Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Datacore

I’d also caution that companies are reluctant to be attacked by tabloids for making a move. They still have a market in the U.K. - so they’ll try to minimise any suggestions that their moves might be Brexit related.

Nobody wants a PR mess if it’s avoidable.

It’s easier to fizzle something out than spectacularly close it.

Newuser2

Datacore wrote: »

I’d also caution that companies are reluctant to be attacked by tabloids for making a move. They still have a market in the U.K. - so they’ll try to minimise any suggestions that their moves might be Brexit related.

Nobody wants a PR mess if it’s avoidable.

It’s easier to fizzle something out than spectacularly close it.

Would it not be the opposite

Surely they can hide behind Brexit

Datacore

Newuser2 wrote: »

Would it not be the opposite

Surely they can hide behind Brexit

If they blame Brexit yeah. However if they just coldly decide to move with out at least struggling on for a bit, the tabloids could well crucify their brands for disloyalty.

Peregrinus

Newuser2 wrote: »

Would it not be the opposite

Surely they can hide behind Brexit

Attributing blame to Brexit will piss of some of their market in the UK, who won't want to be told unpleasant truths about Brexit. Plus, it may piss off the UK government. And there's really no upside.

I think the only businesses likely to point to Brexit as their reason for disengaging from the UK are those that disengage completely.

CelticRambler

Newuser2 wrote: »

Would it not be the opposite

Surely they can hide behind Brexit

No need. These are companies that have been making who-does-what-where decisions for decades; for them, Brexit is nothing more than a convenient bump on the road, helping to justify future choices based purely on the costs of the different options.

For them, Brexit is "done" now; disruption to JIT supply chains will be a daily headache but can be managed in the medium term. Temporary lay-offs can be blamed on Brexit if it suits the narrative while dealing with the unions, but there's no value in "hiding" long-term decisions behind Brexit as who knows what other global shocks the twentytwenties have in for us.

CelticRambler

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Thats why Dyson backed Brexit

https://whoownsengland.org/2017/09/19/why-is-james-dyson-hoovering-up-land/

:eek: Jeez ... and I thought my neighbour was bad!

But reading that, it doesn't seem like so much of a conspiracy theory after all. What better way to boot lifestock off all that potentially tillable land than killing their EU export market and blaming it on Brussels; then sit back and let the British taxpayer funnel CAP-alternative subsidies into your bank account while growing carbon credits to sell to the data centres that power the same taxpayers' addiction to online gaming/shopping/streaming ...

rock22

Another great trade deal not done https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55725718

i imagine Joe Biden will have a different position on it.

johnnyskeleton

rock22 wrote: »

Another great trade deal not done https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55725718

i imagine Joe Biden will have a different position on it.

Just on the tarrifs, the Scottish Whisky one is great for Irish Whiskey:

https://www.thespiritsbusiness.com/2020/12/irish-whiskey-sales-forecast-to-exceed-scotch-by-2030/

Whiskey distilleries tend to be in rural locations (but not always) and are labour intensive. Im sorry to say this of our Scottish buddies, but their disadvantage is our gain. I should stress that it isnt just the tarrifs that are at play, the Irish Whiskey industry is really hitting the premium and super premium market in the US and Irish Distilleries are really knocking it out of the park marketing-wise.

Also interesting to observe that one of the more intellectual reasons for Brexit was that the EU would insist on tarrifs that suit some countries e.g. garlic for France and Spain, but the UK produces very little garlic so shouldnt have to have those tarrifs. I wonder what the SNP think about their pride and glory industry being the victim because the predominantly English steel and airplane manufacturers are being protected by the UK!

Sam Russell

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Just on the tarrifs, the Scottish Whisky one is great for Irish Whiskey:

https://www.thespiritsbusiness.com/2020/12/irish-whiskey-sales-forecast-to-exceed-scotch-by-2030/

Whiskey distilleries tend to be in rural locations (but not always) and are labour intensive. Im sorry to say this of our Scottish buddies, but their disadvantage is our gain. I should stress that it isnt just the tarrifs that are at play, the Irish Whiskey industry is really hitting the premium and super premium market in the US and Irish Distilleries are really knocking it out of the park marketing-wise.

Also interesting to observe that one of the more intellectual reasons for Brexit was that the EU would insist on tarrifs that suit some countries e.g. garlic for France and Spain, but the UK produces very little garlic so shouldnt have to have those tarrifs. I wonder what the SNP think about their pride and glory industry being the victim because the predominantly English steel and airplane manufacturers are being protected by the UK!

