Brexit has well and truly begun!

[Carana]

What does Peter Lilley suggest we do about this aspect of WTO rules?

“One suggestion has been that the UK scrap all tariffs and regulations for EU imports and continue to accept all products from the EU without checks. But, according to the WTO rules, the UK should extend this approach to products from all other WTO members (it has to treat everyone equally). Is the UK ready to allow all food products, tariff-free and without checks into the UK market? Not only would this be very damaging to UK farmers and the food industry, it would threaten food quality and safety standards”.

An associated question is why he's glossing over what happens to exports. Can't think why... 

In a default WTO no-deal scenario, AFAIK, the UK could decide to unilaterally scrap WTO tariffs on imports, and would have to extend that to all countries (the MFN principle), which is the point being made above, but WTO tariffs would still have to be applied to UK exports, thus making them uncompetitive.

To substantiate that, here's a Select Committe paper from Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: 

Most Favoured Nation Principle

12.The WTO’s 164 country members must observe the “most favoured nation” (MFN) principle: this “non-discrimination principle” means the same tariffs must be applied to all countries. Lower-than-MFN tariffs may only be applied where a free trade agreement (FTA) or customs union (CU) agreement has been concluded with one or more trading partners, or when preferential treatment is given to developing countries.4

13.In this Chapter we examine the impact that tariffs could potentially have on different agri-food sectors.
Tariffs on UK-EU exports under WTO rules

14.Individual tariffs vary between different sectors and products. For non-agricultural goods, the average tariffs are relatively small. However, tariffs on agricultural goods are typically much higher, with the intention of protecting domestic markets.

15.The average EU tariff on dairy products is over 30%, while tariffs could be as high as 87% for frozen beef. Some other examples include a tariff of 46% for cheese or 21% for tomatoes. Some individual products have tariffs over 100%.5

16.Witnesses told us that tariff-free access to the EU was “crucial”.6 Tariffs would have a detrimental impact on those agricultural sectors that were dependent on EU exports for their profitability.

17.We heard particular concerns about the impact of tariffs on the sheep sector. The EU is very important for UK sheep meat exports, with more than 95% of its export volume destined for the EU. The Welsh lamb market is very dependent on the EU market, with 92% of exports (by value) and 85% (by volume) destined for the EU.7

18.Sheep exports, with a tariff of at least 50%, would become uncompetitive on the EU market.8 The Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) told us that this would have a “devastating” effect on the sector.9 The Andersons Centre estimated that in Northern Ireland alone, exports to the EU would drop by about 90%.10 It would have serious consequences in Wales, where sheep farming was such a vital part of the Welsh economy, with producer prices estimated to decrease by 30%.11

19.The EU market is also important to the beef market, with more than 90% of UK beef exports shipped to other EU countries in 2015/16.12

20.In addition to their raw value, exports are important in the meat sector in helping to secure value for the whole carcass, finding markets for parts of the animal that are less favourable in the domestic market. In the UK, consumers prefer to eat chicken breast, lamb legs, mince, beef steaks, pork chops. There is little or no domestic market for dark chicken meat, chicken necks, chicken feet, sow meat and pigs trotters, for example.13 Exporting these allow producers to maximise their return.

21.The EU is also a key market for an “export-focused and orientated” dairy market.14 Currently, 15% of current output in the sector is exported, with 85% to 90% going to mainland Europe.15 In Northern Ireland, the situation is exacerbated by the fact that, unlike other regions of the UK, it exports between 70%–85% of its milk product, mostly as milk powders, and does not have a reliance on the liquid milk market.

22.AHDB noted that the introduction of tariffs would prevent most imports of dairy products into the EU.16 Dairy UK stated:

If you take cheese as an example, WTO tariffs on dairy will do what they are designed to do: they will stop trade. The WTO tariff on cheese is of the order of 40% to 50% depending on the cheese variety. We do not make 50% margins in this sector, so the ability to absorb is minimal, if not non-existent.17

23.In the cereals sector, wheat and barley exports would be most affected. Approximately 80% of exports go to EU markets.18 AHDB told us that cereals would find it difficult to compete in the EU market with other third country wheat producers, such as Russia, Ukraine, the US or South America: “They not only have been exporting effectively for a very long time, but they do it in volumes we cannot imagine”.19

24.An exception to the general concern was fruit and vegetables. Exports are minimal, with most trade focused on the domestic market.20

25.George Eustice MP, Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Defra, recognised that the lamb industry and cereals industry would be affected by tariffs on exports.21

26.During our evidence session with Rt. Hon. Michael Gove MP, Secretary of State, and the Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, we were surprised to hear that Defra had not completed work on sector by sector analysis.22 More surprising was the admission that this work may not be completed before the publication of the Agriculture Bill. Although DexEU had produced Brexit impact assessments and made them available for Members to view, we were not impressed with the depth of analysis in the documents.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmenvfru/348/34805.htm

[Carana]

Telling the voters that they're too old, too stupid or don't understand is a risky strategy in my opinion. Such people no doubt do exist and some of them voted to leave the EU and some of them voted to remain in it. Inferring that only those who voted to leave fit the description is insulting and untrue.

