulations of imported drugs for their health and sanity.
Perhaps the Nigel could suggest a suitable clause in the treaty where France is required to sink migrant boats and drown the refugees on their side of the Channel.
Dead migrants. What Faragistas and Millwall fans really want.
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
They don't need to, being mostly retired on fixed incomes, sitting and watching working age people actually suffer the changes.
Is my guess also.
In the past couple of years the EU has brought forward legislation that fundamentally affects the antiques and art market without any understanding of it, or real need for it.
Staying in would have been more disruptive for my business than leaving.
I get that. Of course there are areas where it's an embuggerance and I think you explained it to me some time ago. Happy if you would like to remind me what exactly it is but it seemed IIRC to be absolutely valid.
But in aggregate for the UK economy is more what I was talking about.
Still, at least we can finally jettison Droite de Suite after all this time.
I hope so! Put me off buying some Kyffin Williams' drawings last week.
The bigger problem was requiring import licensing for certain goods *because terror funding*. It was sledgehammer to crack a corn kernel stuff that even the reps from whichever security service was asked about it couldn't quite see the point of.
I fully recognise that for some businesses selling stuff to Strassbourg is currently the same as selling it to Stockport. It will be a pain to disrupt that, of course, but frankly many businesses have been dealing with customs and import/export regs for decades.
It is a process to go through - and my view has always been that the long term benefits of being outside of the customs union will outweigh the short term and ongoing costs...
"... long term benefits of being outside of the customs union ..."
When Ireland became independent, those benefits took 50 or 60 years to turn up. Oddly enough, just after they joined the EEC/EU-to-be.
On that timeline we might all be dead by the time the "benefits" arrive.
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
Oh boo f*cking hoo. This was supposed to be the "easiest deal in the world". This is all on you guys.
The point is that the EU are trying to impose ratchet mechanisms on UK law, that don’t appear in their own trade deals with other nations such as Canada and Japan.
The EU were massively in favour of giving us a ‘Canada’ agreement, until we said that was what we wanted.
Like I said, boo f*cking hoo. This is a consequence of leaving - having to deal with the big boys. Don't like it? Well it's tough isn't it.
I didn't see any of this on the side of a bus.
Okay, No deal then.
From where are companies in the EU going to find finance next year, given that the vast majority of it currently comes from London?
The same as now, they capitalise a subsidiary, get it a credit rating and raise the money as a domestic company. That's how everyone else does it anyway.
S'ok - most people are quick to explain how this or that sector will face such and such, or no problems when they don't have the foggiest clue about how that sector works.
For @Sandpit as an example I believe he was one on here who with great perspicacity identified the flaws in the govt's track and trace app. But business finance? Perhaps not so much.
Just like you and me on, say, fishing or industrial light machinery (I hope I don't impugn your knowledge...).
It does raise some interesting scenarios wrt selling senior notes and jurisdictional issues, especially given that the ECJ would try and get involved. Does the senior debt sold by the subsidiary subordinate everything else held by the parent?
I'm honestly not sure. Hopefully the clever lawyers have figured it all out.
Indeed. And of course the brouhaha about euro clearing did invoke a "be careful what you wish for" for the ECB.
Yes, I'm honestly not sure that the French have properly thought through no deal wrt financial services. We've got a Tory government in charge with a big majority and city hedgies bankrolling the party. As I said earlier last week, keeping us in the tent pissing out is probably a better long term bet than having us out of the tent definitely pissing and lobbing shit into it.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
They think it’s in their interest to run everything past the 11th hour, even if it generates chaos in the process.
Yes that's how it looks. We should consider what WTO terms means. Those terms are actually up to the UK to decide, but bearing in mind that the EU is now just one other trading partner among all countries. We do not have to replicate current EU tariff-quotas, though that would be administratively easiest. We could, for example, unilaterally abolish all tariffs and quotas. This would be the best outcome for UK consumers. On the other hand, if we think that some domestic activities need protection (I would ask: why?) we should design the tariff-quota regime to suit our domestic industries. For example, there would be no justification for tariffs on e.g. citrus fruits (up to 16% currently).
Some of the tariffs do come down to standards of production. Generally, it is illegal under WTO to prohibit imports on the basis that one dislikes the way the produce was made (70-hour working weeks, horrible animal welfare, etc.) - there are exceptions but narrow ones.
If one feels that consumer interests mean that we should always compete with the cheapest in the world, regardless of standards apart from specific issues such as health and safety, then zero tariffs make sense. It would make a great deal of British production unviable because the standards in Britain are much higher than, say, Thailand. We are also not permitted to say "OK, we'll allow Swiss imports but not Thai imports" if the products are the same. If British production becomes unviable, then of course either the producers go under or they get British standards lowered.
I agree that where no British production takes place such as citrus fruits, then we may as well have zero tariffs. But otherwise they may be all that prevents a race to the bottom, which Britain will always lose as there's always somewhere willing to do work more cheaply. Consumers tend to be employees too, and will benefit little from lower prices if their income collapses.
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
There was an interesting piece on Times Radio hosted Digby Jones, massive Brexiteer, and a Kent based wholesale florist. The wholesale florist has an easy to understand business model: get orders from florist shops, which are normally time constrained as they ordering for events, purchase the required flowers at the Amsterdam flower market, ship the flowers to her distribution point in Kent and distribute them from there to the florists in time for their events.
She is suddenly confronted with four new barriers and costs to her business:
Delay. She has to start out earlier from Holland to get the flowers across the Channel. Flowers are a perishable product.
