Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, not the UK market.

Open to correction here, but has the UK not succeeded in getting Japan to agree to roll over the JPN/EU trade deal with the UK, at least for a limited period?

moon2

Peregrinus wrote: »

Open to correction here, but has the UK not succeeded in getting Japan to agree to roll over the JPN/EU trade deal with the UK, at least for a limited period?

Nope - Japan said no to a rollover.

I did a quick search and all headlines seemed to agree with me: https://www.ft.com/content/b6a047c6-dafc-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17

Peregrinus

moon2 wrote: »

Nope - Japan said no to a rollover.

I did a quick search and all headlines seemed to agree with me: https://www.ft.com/content/b6a047c6-dafc-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17

I stand corrected, so. Thanks.

reslfj

Peregrinus wrote: »

Open to correction here, but has the UK not succeeded in getting Japan to agree to roll over the JPN/EU trade deal with the UK, at least for a limited period?

Doesn't look like it has.

https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/uk-start-trade-talks-japan-eu-talks-ongoing-200512205253397.html


Lars

PS! "...to secure a deal that goes even further than the existing B]EU-Japan[/B agreement,..." added Truss.

I believe the EU-Japan trade deal will automatically allow the EU to get everything the UK will obtain.

Jim2007

reslfj wrote: »

Doesn't look like it has.

https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/uk-start-trade-talks-japan-eu-talks-ongoing-200512205253397.html


Lars

PS! "...to secure a deal that goes even further than the existing B]EU-Japan[/B agreement,..." added Truss.

I believe the EU-Japan trade deal will automatically allow the EU to get everything the UK will obtain.

Truss is clueless. The EU/Japan trade deal includes a clause preventing Japan giving any other trading partner a deal as good as or better than the one done with the EU, without the agreement of the EU. This was done to ensure that third countries could not use Japan as a back door to access the single market.

The Canadian deal and the proposed deals with Australia etc. contains the same clause. This was pointed out by one of the retired WTO Negotiators some while back. Sorry can’t find the link now.

Leroy42

Jim2007 wrote: »

Truss is clueless. The EU/Japan trade deal includes a clause preventing Japan giving any other trading partner a deal as good as or better than the one done with the EU, without the agreement of the EU. This was done to ensure that third countries could not use Japan as a back door to access the single market.

The Canadian deal and the proposed deals with Australia etc. contains the same clause. This was pointed out by one of the retired WTO Negotiators some while back. Sorry can’t find the link now.

And it also works the other way. The Eu cannot give a more favourable deal to the UK (or other countries) without the agreement from Japan & Canada (or maybe not the agreement but that they have to right to the better deal.

So the EU's hands are tied by those agreements as well.

Something the UK seemed to have completely ignored.

RobMc59

Jim2007 wrote: »

Truss is clueless. The EU/Japan trade deal includes a clause preventing Japan giving any other trading partner a deal as good as or better than the one done with the EU, without the agreement of the EU. This was done to ensure that third countries could not use Japan as a back door to access the single market.

The Canadian deal and the proposed deals with Australia etc. contains the same clause. This was pointed out by one of the retired WTO Negotiators some while back. Sorry can’t find the link now.

Perhaps the UK has identified a loophole in the wording of the EUs agreements with these countries which would allow a better deal.

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Perhaps the UK has identified a loophole in the wording of the EUs agreements with these countries which would allow a better deal.

If this were the case, the Express and the Mail would have been broadcasting it.

Charles Babbage

RobMc59 wrote: »

Perhaps the UK has identified a loophole in the wording of the EUs agreements with these countries which would allow a better deal.

But, even if the EU can do better deal on a technicality, do you think they want to do so politically? The EU is pretty straight on these issues.

RobMc59

Charles Babbage wrote: »

But, even if the EU can do better deal on a technicality, do you think they want to do so politically? The EU is pretty straight on these issues.

Your probably right and reading the link provided by Lars, any deals with Japan or Australia/New Zealand the UK might negotiate would be insignificant in comparison with the trade it does with the EU anyway.

reslfj

RobMc59 wrote: »

.... in comparison with the trade it does with the EU anyway.