The electorate includes all kinds of people and every one of them is entitled to vote as they see fit.

A few in the medical community have voiced the argument of "informed consent".

As a doctor and an MP, I believe we need informed consent from the British public on Brexit – that's why I'm backing a Final Say

If a patient decides, on the advice of their doctor, to undergo an operation but subsequent tests show the patient could avoid surgery, would the surgeon be right to say: ‘Sorry – you’ve agreed to me cutting into your heart and I’m jolly well going to do it’?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-latest-final-say-second-referendum-theresa-may-no-deal-eu-negotiations-a8627621.html

NB: A concern of mine is whether people are now so polarised that cofirmation bias would take over.
I've no idea what the solution to that would be.

[Carana]

1. Rumour has it everyone wants to start a plant in UK now because the pound is down ergo so will be UK unit labour rates......sweat shops alive and well in a little island off the north Europe coast.
2. Import like we do now.
3.I don't think JCB would see itself as a small company with a turnover of two and a half billion.

Quite what Nissan, Honda, Toyota and VW will make of it all remains to be seen. I suppose VW will stay here making Bentleys and BMW will keep the Mini and Rolls Royce here. ?

I must have missed this from Alice. LOL

[Carana]

According to this Sky article, there isn't a majority for a 2nd ref.
https://news.sky.com/story/most-britons-oppose-second-eu-referendum-sky-data-poll-reveals-11613019

But that was on Sunday and doesn't appear to be the Twitter one.

[Carana]

Of course there is no need to panic, the EU needs the UK more than we need them and history has proven this over the last century. If it wasn't for Britain and its allies the whole of Europe would be one huge Germanic state ruled by Nazis by now reaching from Norway to Turkey to Portugal and most probably half of Africa.  Anyone who cannot see that by now has really buried their head in the sand.

I've really no idea where you get that idea from, Angelo.

A large part of the concept of Europe was precisely to promote peace and prevent another extremist imposing power... and that goes back to Churchill.

[Carana]

26% appears to be an exaggeration - although it's still not clear where the polls originate nor how representative the results are.


    Only around 4% of people think a no-deal Brexit would involve the UK remaining in the EU, the research finds. Ford and Wager explain:

It is worth starting with what the public very clearly knows to be true. Despite claims to the contary, there is no polling evidence to suggest that any significant section of the population think a no deal Brexit would mean that the UK would remain in the EU. Just 4% think that no deal means a reversion to the status quo ante. Only 8% think that ‘nothing important would really change’ if the UK left the EU without a deal. While leave voters are three times more likely to think this – 12% versus 4% – the idea that no deal would not be an event with consequences, for good or bad, is not widely held.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/jan/22/brexit-latest-news-developments-theresa-may-under-pressure-to-allow-ministers-free-vote-on-amendment-to-block-no-deal-politics-live

[Carana]

No time now, but this ccould be an interesting read

 2h ago 10:52
Identification with remain/leave much stronger than identification with a political party, research finds

If you are interested in Brexit, there is a huge amount of quite interesting analysis in the Brexit and Public Opinion 2019 report (pdf) out today from the UK in a Changing Europe project. It contains 22 short essays by academics and other experts.

One, by Geoff Evans and Florian Schaffner, says that whereas in the past people used to identify themselves politically according to the party they supported, now they are far more likely to identify themselves by where they stand on Brexit. Here is an extract.

    The number of both remainers and leavers expressing a Brexit identity grew markedly following the referendum result. After then it has been almost neck-and-neck, with just under 50% identifying with each side but with a slight lead for remain.

    Tellingly, even in mid-2018, two years after the referendum, only just over 6% of people did not identify with either leave or remain.

    Compare this with party attachment. The percentage with no party identity increased from 18% to 21.5% over same period – in part due to the decline of UKIP. Only one in 16 people don’t have a Brexit identity whereas more than one in five have no party identity ...

    The EU referendum seems to have resulted in a classic in-group versus out-group response, especially from remainers. The social and emotional intensity of these Brexit identities – held by almost everybody – is far higher than those for parties. The latter increased a little during the 2017 general election, especially for Labour, but then subsided. A Brexit identity remained prevalent and consequential even two years after the referendum itself. We are a long way removed from the idea that Britain ‘has come together’ to face the challenge of Brexit. Social polarisation is pronounced and shows no sign of diminishing.