Disruption. If roads are blocked in Kent she will need to look to ship via other routes, eg Harwich, with logistical difficulties and extra expense.
Customs and other costs, which will need to be passed onto the customer but which she can't calculate at this point because the information isn't there.
Her own additional paperwork to be completed on top of her existing tasks
The devastating thing is that she was very reasonable: this is stuff I have to deal with, there is no point complaining about it. Digby Jones was reduced to claiming that she can get a competitive advantage by being on top of the red tape.
There is of course a huge emerging industry of people to help you with the red tape a la PPI claims. Now, is that a good thing? Not for the consumer who will have to pay for it all although it will generate work for those involved.
Phone rings: "Hello have you been involved in an attempt to import goods from the EU?"
Indeed! We have two problems: a lack of people who work in import/export who have knowledge of whatever the hell the regulations are going to be, and a lack of people in customs / ports / freight handlers to assist and check. There are already adverts out there for friendly sounding companies who can "cost-effectively" help with your import/export paperwork needs. Are they any good? How can companies having to learn this from scratch to know?
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
I don't know (Is there one? It would be fascinating to find out), but I can imagine it including:
Europe holds more of the cards. Europe has is pretty much ready and Britain isn't for January, deal or no deal. Is it going to be worth us selling stuff to the British, anyway? If they double-cross us on the Withdraw Agreement, the final deal needs to be nailed down hard. If les rosbifs want to trade with us, that's lovely, but they don't get a blank cheque. If they undercut us, now or in the future, we decide what tarrifs to put on. souveraineté, n'est-ce pas?
I don't think it's unpatriotic as a Briton to point those likely opinions out. It also doesn't really matter if they're correct opinions, if their the opinions that our opposite numbers hold. There isn't some equivalent of a teacher on playground duty that the UK can run off to and say "Europe won't play with me and it's not fair".
They sold us £374bn of stuff in 2019, about the same as their largest export market the US. I'm sure they can just find other places to flog their stuff.
We're still going to buy it. It's just going to be more expensive. We have an insatiable demand for goods that isn't going to disappear overnight in 3.5 weeks time.
How much will remainers pay in a new EU sales tax, on say Spainsh/French/Italian wines over New World, to prove their fealty?
Better than that, we drop all import duty on wine and it’s cheaper for everyone in the UK.
The EU external tarriffs are huge for certain imports.
Who cares! When we are leaving the most civilising institution in the world because too many of our fellow countrymen don't like foreigners who can worry about the price of plonk?
Listening to LBC (as ever, now) where every other ad is about the new paperwork and arrangements required if you do any business with the EU and that there are particular arrangements if NI/RoI is involved
I'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of Brexiters thought we'd "just leave" and are amazed that there is any administrative change.
Then again the vast majority of Brexiters, I imagine, have no idea how the current system works.
There was an interesting piece on Times Radio hosted Digby Jones, massive Brexiteer, and a Kent based wholesale florist. The wholesale florist has an easy to understand business model: get orders from florist shops, which are normally time constrained as they ordering for events, purchase the required flowers at the Amsterdam flower market, ship the flowers to her distribution point in Kent and distribute them from there to the florists in time for their events.
She is suddenly confronted with four new barriers and costs to her business:
Delay. She has to start out earlier from Holland to get the flowers across the Channel. Flowers are a perishable product.
Disruption. If roads are blocked in Kent she will need to look to ship via other routes, eg Harwich, with logistical difficulties and extra expense.
Customs and other costs, which will need to be passed onto the customer but which she can't calculate at this point because the information isn't there.
Her own additional paperwork to be completed on top of her existing tasks
The devastating thing is that she was very reasonable: this is stuff I have to deal with, there is no point complaining about it. Digby Jones was reduced to claiming that she can get a competitive advantage by being on top of the red tape.
There is of course a huge emerging industry of people to help you with the red tape a la PPI claims. Now, is that a good thing? Not for the consumer who will have to pay for it all although it will generate work for those involved.
Phone rings: "Hello have you been involved in an attempt to import goods from the EU?"
Indeed! We have two problems: a lack of people who work in import/export who have knowledge of whatever the hell the regulations are going to be, and a lack of people in customs / ports / freight handlers to assist and check. There are already adverts out there for friendly sounding companies who can "cost-effectively" help with your import/export paperwork needs. Are they any good? How can companies having to learn this from scratch to know?
Yeah but apart from those two sets of people, we're sorted, right?
Mr. Cooke, Russell was very impressive but the fastest lap disparity is misleading. Russell's was on low fuel, with the fastest car, and with fresh tyres of the fastest compound.
He may have got the fastest lap anyway but the margin was larger than it ought to be due to the new soft tyres.
Oh, he had the advantages, but he still had to play his cards. Bottas certainly hasn't done so this season. Even with those advantages, a second+ per lap on the entire field is still pretty impressive.
Bottas has repeatedly demonstrated his inability to pass. "The Mercedes isn't great in traffic" say the commentators. Except it is when Hamilton or Russell need to slice through traffic. Its just Bottas who can't do it.
So ditch him.
Yup. Before the race, they were talking about three big questions over Russell's potential:
1 - Can he manage a full race or is he just "Mr Saturday"? 2 - Can he start well; lots of doubt over that? 3 - Can he overtake; has he got the elbows for it?
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
I couldn't care a baboon's bawhair about him. I'm much more worried about family members who rely on specific formulations of imported drugs for their health and sanity.