The UK will need a deal. WTO rules and regulations as the very minimum.

The UK can import with UK government's. permission, but there might be restrictions on export from EU27/EEA and other countries e.g. some medicine, PPE, radioactive products...

But without at least WTO rules, SM standards and regulations import of UK goods into the EU27 is very far from assured.

Unlikely the UK will leave the WTO by itself, but the WTO may cease to work for the UK e.g. following Trump's latest moves (no conflict arbitration).
The UK will in that case be fully dependent upon EU27, China + some countries recreating conflict arbitration in parallel to the non working arbitration within the WTO.

Lars

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If this were the case, the Express and the Mail would have been broadcasting it.

Would they have a smart enough legal team to find it, the newspapers, not the government.

Enzokk

Let's hope the packaging standards will be kept to reflect what you are buying when you are in the UK,

Government ready to open British markets to chlorinated chicken for US trade deal

The government is set to open British markets to food produced to lower US welfare standards as part of its planned trade deal with Donald Trump.

Downing Street on Thursday refused to stand by an earlier pledge to keep so-called "chlorinated chicken" off UK shelves, in the first sign of the government folding under pressure from American trade negotiators.

Ministers are reportedly considering letting in products like chlorinated chicken and hormone fed beef into British supermarkets, but applying tariffs to them to protect UK-based farmers from competition.

The move would represent a significant loosening of the current situation where complying with high European welfare and sanitary standards for food are a requirement across a wide range of foods.

But under the so-called "dual tariff" system being looked at American agribusiness would be allowed to sell goods in the UK even if they were not complying with the same production standards as British farmers – as long as they pay a tariff.

Some ministers, such as right-winger Liz Truss, want to go further, the Daily Telegraph reports – and gradually reduce these tariffs to zero over 10 years, giving farmers time to adjust to the new normal.

In 2017 Gove said they would not allow these products in British Supermarkets. Then in January this was confirmed by Therese Villiers to still be the case but new Environment Secretary George Eustice would only confirm there was no plans to change the ban on these items.

So now they have gone from not allowing it at all to allowing it but with tariffs. They only started the negotiations with the US in May. I think in July we are going to be at a situation where UK farmers will pay US farmers the cost of exporting lower standard and cheaper foods into the UK.

Leroy42

That type of chicken will never hit the supermarkets. It is for the likes of hospitals, prisons, schools, staff canteens, etc. Most people will never even notice and they can go about saying that the standards haven't dropped.

Eventually, you will get a person like Jamie Oliver or the like that will expose it but it will be too late at that stage in terms of the government getting past the issue.

If an uproar does happen, they will claim to start an investigation, set up a committee and say that are asking all hospitals etc to review their policies. No additional budget will be provided.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

That type of chicken will never hit the supermarkets. It is for the likes of hospitals, prisons, schools, staff canteens, etc. Most people will never even notice and they can go about saying that the standards haven't dropped.

Eventually, you will get a person like Jamie Oliver or the like that will expose it but it will be too late at that stage in terms of the government getting past the issue.

If an uproar does happen, they will claim to start an investigation, set up a committee and say that are asking all hospitals etc to review their policies. No additional budget will be provided.

Most consumers would simply avoid it at all costs, prisons etc, have a captive clientele who mostly don't have a choice, if staff get wind that it's being served in the canteen they'll probably boycott it.
Jamie Oliver did once show a group of schoolchildren how their chicken nuggets were made, starting with some disgusting looking pink slime, after cooking them, he asked the kids would they eat them now after seeing what they were made from!
Several hands shot up!!

ancapailldorcha

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Most consumers would simply avoid it at all costs, prisons etc, have a captive clientele who mostly don't have a choice, if staff get wind that it's being served in the canteen they'll probably boycott it.
Jamie Oliver did once show a group of schoolchildren how their chicken nuggets were made, starting with some disgusting looking pink slime, after cooking them, he asked the kids would they eat them now after seeing what they were made from!
Several hands shot up!!

I don't think there'll be a choice. These American food corporations are anything but stupid. They'll be lobbying hard to ensure that they can pass the stuff off a British somehow or just ditch labels detailing the country of origin.