This is apposite as the USA tariffs on Scotch whiskey is not being removed unlike those imposed on the EU because the UK is no longer in the EU and was not named in the WTO action. If it was still in the U that tariffs would be gone.

Ironic or what?

L1011

As far as I remember, the tariff is on single malt whiskeys; not just Scotch. So the premium ranges of Bushmills, West Cork and a few others are also tariffed. We do produce single malts here, even if our big brands (including the non-premium from most of those who do make it) are primarily blends and our super-premiums are mostly single pot still.

Panrich

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Thats why Dyson backed Brexit

https://whoownsengland.org/2017/09/19/why-is-james-dyson-hoovering-up-land/

I love the bit about education for all ...... who can afford it. It's going back to serfdom.

serfboard

CelticRambler wrote: »

sit back and let the British taxpayer funnel CAP-alternative subsidies into your bank account while growing carbon credits to sell to the data centres that power the same taxpayers' addiction to online gaming/shopping/streaming ...

Panrich wrote: »

I love the bit about education for all ...... who can afford it. It's going back to serfdom.

Jeez lads, ye're all sounding like Marxists today!

ambro25

Panrich wrote: »

I love the bit about education for all ...... who can afford it. It's going back to serfdom.

It started going back to serfdom in 2010, if not earlier still. The worst precariat in northern Europe has been mostly in the (northern) UK for years now.

Brexit is about removing any left-over (and mostly EU-driven) opportunities to mend that social fracture.

I did not seriously think it would take all of a generation (or more) for the UK -or whatever is left of it by then- to reintegrate the EU. But I'm getting ever less sure of that now, such is the pace and scale of socio-economic vandalism visited on the UK by Johnson & associates. Especially if there is another 4 years of this to come.

EDIT: in Brexit-related and personal news, my (2016 Leave-voting) mother-in-law (who came to stay with us in Luxembourg late last November, so she'd get to spend a family xmas) today expressed for the first time a desire to remain with us in Luxembourg...indefinitely. Well.

peter kern

ambro25 wrote: »

It started going back to serfdom in 2010, if not earlier still. The worst precariat in northern Europe has been mostly in the (northern) UK for years now.

Brexit is about removing any left-over (and mostly EU-driven) opportunities to mend that social fracture.

I did not seriously think it would take all of a generation (or more) for the UK -or whatever is left of it by then- to reintegrate the EU. But I'm getting ever less sure of that now, such is the pace and scale of socio-economic vandalism visited on the UK by Johnson & associates. Especially if there is another 4 years of this to come.

EDIT: in Brexit-related and personal news, my (2016 Leave-voting) mother-in-law (who came to stay with us in Luxembourg late last November, so she'd get to spend a family xmas) today expressed for the first time a desire to remain with us in Luxembourg...indefinitely. Well.

is she still pro brexit now ?

ambro25

peter kern wrote: »

is she still pro brexit now ?

No. But she is very strong-minded and proud, like the self-made Yorkshire woman she is, so there hasn't been any open or outright admission.

We both know the score and leave it unsaid at that.

It can't have been an easy one for her to come out with. But at 80, it's nothing if not a brave decision. Now, to see if I can actually make it happen from the perspective of immigration/rules/income etc. At least, she "got in" before 31/12, so there is that. I just wish the Mrs and her had discussed it and decided sooner, like I've been asking them since 2018.

<sigh> apologies, back on with politics.

CelticRambler

serfboard wrote: »

Jeez lads, ye're all sounding like Marxists today!

In my defence, I will cite exhibit A, watching one of my winter houseguests swing from elation at getting her first proper job to being borderline brain-dead after two days of working from "home" putting in the hours dictated by The Big Boss doing tasks dictated by The Big Boss using tools proscribed by The Big Boss while myself and her boyfriend did real work like chopping logs and digging deep holes and generally making my parcel of land work for us first and the State/society after;

and exhibit B: this opinion piece from the Guardian, concluding as follows -

The Conservative party is a brilliant machine for adapting to social pressure from below, remaking itself to absorb new supporters without the established elite having to surrender power.

It is the fantasy that we all dressed in finery once upon a time. The servants and peasants who were chopped to bits to settle obscure vendettas between noble families must have been someone else’s great-great-great-grandparents.

The genius of this system is its ability to contain violent upheavals behind the veneer of continuity. Brexit is just the latest iteration: upsetting the established order while somehow leaving the established order untroubled, a rebellion that succeeds by inflicting the highest economic cost on the places that rebelled.