That's the serious side of these theatrics. It's creating real fear for many people. Hopefully when the deal is unveiled their primary feeling will not be relief but anger at being needlessly put through the wringer.
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
Oh boo f*cking hoo. This was supposed to be the "easiest deal in the world". This is all on you guys.
The point is that the EU are trying to impose ratchet mechanisms on UK law, that don’t appear in their own trade deals with other nations such as Canada and Japan.
The EU were massively in favour of giving us a ‘Canada’ agreement, until we said that was what we wanted.
Like I said, boo f*cking hoo. This is a consequence of leaving - having to deal with the big boys. Don't like it? Well it's tough isn't it.
I didn't see any of this on the side of a bus.
What you fail to grasp still is the UK is a "big boy" too.
If there's no deal then the only ones squealing about how terrible that would be "😭😭😭😭" is your side of the argument not ours.
Indeed. And of course the brouhaha about euro clearing did invoke a "be careful what you wish for" for the ECB.
Banks, regulators and customers have interests that aren't well aligned, so what one party wants isn't necessarily what the others would choose. When it comes to shifting counterparty clearing for derivatives to the EU, even the regulator is in two minds.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
They think it’s in their interest to run everything past the 11th hour, even if it generates chaos in the process.
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
We knew this last week. Has anything new happened? Funny how property developers are in the news so often: Derek Hatton; Donald Trump.
Did we? This is the first mention I can see of it in the media.
Yep, it was in the paper on Friday.
And I'm still amazed we're not hearing more made of it to be honest....
It is a live investigation and court case, so perhaps not?
I don't know (Is there one? It would be fascinating to find out), but I can imagine it including:
Europe holds more of the cards. Europe has is pretty much ready and Britain isn't for January, deal or no deal. Is it going to be worth us selling stuff to the British, anyway? If they double-cross us on the Withdraw Agreement, the final deal needs to be nailed down hard. If les rosbifs want to trade with us, that's lovely, but they don't get a blank cheque. If they undercut us, now or in the future, we decide what tarrifs to put on. souveraineté, n'est-ce pas?
I don't think it's unpatriotic as a Briton to point those likely opinions out. It also doesn't really matter if they're correct opinions, if their the opinions that our opposite numbers hold. There isn't some equivalent of a teacher on playground duty that the UK can run off to and say "Europe won't play with me and it's not fair".
They sold us £374bn of stuff in 2019, about the same as their largest export market the US. I'm sure they can just find other places to flog their stuff.
We're still going to buy it. It's just going to be more expensive. We have an insatiable demand for goods that isn't going to disappear overnight in 3.5 weeks time.
How much will remainers pay in a new EU sales tax, on say Spainsh/French/Italian wines over New World, to prove their fealty?
Better than that, we drop all import duty on wine and it’s cheaper for everyone in the UK.
The EU external tarriffs are huge for certain imports.
Who cares! When we are leaving the most civilising institution in the world because too many of our fellow countrymen don't like foreigners who can worry about the price of plonk?
Woah. 'Most civilising institution in the world'. Thats quite a claim.
"We had to destroy the independent schools to save them..."
(I went to a comprehensive, but surely the whole point of independent schools is that, beyond safeguarding, what they do is none of HMG's dammed business?)
Yes that's how it looks. We should consider what WTO terms means. Those terms are actually up to the UK to decide, but bearing in mind that the EU is now just one other trading partner among all countries. We do not have to replicate current EU tariff-quotas, though that would be administratively easiest. We could, for example, unilaterally abolish all tariffs and quotas. This would be the best outcome for UK consumers. On the other hand, if we think that some domestic activities need protection (I would ask: why?) we should design the tariff-quota regime to suit our domestic industries. For example, there would be no justification for tariffs on e.g. citrus fruits (up to 16% currently).
Some of the tariffs do come down to standards of production. Generally, it is illegal under WTO to prohibit imports on the basis that one dislikes the way the produce was made (70-hour working weeks, horrible animal welfare, etc.) - there are exceptions but narrow ones. .
Isn’t the current problem, that the EU are insisting on the UK following their future rules on such things, when the UK has no say on such rules - and the suspicion is that they’ll be deliberately targeted at the UK and UK businesses?
Level playing field was always going to be the toughest. The EU are requiring the UK to behave as if we have not left the EU. To which the only - and continuing - response is "Fuck off".
Not true though is it. The EU is quite happy for us to trade as an independent country with all our own rules, BUT, BUT don't then expect to get a free trade agreement.
Anyone agreeing to this would be bonkers. It would mean the Govt could ensure our businesses could undercut European competitors unfairly.
Cake and eat it applies.
So I repeat the EU is NOT requiring us to behave as if we have not left. It is entirely up to us. On the contrary it is us who want the both the benefits of membership without the consequences.
To which the response by the EU is 'Fuck off'.
No, the LPF stuff has never before been seen in a trade agreement.
They want to be able to pass future EU law that says no-one working in financial services should be allowed to work more than 35 hours a week, and if the UK doesn’t pass the same law they’ll be denied access to EU markets.
The state aid dispute is over the fact that all EU law on the subject is routinely ignored (by their own courts) when it’s politically convenient, but they want to be able to stop the UK gov bailing out British Airways in the middle of a pandemic.
Oh boo f*cking hoo. This was supposed to be the "easiest deal in the world". This is all on you guys.
The point is that the EU are trying to impose ratchet mechanisms on UK law, that don’t appear in their own trade deals with other nations such as Canada and Japan.
The EU were massively in favour of giving us a ‘Canada’ agreement, until we said that was what we wanted.