Once this stuff hits the shelves, that's it for British poultry. Farms will go bust as they just can't compete with the masses produced, chemical-ridden American fare.

This will be the first nail in the coffin of British agriculture should it come to pass.

cantwbr1

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't think there'll be a choice. These American food corporations are anything but stupid. They'll be lobbying hard to ensure that they can pass the stuff off a British somehow or just ditch labels detailing the country of origin.

Once this stuff hits the shelves, that's it for British poultry. Farms will go bust as they just can't compete with the masses produced, chemical-ridden American fare.

This will be the first nail in the coffin of British agriculture should it come to pass.

If my memory serves me right I think that labelling of origin of foods was a major sticking point in some previous negotiations between EU and US. They wanted no requirement to identify the origin as they knew that the consumer would not touch US originating food due to gmo/hormone concerns. The EU held firm but I can’t see the UK being as strong.

Lemming

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't think there'll be a choice. These American food corporations are anything but stupid. They'll be lobbying hard to ensure that they can pass the stuff off a British somehow or just ditch labels detailing the country of origin.

Once this stuff hits the shelves, that's it for British poultry. Farms will go bust as they just can't compete with the masses produced, chemical-ridden American fare.

This will be the first nail in the coffin of British agriculture should it come to pass.

I think they'll lobby hard to overturn labelling requirements, allowing them [US corps] to go wild with a wide variety of food stuffs, not just chlorinated chicken or hormone-pumped beef, but things like the much more slack tolerances about sh1t (literally and figuratively) that makes its way into jars & tins like sauces & baby food.

Edit: cantwbr1 beat me to it, and I'd forgotten about the GMO angle.

BonnieSituation

RobMc59 wrote: »

Perhaps the UK has identified a loophole in the wording of the EUs agreements with these countries which would allow a better deal.

And the EU's incredibly experienced negotiators hadn't noticed this potential loophole but the UK's less experienced heads have?

Seth Brundle

Leroy42 wrote: »

That type of chicken will never hit the supermarkets. It is for the likes of hospitals, prisons, schools, staff canteens, etc. Most people will never even notice and they can go about saying that the standards haven't dropped.

It will also be in much of the processed foods - burgers, kievs, etc sold in supermarkets

RobMc59

BonnieSituation wrote: »

And the EU's incredibly experienced negotiators hadn't noticed this potential loophole but the UK's less experienced heads have?

You maybe right,although when the agreement was being drawn up who could foresee that trade deal negotiations would be at this apparent impasse?I`d agree that it`s unlikely the UK could outfox anyone if how we`ve handled coronavirus is anything to go by.

moon2

RobMc59 wrote: »

You maybe right,although when the agreement was being drawn up who could foresee that trade deal negotiations would be at this apparent impasse?I`d agree that it`s unlikely the UK could outfox anyone if how we`ve handled coronavirus is anything to go by.

We can follow the thought through the other way. Suppose the EU thought something was locked down and Japan (or the UK) said "well, actually, according to our interpretation of subclause 7 it is allowed", I would expect the EU response to be two-fold:

1) Using polite wording explain that the interpretation is incorrect and that both the spirit and letter of the agreement say that the thing is locked down/not allowed.
2) offer to amend the treaty with an unambiguous clarification, with Japan's agreement, to ensure the thing is most definitely locked down.

So - in the event there is disagreement in interpretation, or even if there is a legitimate flaw which breaks the spirit of the agreement, I would expect the EU and Japan to reach an agreement before the UK actually gets to take advantage of it.

I would also expect the reverse to be true - Japan would hound the EU if Japan believed the EU were violating the agreement in a way which unfairly benefited the UK over Japan.

The balancing act all parties will play is to ensure the most beneficial relationship is maintained. 'Beneficial' wouldn't be restricted to mere monetary value in this context.

Finally, in the event of a major disagreement over this hypothetical flaw, I assume the ultimate step is for one party to unilaterally terminate the agreement. This would probably be a net loss for everyone in all senses of the word.

moon2

Leroy42 wrote: »

That type of chicken will never hit the supermarkets.