In a very roundabout way, it looks like the Brexit-Covid duo has (or might) very effectively reverse the societal change that came about in Britain as a result of the Black Death. The robber barons are making a comeback ...

serfboard

CelticRambler wrote: »

this opinion piece from the Guardian

The Guardian wrote:

upsetting the established order while somehow leaving the established order untroubled

Nicely put.

I read before that the only real change in inequality happens in societies after wars. Since we're not so keen on foriegn adventures anymore, that leaves a Civil War as the only real way that inequality will be addressed, since democracy doesn't seem to be doing it.

The Murdochs/Barclays/Mercers of this world think that they can keep the pot simmering and the proletariat at each other's throats while proving no threat to themselves.

Unfortunately, a riled-up, lied-to populace will only stay physically silent for so long - until venting online doesn't solve it and they come to the conclusion that the only response that will work is direct action.

We have seen this already in the US. I expect to see more of it.

Panrich

Panrich wrote: »

I love the bit about education for all ...... who can afford it. It's going back to serfdom.

Which is precisely what globalism is all about, but unlike in the old days when the lord of the manor can look out of bis bedroom window and and all the land he sees be owns, a globalists can do it from 10000m up in his private jet!

sink

UK and EU in row over bloc's diplomatic status

The UK is refusing to give Joao Vale de Almeida the full diplomatic status that is granted to other ambassadors.

The Foreign Office is insisting he and his officials should not have the privileges and immunities afforded to diplomats under the Vienna Convention.

It is understood not to want to set a precedent by treating an international body in the same way as a nation state.

As it stands, the ambassador would not have the chance to present his credentials to the Queen like other diplomatic heads of mission.

The British decision is in marked contrast to 142 other countries around the world where the EU has delegations and where its ambassadors are all granted the same status as diplomats representing sovereign nations.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55742664

This is really stupid, the UK has an ambassador to the EU, Tim Barrow as well as a full diplomatic mission with many diplomats. There is a quid pro-quo. If the UK does not extend full diplomatic status to the EU's representatives, the EU will simply retaliate in kind.

The UK can try to claim that it deserves full recognition as it's a sovereign nation and the EU is not, but then why is Tim Barrow even an ambassador, if he is not making representations to an entity worthy of diplomatic status?

This is just another case of the Brits being stupidly belligerent without any possibility of benefit to them. Giving the EU the middle finger and in the next breath asking for special treatment. Embarrassingly amateur.

Peregrinus

This does seem like an extraordinarily stupid row to pick.

Couple of points:

1. Tim Barrow is no longer the UK Ambassador to the EU. The post is currently vacant. Barrow was appointed as a full rank ambassador with effect from Brexit day (31 January 2020); immediately prior to that he was Permanent Representative to the EU, the title the UK gave to the head of its diplomatic mission to the EU while it was a member state. It remains to be seen what title/status the UK will confer on Barrow's successor as head of mission. Barrow may turn out to be not the first, but the only, Ambassador ever accredited by the UK to the EU.

2. The US under Trump did the same thing in 2017, downgrading their treatment of the EU ambassador to the US. But they reversed that decision in 2019, and began treating him as a full ambassador again. They offered no explanation either for the downgrading or for the reversal.

3. It also seems to be trolling Brexiters, who argued that the UK had to leave the UK to recover its sovereignty, since being a member state involved ceding sovereignty to the Union. But you can't really argue that the member states of the Union are not sovereign and that the Union is also not sovereign.

Enzokk

Is this like the EU office in NI all over again? The UK tries to flex it might, the EU responds by asking it to be sensible. The UK flexes harder because it is a sovereign nation and the EU flexes its considerably bigger muscle. The UK relents and normality is restored.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Which is precisely what globalism is all about, but unlike in the old days when the lord of the manor can look out of bis bedroom window and and all the land he sees be owns, a globalists can do it from 10000m up in his private jet!

The EU is fundamentally a peace project and an attempt to manage and fairly balance globalism. Brexit is just a way of forcing the negatives of globalism down the throats of people who are struggling because of either being taken advantage of by the government or being abandoned by successive governments.

Akrasia

Enzokk wrote: »

Is this like the EU office in NI all over again? The UK tries to flex it might, the EU responds by asking it to be sensible. The UK flexes harder because it is a sovereign nation and the EU flexes its considerably bigger muscle. The UK relents and normality is restored.

Back at the beginning of this mess, in 2016 the UK were insisting that they could negotiate directly with the EU27 and build their future relationship as a series of bilateral agreements with individual nation’s. That lasted about 15 minutes until they realized (were told in no uncertain terms) that the EU would be negotiating withdrawal as a single bloc and all correspondence needed to go through the EU.