Like I said, boo f*cking hoo. This is a consequence of leaving - having to deal with the big boys. Don't like it? Well it's tough isn't it.
I didn't see any of this on the side of a bus.
What you fail to grasp still is the UK is a "big boy" too.
If there's no deal then the only ones squealing about how terrible that would be "😭😭😭😭" is your side of the argument not ours.
If there is "no deal" then we'll see what happens. I must admit I am scared of such a scenario.
I however am not the one incessantly whining about how unfair the EU are being by not recognising how much of a "big boy" we are.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
Theresa May really was a disaster, we should have spent the 2016-2019 years getting ready for no deal, putting systems and processes in place for customs, tariffs and quotas, signing independent trade deals with our other trading partners. Instead she fooled herself into thinking that we could have this odd customs union deal that was never on the table which meant we didn't get ready for importing EU goods with necessary customs clearance, we didn't sign independent trade deals and we didn't put together a list of areas where tariffs would be acceptable within a future trade deal with the EU.
If I was to blame anyone for the looming disaster of no deal it has got to be Theresa May followed closely by Olly Robbins and Philip Hammond. Between the three of them no deal is a real step into the dark. Boris takes a pretty strong fourth place for not taking the 2/4 year extension and preparing the nation and economy for no deal. As soon as COVID hit he had the perfect political cover to extend the transition period for at least a year while we figured out customs and started talking to the EU about tariffs within the trade deal unlocking reasonable baseline standards.
The whole process has been a disaster because of deluded, lazy and idiotic politicans and their sycophants. The only person who has come out well from this is David Frost, who has proved to be a good negotiator.
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Mr. Cooke, Russell was very impressive but the fastest lap disparity is misleading. Russell's was on low fuel, with the fastest car, and with fresh tyres of the fastest compound.
He may have got the fastest lap anyway but the margin was larger than it ought to be due to the new soft tyres.
Oh, he had the advantages, but he still had to play his cards. Bottas certainly hasn't done so this season. Even with those advantages, a second+ per lap on the entire field is still pretty impressive.
Bottas has repeatedly demonstrated his inability to pass. "The Mercedes isn't great in traffic" say the commentators. Except it is when Hamilton or Russell need to slice through traffic. Its just Bottas who can't do it.
So ditch him.
Yup. Before the race, they were talking about three big questions over Russell's potential:
1 - Can he manage a full race or is he just "Mr Saturday"? 2 - Can he start well; lots of doubt over that? 3 - Can he overtake; has he got the elbows for it?
Three questions asked and answered.
Damn right. He’s the 2022 Mercedes driver, after that long weekend of interviews.
Toto will spend the next few months selling the new Williams managers on the idea of a very experienced development driver who already knows the team, as the 2022 lead driver for their brand new car.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
In the 1990s violent crime fell by 56% in New York city under Giuliani's Mayoralty compared to only 28% across the US as a whole, property crimes fell by 65% in the city but only 26% nationally.
New York city was in many parts a violent crime ridden hellhole under his predecessors Mayors Ed Koch and David Dinkins, especially once you got outside the most wealthy bits of Manhattan and towards the Bronx and it was not safe to walk alone at night in many parts, Giuliani changed that
But the relevant comparator is not the country generally, since big cities experienced far higher falls (from higher peaks) than the rest of the nation. It's other big cities. And the more you look at the numbers, the less important Giuliani's role is. He was inaugurated in 1993, when crime in New York was already dropping dramatically. Its peak year was 1990. And the big increase in police numbers was agreed by his predecessor.
Once you allow for those factors, New York's performance is about average, or maybe slightly better, but certainly not as good as you make it out to be.
It was Giuliani's broken windows policy of tackling small crimes hard and three strikes and you are out that made the difference, under Koch and Dinkins his predecessors much of New York city was a crime ridden hellhole, particularly around the Bronx, Giuliani changed all that and enabled the much safer, more tourist friendly city that it is today
Then why was it dropping dramatically before he took office and why did other cities which did not implement it record similar falls?
Yes that's how it looks. We should consider what WTO terms means. Those terms are actually up to the UK to decide, but bearing in mind that the EU is now just one other trading partner among all countries. We do not have to replicate current EU tariff-quotas, though that would be administratively easiest. We could, for example, unilaterally abolish all tariffs and quotas. This would be the best outcome for UK consumers. On the other hand, if we think that some domestic activities need protection (I would ask: why?) we should design the tariff-quota regime to suit our domestic industries. For example, there would be no justification for tariffs on e.g. citrus fruits (up to 16% currently).
Some of the tariffs do come down to standards of production. Generally, it is illegal under WTO to prohibit imports on the basis that one dislikes the way the produce was made (70-hour working weeks, horrible animal welfare, etc.) - there are exceptions but narrow ones.
If one feels that consumer interests mean that we should always compete with the cheapest in the world, regardless of standards apart from specific issues such as health and safety, then zero tariffs make sense. It would make a great deal of British production unviable because the standards in Britain are much higher than, say, Thailand. We are also not permitted to say "OK, we'll allow Swiss imports but not Thai imports" if the products are the same. If British production becomes unviable, then of course either the producers go under or they get British standards lowered.
I agree that where no British production takes place such as citrus fruits, then we may as well have zero tariffs. But otherwise they may be all that prevents a race to the bottom, which Britain will always lose as there's always somewhere willing to do work more cheaply. Consumers tend to be employees too, and will benefit little from lower prices if their income collapses.