If they have already backpedaled this far I don't think it's realistic to think there's any plan to restrict the lower standard imports to captive audiences. It'll be everywhere.

I'd say it's a tossup as to whether labelling requirements will change. If American companies view "Made in America" as a negative then they'd likely tie the removal of labeling requirements to the same agreement which allows the produce to be imported - make it an all or nothing agreement.

As I said already, if the UK have already made concessions which *directly contradict* promises made multiple times, it's pretty likely they'll concede whatever is necessary to make the deal. They clearly want it otherwise they would not have broken the promise.

BonnieSituation

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It will also be in much of the processed foods - burgers, kievs, etc sold in supermarkets

It still has to be labelled.

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

That type of chicken will never hit the supermarkets. It is for the likes of hospitals, prisons, schools, staff canteens, etc. Most people will never even notice and they can go about saying that the standards haven't dropped.

The EU will notice, and they will impose stringent import controls on everything and anything exported from the UK to the EU that might have a trace of American ingredients in it. If the UK were daft enough to indicate that they were going to sign off on this kind of deal, that would immediately torpedo the grandfathering of British producers' approvals into any new UK-EU trade deal.

That'd kill off the sale of a lot of processed foods that end up in Irish supermarkets (bad news for Tesco, great news for Carrefour) ... and it'd cause an almighty row over what foodstuffs could cross the GB-NI border without additional controls and declarations.

fash

RobMc59 wrote: »

You maybe right,although when the agreement was being drawn up who could foresee that trade deal negotiations would be at this apparent impasse?I`d agree that it`s unlikely the UK could outfox anyone if how we`ve handled coronavirus is anything to go by.

I believe that most experts from the start believed there was around a 50-50 chance of a deal and the thinking remains around there - it just depends on how Johnson feels at the end of the day is the thing that if easier to spin.

Nody

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It still has to be labelled.

Repackaged /processed in the UK and suddenly it will be "UK produced" instead.

Seth Brundle

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It still has to be labelled.

It will be sold in Britain as they can easily change the labelling rules (obviously not in the EU).
Expect the Tories to tell the riff raff that they should consider themselves lucky to be able to consume such fine food at such a reasonable cost

ancapailldorcha

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It still has to be labelled.

I don't see this being a problem for them.

I used to work for a firm doing calibrations on medical devices. We'd import them from Poland, QC them and slack stickers with "Made in the UK" on them replete with the Union Flag.

They'd be daft if they were happy to sell it in supermarkets with US flags on it or labelled as being from the US in fine print.

Rumours of a possible Tesla gigafactory to be built in the UK, great for RHD countries.

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-gigafactory-uk-makes-sense/
Recent rumors have emerged that point to the idea of a Tesla Gigafactory being established in the United Kingdom. This is a bit surprising considering that the company is already in the process of building Gigafactory Berlin, which is located nearby in Germany. Yet in the grand scheme of things, establishing a dedicated facility in the UK actually makes a lot of sense. It could even be a stroke of minor genius.

The rumors of a potential Gigafactory UK initially emerged after European news agency AM-Online posted a report stating that the UK’s Department of International Trade (DIT) was on the hunt for a 4 million sq ft plot of land that would be utilized as a space to build an R&D center and manufacturing plant for Tesla. A DIT spokesperson initially related the information to local publication Property Week, which reports on commercial and residential real estate news in the area.

Even more interestingly, avid Tesla critics who were prone to following the flight paths of Elon Musk’s private plane have noted that the CEO had landed at the Luton Airport on Wednesday. The purpose of Musk’s visit remains unknown, of course, though his presence in the country added fuel to the rumors of a potential Tesla facility hosted in the United Kingdom.

In a way, a dedicated Tesla facility in the UK makes perfect sense, especially considering that the country uses vehicles that are Right Hand Drive (RHD). Over the years, Tesla has started vehicle deliveries in the UK later compared to other countries due to this reason. The Model 3 is a perfect example, with the UK only receiving the all-electric sedan in mid-2019, far later than countries that are Left Hand Drive.