This has big consequences for party politics. In a recent speech in Wakefield Jeremy Corbyn argued that “the real divide in our country is not between those who voted to remain in the EU and those who voted to leave” but between the many and the few. He may well be right, but this research suggests that that is not the way people feel at the moment.

From here

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/jan/22/brexit-latest-news-developments-theresa-may-under-pressure-to-allow-ministers-free-vote-on-amendment-to-block-no-deal-politics-live

with link to

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Public-Opinion-2019-report.pdf

[John]

According to this Sky article, there isn't a majority for a 2nd ref.
https://news.sky.com/story/most-britons-oppose-second-eu-referendum-sky-data-poll-reveals-11613019

But that was on Sunday and doesn't appear to be the Twitter one.

Why would anyone take a second referendum seriously when they couldn't even implement the first one?

Parliament has lost all credibility now in my view and will find it difficult to get it back.  The problem as we all know is that MPs and the electorate are promoting different things. The public voted for Brexit, they didn't vote for a deal nor did they vote for Brexit to be subject to conditions. Many MPs on the other hand are defying their electorate and attempting to thwart Brexit and keep the UK in the EU.

IMO the best and indeed only way forward is to exit the EU by default on the 29th March 2019 and thereafter start the negotiations.  Nothing will change on the ground from that date as a suitable implementation period will exist as it benefits both the UK and the EU to have one.  We could also save the country £39 billion which would be better spent at home rather than propping up some defunct eastern European basketcase.

[Carana]

Why would anyone take a second referendum seriously when they couldn't even implement the first one?

Parliament has lost all credibility now in my view and will find it difficult to get it back.  The problem as we all know is that MPs and the electorate are promoting different things. The public voted for Brexit, they didn't vote for a deal nor did they vote for Brexit to be subject to conditions. Many MPs on the other hand are defying their electorate and attempting to thwart Brexit and keep the UK in the EU.

IMO the best and indeed only way forward is to exit the EU by default on the 29th March 2019 and thereafter start the negotiations.  Nothing will change on the ground from that date as a suitable implementation period will exist as it benefits both the UK and the EU to have one.  We could also save the country £39 billion which would be better spent at home rather than propping up some defunct eastern European basketcase.

"The public voted for Brexit, they didn't vote for a deal" - seriously?

Are you sure of that amidst all the assurances at the time that life would go on pretty much as before? (CF "easiest deal in history", "over a cup of tea", etc? It hasn't turned out that way, has it?

[Carana]

Brexit backer Dyson moves head office to Singapore

16:43, UK, Tuesday 22 January 2019
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-backer-dyson-moves-head-office-to-singapore-11614700

Who would have thunk that?

[Myster]

Brexit backer Dyson moves head office to Singapore

16:43, UK, Tuesday 22 January 2019
https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-backer-dyson-moves-head-office-to-singapore-11614700

Who would have thunk that?

Dyson moved his manufacturing base to Malaysia back in the late 1990's before Brexit was even born, and so has nothing to do with it.  Just bought an imported Lightball from there which is brilliantly designed and of excellent quality. One of the main reasons he relocated was the lack of graduate engineers / industrial designers produced by our own educational system - 4% of graduates with engineering-related qualification compared with 40% in Singapore.  So it was only a matter of time before the Dyson headquarters followed suit.

[Carana]

Dyson moved his manufacturing base to Malaysia back in the late 1990's before Brexit was even born, and so has nothing to do with it.  Just bought an imported Lightball from there which is brilliantly designed and of excellent quality. One of the main reasons he relocated was the lack of graduate engineers / industrial designers produced by our own educational system - 4% of graduates with engineering-related qualification compared with 40% in Singapore.  So it was only a matter of time before the Dyson headquarters followed suit.

Is the lack of  UK graduate engineers / industrial designers due to the EU, do  you think? If so, how?

[Myster]

Is the lack of  UK graduate engineers / industrial designers due to the EU, do  you think? If so, how?

You were suggesting or implying by a cite to a news report that Dyson's HQ move was triggered by Brexit, when quite clearly it has nothing to do with it.

[Carana]

No-deal Brexit would mean hard Irish border, EU confirms

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/22/no-deal-brexit-would-mean-hard-irish-border-eu-confirms

Last-minute bluff or a serious potential outcome?

[Myster]

No matter where the Dyson HQ and manufacturing facilities are located the EU will still buy his cleaning products.  Even the Germans favour them over their own...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/11331231/Germanys-leading-vacuum-brand-is-made-in-the-UK.html

Another reason why Dyson favoured exiting the EU...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/11075490/James-Dyson-suggests-leaving-the-EU-over-vacuum-cleaners.html

and others...

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-01-22/brexit-backer-james-dyson-ditches-britain-for-singapore-with-hq-move/