Thanks for a thoughtful comment. The textbook case for tariffs is the "infant industry argument", whereby lower long-run average costs can only be achieved at sufficient scale, so the argument goes: protect the industry until it arrive at that scale. In other words it is a justification for temporary tariffs. It's not clear where the argument of your second paragraph takes us. The point you make has validity and some force, but you have to ask if it is the UK govt's responsibility to have a trade policy based on foreign standards of employment. Also there is the general observation that such standards, and incomes, improve with trade. But if the consequences for domestic producers of low cost imports are as you say, then regrettably I would have to say that they are in the wrong business.
If we crash out with no deal and BoZo is defenestrated by irate backbenchers, what price Mrs May stepping up as caretaker for the rejoin negotiations?
Doubt it would be rejoin- maybe May Plan Redux, possibly "I can't believe it's not EEA" (just to keep the wheels rolling temporarily, honest...).
But if you rule out a General Election and anyone whose reputation will be compromised by association with a clustershambles (sorry Rishi!), whose left? And who else has the grim sense of duty that the job will take; 3 years of shovelling sh1t before an inevitable defeat?
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Tariffs and paperwork would have some impact on exports and imports but I think that this is much exaggerated. In most cases things and services will be slightly more expensive and have less of a competitive advantage with the rest of the world. Which would no doubt reduce trade at the margins but I honestly doubt it will prove more than 5%, possibly less in the short term.
None of this makes this desirable of course and it is in our and the EU's interest to reduce any additional friction to the minimum that can be agreed. I would expect us to have a rough and ready deal this week and then look to fine tune some parts of our trading relationship over the next several years.
I can ask someone for a Ferrari but it doesn't mean I'm going to get one, even if they've previously given a Ferrari to someone else.
I saw my first Tributo today. I am not normally a Ferrari person due to the Miami Real Estate Developer/Emirati Princeling vibe that hangs over them but I fully tented over the F8.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
I couldn't care a baboon's bawhair about him. I'm much more worried about family members who rely on specific formulations of imported drugs for their health and sanity.
That's the serious side of these theatrics. It's creating real fear for many people. Hopefully when the deal is unveiled their primary feeling will not be relief but anger at being needlessly put through the wringer.
Quite. I'm also worried about the very fact that my relatives are distressed. And the complications of perhaps having to be sorting out the mess for relatives with covid raging. I am utterly furious with the malice and incompetence and sheer hatred of their fellow citizens shown by the Brexiteers at all levels. (And it's no excuse to moan about the furriners. It was their idea in the first place and their idea to do almost nothing useful for the last three years.)
The only person who has come out well from this is David Frost, who has proved to be a good negotiator.
Bit too early to say that.
No, the fact that we've made the EU bend on legal texts before the terms have been agreed is a very big win for Frost. It means that if we can agree those last few points the legal texts of the agreement are already written and there won't be any wrangling over the specific wording or be railroaded by the EU based on a deadline which is what happened with the May WA and the Boris WA.
Olly Robbins was there to say yes to anything, Frost is there to negotiate and it shows.
I don't know (Is there one? It would be fascinating to find out), but I can imagine it including:
Europe holds more of the cards. Europe has is pretty much ready and Britain isn't for January, deal or no deal. Is it going to be worth us selling stuff to the British, anyway? If they double-cross us on the Withdraw Agreement, the final deal needs to be nailed down hard. If les rosbifs want to trade with us, that's lovely, but they don't get a blank cheque. If they undercut us, now or in the future, we decide what tarrifs to put on. souveraineté, n'est-ce pas?
I don't think it's unpatriotic as a Briton to point those likely opinions out. It also doesn't really matter if they're correct opinions, if their the opinions that our opposite numbers hold. There isn't some equivalent of a teacher on playground duty that the UK can run off to and say "Europe won't play with me and it's not fair".
They sold us £374bn of stuff in 2019, about the same as their largest export market the US. I'm sure they can just find other places to flog their stuff.
We're still going to buy it. It's just going to be more expensive. We have an insatiable demand for goods that isn't going to disappear overnight in 3.5 weeks time.
How much will remainers pay in a new EU sales tax, on say Spainsh/French/Italian wines over New World, to prove their fealty?
Better than that, we drop all import duty on wine and it’s cheaper for everyone in the UK.
The EU external tarriffs are huge for certain imports.
Who cares! When we are leaving the most civilising institution in the world because too many of our fellow countrymen don't like foreigners who can worry about the price of plonk?
Woah. 'Most civilising institution in the world'. Thats quite a claim.
It is but can you think of any other institution of its influence and reach that would prohibit membership to at least four fifths of the world because of barbaric or undemocratic practices and that including the USA?
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
Indeed. Thank Theresa May for that one.
Truly our worst ever PM.
David Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Boris is sui generis and can be evaluated when he leaves office.
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Of course, quoting percentages of exEU trade does rather miss the point that the EU enables trillions worth of what would otherwise be international trade within the single market. I'm always a little surprised when EUphiles get into percentage dick fights (43% is an amputation, 19% a mere scratch - almost a fifth of all exports is still a LOT) rather than making that point.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
Indeed. Thank Theresa May for that one.
Truly our worst ever PM.
David Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Boris is sui generis and can be evaluated when he leaves office.
He'd nevertheless have some recovering to do to avoid the bottom spot.
The only person who has come out well from this is David Frost, who has proved to be a good negotiator.
Bit too early to say that.