It seems they’re going to try the same thing now, by using diplomatic channels with individual EU members to try to divide and undermine EU positions relating to British interests.

It’s not going to work this time either

Peregrinus

Actually, I think this may be a simple stuff-up, compounded by incompetence.

Missions in London that have diplomatic status get it, as a matter of UK law, under one of a number of Acts of Parliament. The Diplomatic and Consular Immunities Act 1964 deals with this in relation to sovereign states. Various Commonwealth, UN and international agencies that have representative offices in London get status under the International Organisations Act. A few agencies have status under their own special acts - e.g. the Commonwealth Secretariat under the Commonwealth Secretariat Act 1966.

Right. The EU delegation used to have status under the European Communities Act 1972, but that has been repealed as part of the suite of legislation to give effect to Brexit. It may be that the Brexit legislation failed to consider this matter, or make a replacement provision for treating the EU delegation as having full diplomatic status - that would be the stuff-up - so some middle-ranking bod at the Foreign Office, having noticed this, has decided that the best he can do, given the state of the law, is to treat it as an international organisation with (lesser) status under the International Organisations Act.

The incompetence would then be the failure of anyone higher up the chain to notice this, or to realise its implications, or to think about how to manage it. The right thing to do would be to announce an intention to introduce legislation to restore to the EU delegation the status it previously had. They didn't do this either because they never turned their minds to this issue, or they did but the failed to realise how the downgrading would be taken.

Either way, odds are they will u-turn on this fairly quickly.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The EU is fundamentally a peace project and an attempt to manage and fairly balance globalism. Brexit is just a way of forcing the negatives of globalism down the throats of people who are struggling because of either being taken advantage of by the government or being abandoned by successive governments.

It has very much become an economic and global power project today. Many countries remain in the EU for these reasons only.

Hurrache

sink wrote: »

This is just another case of the Brits being stupidly belligerent without any possibility of benefit to them. Giving the EU the middle finger and in the next breath asking for special treatment. Embarrassingly amateur.

Similar arose a while ago regarding the arts industry and entry to Europe for bands etc. A bit of he said she said but the EU did make an offer a good while ago which the UK didn't take up and it descended into bit of an argument which seemed that while the UK wanted one thing, they weren't going to reciprocate.

A bunch of musicians signed a letter to the UK government yesterday but the funniest thing about it was that Roger Daltrey was a signatory. The same brexiter Daltrey during an interview prior to Brexit said “As if we didn’t tour Europe before the ****ing EU, oh, give it up!”.

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson_MP/status/1351827701708054528

johnnyskeleton

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It has very much become an economic and global power project today. Many countries remain in the EU for these reasons only.

Are the two things really all that separate? The EUs key insight is that you dont create peace with nice words and good intentions, but by ensuring economic integration and political cooperstion you make war unattractive to the point of vanishing

Professor Moriarty

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Are the two things really all that separate? The EUs key insight is that you dont create peace with nice words and good intentions, but by ensuring economic integration and political cooperstion you make war unattractive to the point of vanishing

Fair point. However, I think the primary reason that many countries stay in the EU is global/economic power. If either of those dwindled, they would most definitely consider leaving the EU as many of their citizens do not see it as a peace project.

PokeHerKing

Hurrache wrote: »

Similar arose a while ago regarding the arts industry and entry to Europe for bands etc. A bit of he said she said but the EU did make an offer a good while ago which did the didn't take up and it descended into bit of an argument which seemed that while the UK wanted one thing, they weren't going to reciprocate.

A bunch of musicians signed a letter to the UK government yesterday but the funniest thing about it was that Roger Daltry was a signatory. The same brexiter Daltry during an interview prior to Brexit said “As if we didn’t tour Europe before the ****ing EU, oh, give it up!”.

https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson_MP/status/1351827701708054528

Thats a real never meet your heros type video.

johnnyskeleton

Hurrache wrote: »

Similar arose a while ago regarding the arts industry and entry to Europe for bands etc. A bit of he said she said but the EU did make an offer a good while ago which did the didn't take up and it descended into bit of an argument which seemed that while the UK wanted one thing, they weren't going to reciprocate.

A bunch of musicians signed a letter to the UK government yesterday but the funniest thing about it was that Roger Daltry was a signatory.

Big stadium rock bands will suffer a minor inconvenience, or rather their management staff will. So from Daltreys point of view it probably wont make any difference.

But for the gigging musician who makes 4/500 all in for a gig, they are already running on a shoestring when expenses are taken out of it, and if they have to spend more money and time organising their transit and employment visas, it wont be worth it