No, the fact that we've made the EU bend on legal texts before the terms have been agreed is a very big win for Frost. It means that if we can agree those last few points the legal texts of the agreement are already written and there won't be any wrangling over the specific wording or be railroaded by the EU based on a deadline which is what happened with the May WA and the Boris WA.
Olly Robbins was there to say yes to anything, Frost is there to negotiate and it shows.
Have you forgotten that in Robbins' negotiation there was a legal text with all the open issues highlighted? It was conducted in exactly the same way. As for not being railroaded by the EU based on a deadline, what do you think is happening now?
US buys 23% of EU exports with $494bn worth (€408bn), so the same as UK, which would mean about 19% of UK included total.
Edit: Deleted, I was writing nonsense.
Not to worry, we all do it some of the time. It's the intelligent ones who realise it. And it's the unintelligent or malicious ones who double and quadruple down when someone else points out they are writing nonsense.
The only person who has come out well from this is David Frost, who has proved to be a good negotiator.
Bit too early to say that.
No, the fact that we've made the EU bend on legal texts before the terms have been agreed is a very big win for Frost. It means that if we can agree those last few points the legal texts of the agreement are already written and there won't be any wrangling over the specific wording or be railroaded by the EU based on a deadline which is what happened with the May WA and the Boris WA.
Olly Robbins was there to say yes to anything, Frost is there to negotiate and it shows.
Have you forgotten that in Robbins' negotiation there was a legal text with all the open issues highlighted? It was conducted in exactly the same way.
Those legal texts were sprung onto him by the EU and then he had to either say yes or no deal and they knew he would never no deal. This time the legal texts have been jointly written and the UK team have been involved from the beginning. They agreed to change the sequencing a few months ago vs what it was in both WA negotiations.
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Of course, quoting percentages of exEU trade does rather miss the point that the EU enables trillions worth of what would otherwise be international trade within the single market. I'm always a little surprised when EUphiles get into percentage dick fights (43% is an amputation, 19% a mere scratch - almost a fifth of all exports is still a LOT) rather than making that point.
Yes it is a lot but you are also making a rookie mistake. It is 19% for the EU = 27 nations. Individually it is 6-9% per nation vs our 43%.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
Theresa May really was a disaster, we should have spent the 2016-2019 years getting ready for no deal, putting systems and processes in place for customs, tariffs and quotas, signing independent trade deals with our other trading partners. Instead she fooled herself into thinking that we could have this odd customs union deal that was never on the table which meant we didn't get ready for importing EU goods with necessary customs clearance, we didn't sign independent trade deals and we didn't put together a list of areas where tariffs would be acceptable within a future trade deal with the EU.
If I was to blame anyone for the looming disaster of no deal it has got to be Theresa May followed closely by Olly Robbins and Philip Hammond. Between the three of them no deal is a real step into the dark. Boris takes a pretty strong fourth place for not taking the 2/4 year extension and preparing the nation and economy for no deal. As soon as COVID hit he had the perfect political cover to extend the transition period for at least a year while we figured out customs and started talking to the EU about tariffs within the trade deal unlocking reasonable baseline standards.
The whole process has been a disaster because of deluded, lazy and idiotic politicans and their sycophants. The only person who has come out well from this is David Frost, who has proved to be a good negotiator.
Hang on. Put Brexit down for a minute and take a step back. You're saying that the Conservative government should have spent a lot of money preparing the UK for a vast array of red tape and costs. The same red tape and costs that Conservative governments have spent decades reducing and removing.
In no scenario was it ever in Britain's interests to cripple business with this burden.
I wonder how much longer they can delay announcing the deal? Talk about ramping up the tension! Fine by me, but not really fair on the vulnerable. John Redwood, for example, is clearly now in a state of utter anguish over fish and might flip before too long.
#getbrexitdone
The U.K. was happy to negotiate this stuff years ago, the ‘sequencing’ is entirely down to the EU side.
And the fact we allowed any "sequencing" is part of the problem here.
Indeed. Thank Theresa May for that one.
Truly our worst ever PM.
David Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Boris is sui generis and can be evaluated when he leaves office.
No he wasn't, Eden, Heath, Callaghan and Brown were worse and that is just since WW2 and before then you had Chamberlain, Balfour, Wellington etc
Derek Hatton is arrested in property fraud probe: Liverpool City Council's ex-Trotskyist deputy leader is one of five men including mayor Joe Anderson held after 15-month investigation
Always first with the news........even when it's four days old. But thanks for letting us know who Derek Hatton is.
Erhhhh, by 4 days old you mean only just revealed in the media he was one of the individuals involved.
It was known on Friday. It was widely known yesterday.
If we crash out with no deal and BoZo is defenestrated by irate backbenchers, what price Mrs May stepping up as caretaker for the rejoin negotiations?
If we go to No Deal which ends up a disaster there is no alternative but Sunak.
The new leader would still have to be a Leaver to appease the membership, that rules out Remainers Hunt and May again while Sunak backed Leave, but also someone prepared to compromise with the EU, Sunak also voted for May's Withdrawal Agreement 3 times unlike Boris and Raab who only voted for it on MV3 and Patel who never voted for May's Withdrawal Agreement once
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Of course, quoting percentages of exEU trade does rather miss the point that the EU enables trillions worth of what would otherwise be international trade within the single market. I'm always a little surprised when EUphiles get into percentage dick fights (43% is an amputation, 19% a mere scratch - almost a fifth of all exports is still a LOT) rather than making that point.
Yes it is a lot but you are also making a rookie mistake. It is 19% for the EU = 27 nations. Individually it is 6-9% per nation vs our 43%.
Ours probably isn't as much as 43% tbf, lots of our non-EU exports to via the Netherlands and Greece so we export to the EU and then they export those same goods to non-EU countries. It's still high though, no doubt. I think it's better to look at it in terms of GDP anyway, at last count our EU exports accounted for around 12% of GDP, their exports to the UK account for around 4% of EU GDP, but some nations are much higher than others. Those numbers have also been closing as well, the delta used to be much bigger.
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Tariffs and paperwork would have some impact on exports and imports but I think that this is much exaggerated. In most cases things and services will be slightly more expensive and have less of a competitive advantage with the rest of the world. Which would no doubt reduce trade at the margins but I honestly doubt it will prove more than 5%, possibly less in the short term.
None of this makes this desirable of course and it is in our and the EU's interest to reduce any additional friction to the minimum that can be agreed. I would expect us to have a rough and ready deal this week and then look to fine tune some parts of our trading relationship over the next several years.
Yep, of course the raw % of trade potentially impacted is not that important - it depends to what extent the trade is impacted. There will be some things that buyers within the EU can easily source from another EU country (say, most crops we export), some things they'll still get mainly from UK even with delays, tariffs (e.g whisky) and a whole range of things in between, on both sides. Costs and opportunities.
FWIW, I agree on a deal, as @kinabalu has argued for a long time, failing to do a deal is so daft, on both sides, that it's not in anyone's interests. No deal would be a chunk of pain at least short term pain on both sides and that's not going to be popular and politicians don't generally do deliberately unpopular things. My fear has been that our side might just be crazy enough to do it, although I'm optimistic that the pig's lipstick colour is being chosen as we discuss.
Ah, appreciated (should have read the link rather than just the google search headline). So, more pain for EU countries than my initial suggestion, but still some way lower than 43%.
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Of course, quoting percentages of exEU trade does rather miss the point that the EU enables trillions worth of what would otherwise be international trade within the single market. I'm always a little surprised when EUphiles get into percentage dick fights (43% is an amputation, 19% a mere scratch - almost a fifth of all exports is still a LOT) rather than making that point.
Yes it is a lot but you are also making a rookie mistake. It is 19% for the EU = 27 nations. Individually it is 6-9% per nation vs our 43%.
That's including single market trade, which is kind of the point I'm making there..
Coz 6-9% for every nation can't add up to 19% total, even in EU accounts.
If we crash out with no deal and BoZo is defenestrated by irate backbenchers, what price Mrs May stepping up as caretaker for the rejoin negotiations?
If we go to No Deal which ends up a disaster there is no alternative but Sunak.
The new leader would still have to be a Leaver to appease the membership, that rules out Remainers Hunt and May again while Sunak backed Leave, but also someone prepared to compromise with the EU, Sunak also voted for May's Withdrawal Agreement 3 times unlike Boris and Raab who only voted for it on MV3 and Patel who never voted for May's Withdrawal Agreement once
So my £20 bet on Sunak for next PM at 250/1 looking good
Comments
Thousands of Britons living in the EU will have their UK bank accounts closed by the end of the year because of the UK’s failure to agree a post-Brexit trade deal.
Lloyds, Barclays and Coutts have informed retail and business customers that they will lose their accounts before or when the Brexit transition period ends on 31 December and more banks are expected to follow suit.
Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Halifax and Bank of Scotland, has contacted its 13,000 customers in the Netherlands, Slovakia, Germany, Ireland and Portugal, warning them they must make alternative arrangements as the bank is no longer allowed to offer services.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2020/sep/21/britons-eu-uk-bank-accounts-closed-lloyds-barclays-brexit
The EU external tarriffs are huge for certain imports.
I can't see that your company in Strasbourg will bother hiring extra staff to deal with all the bullshit red tape for the UK - they'll contract it out and pass on the cost. As they will pass on the higher transport costs. We can still buy the thing, it will just cost a fair bit more as it will take longer and have reams of paperwork.
In my case our products made in Romania are going to have a zero tariff. So all we'll have to pay are the extra paperwork and logistics costs and lost opportunity cost of our short life products losing life stuck in customs delays. So more expensive despite zero tariffs and consumers will pay the bill.
And yes, various trade magazines (including, er, The Trade Magazine) have been describing for months the various measures firms have been putting in place to ensure a seamless transition whatever the negotiations.
All costs of course but nothing that @Sandpit would notice or care about.
She is suddenly confronted with four new barriers and costs to her business:
- Delay. She has to start out earlier from Holland to get the flowers across the Channel. Flowers are a perishable product.
- Disruption. If roads are blocked in Kent she will need to look to ship via other routes, eg Harwich, with logistical difficulties and extra expense.
- Customs and other costs, which will need to be passed onto the customer but which she can't calculate at this point because the information isn't there.
- Her own additional paperwork to be completed on top of her existing tasks
The devastating thing is that she was very reasonable: this is stuff I have to deal with, there is no point complaining about it. Digby Jones was reduced to claiming that she can get a competitive advantage by being on top of the red tape.So ditch him.
The bigger problem was requiring import licensing for certain goods *because terror funding*. It was sledgehammer to crack a corn kernel stuff that even the reps from whichever security service was asked about it couldn't quite see the point of.
I fully recognise that for some businesses selling stuff to Strassbourg is currently the same as selling it to Stockport. It will be a pain to disrupt that, of course, but frankly many businesses have been dealing with customs and import/export regs for decades.
It is a process to go through - and my view has always been that the long term benefits of being outside of the customs union will outweigh the short term and ongoing costs...
One of the reasons the financial services sector (as well as the legal sector) was such a success is that investors knew we had a long established strong independent judiciary that would be impartial and free from interference from the government.
Now that's going as well, they IMB ain't helped either. A government that would abrogate an international treaty isn't a place you really feel confident in using their banking services.
I can see it briefly mentioned in the Times actually yesterday.
And I'm still amazed we're not hearing more made of it to be honest....
https://twitter.com/lucyallan/status/1335704417094524931?s=20
Phone rings: "Hello have you been involved in an attempt to import goods from the EU?"
#getbrexitdone
Dead migrants. What Faragistas and Millwall fans really want.
When Ireland became independent, those benefits took 50 or 60 years to turn up. Oddly enough, just after they joined the EEC/EU-to-be.
On that timeline we might all be dead by the time the "benefits" arrive.
4067bn is total trade; imports + exports. Exports were 2132bn in 2019
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/International_trade_in_goods
They think it’s in their interest to run everything past the 11th hour, even if it generates chaos in the process.
Follow the tweet... and it's still cropped.
Panic.gif
If one feels that consumer interests mean that we should always compete with the cheapest in the world, regardless of standards apart from specific issues such as health and safety, then zero tariffs make sense. It would make a great deal of British production unviable because the standards in Britain are much higher than, say, Thailand. We are also not permitted to say "OK, we'll allow Swiss imports but not Thai imports" if the products are the same. If British production becomes unviable, then of course either the producers go under or they get British standards lowered.
I agree that where no British production takes place such as citrus fruits, then we may as well have zero tariffs. But otherwise they may be all that prevents a race to the bottom, which Britain will always lose as there's always somewhere willing to do work more cheaply. Consumers tend to be employees too, and will benefit little from lower prices if their income collapses.
411/((2132+411) would be 16% of total EU exports
Later peeps!
Before the race, they were talking about three big questions over Russell's potential:
1 - Can he manage a full race or is he just "Mr Saturday"?
2 - Can he start well; lots of doubt over that?
3 - Can he overtake; has he got the elbows for it?
Three questions asked and answered.
That always goes down well, lads.
If there's no deal then the only ones squealing about how terrible that would be "😭😭😭😭" is your side of the argument not ours.
https://tradingeconomics.com/european-union/exports-by-country
US buys 23% of EU exports with $494bn worth (€408bn), so the same as UK, which would mean about 19% of UK included total.
(I went to a comprehensive, but surely the whole point of independent schools is that, beyond safeguarding, what they do is none of HMG's dammed business?)
I however am not the one incessantly whining about how unfair the EU are being by not recognising how much of a "big boy" we are.
If I was to blame anyone for the looming disaster of no deal it has got to be Theresa May followed closely by Olly Robbins and Philip Hammond. Between the three of them no deal is a real step into the dark. Boris takes a pretty strong fourth place for not taking the 2/4 year extension and preparing the nation and economy for no deal. As soon as COVID hit he had the perfect political cover to extend the transition period for at least a year while we figured out customs and started talking to the EU about tariffs within the trade deal unlocking reasonable baseline standards.
The whole process has been a disaster because of deluded, lazy and idiotic politicans and their sycophants. The only person who has come out well from this is David Frost, who has proved to be a good negotiator.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/07/gove-heads-to-brussels-to-thrash-out-deal-on-post-brexit-northern-ireland-checks
Still, potentially, a huge amount of trade potentially impacted on both sides.
Toto will spend the next few months selling the new Williams managers on the idea of a very experienced development driver who already knows the team, as the 2022 lead driver for their brand new car.
It's not clear where the argument of your second paragraph takes us. The point you make has validity and some force, but you have to ask if it is the UK govt's responsibility to have a trade policy based on foreign standards of employment. Also there is the general observation that such standards, and incomes, improve with trade. But if the consequences for domestic producers of low cost imports are as you say, then regrettably I would have to say that they are in the wrong business.
But if you rule out a General Election and anyone whose reputation will be compromised by association with a clustershambles (sorry Rishi!), whose left? And who else has the grim sense of duty that the job will take; 3 years of shovelling sh1t before an inevitable defeat?
Still, I'm sure it will be fine.
None of this makes this desirable of course and it is in our and the EU's interest to reduce any additional friction to the minimum that can be agreed. I would expect us to have a rough and ready deal this week and then look to fine tune some parts of our trading relationship over the next several years.
Olly Robbins was there to say yes to anything, Frost is there to negotiate and it shows.
Every single thing BoZo has touched has been an epic fuckup.
There is no comparison.
In no scenario was it ever in Britain's interests to cripple business with this burden.
The new leader would still have to be a Leaver to appease the membership, that rules out Remainers Hunt and May again while Sunak backed Leave, but also someone prepared to compromise with the EU, Sunak also voted for May's Withdrawal Agreement 3 times unlike Boris and Raab who only voted for it on MV3 and Patel who never voted for May's Withdrawal Agreement once
FWIW, I agree on a deal, as @kinabalu has argued for a long time, failing to do a deal is so daft, on both sides, that it's not in anyone's interests. No deal would be a chunk of pain at least short term pain on both sides and that's not going to be popular and politicians don't generally do deliberately unpopular things. My fear has been that our side might just be crazy enough to do it, although I'm optimistic that the pig's lipstick colour is being chosen as we discuss.
Coz 6-9% for every nation can't add up to 19% total, even in EU accounts.