Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

  • #2
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 30,571 mod Seth Brundle


    This is the fourteenth incarnation of our Brexit discussion thread.

    Please bear the following in mind before posting:
    • Insults directed at popular figures are not acceptable in this forum
    • Please do not post memes, videos or comedy links here
    • Please do not be uncivil to other posters
    • Please use the report function to alert the mods when necessary
    • Discussion of Sinn Féin's longstanding policy of abstention from Westminster is not suitable for this thread. Posts on this subject may be deleted

    Previous thread is here:
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058099620


«134567254

Comments

  • #2


    54and56 wrote: »
    Was sent this by a pal today which if true proves the point that a picture (or a graphic) speaks a thousand words.

    Whenever anyone in the UK wonders why importing and exporting goods, using services across EU borders or simply travelling into and out of the EU has become so much more difficult post Brexit they should just be directed to this or a similar graphic.

    SuspVFm.jpg

    Would love to find a higher quality version.

    Is it possible that once the media glare dies down the UK can do a load of little individual deals which will essentially make them an EFTA without people noticing ?


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Is it possible that once the media glare dies down the UK can do a load of little individual deals which will essentially make them an EFTA without people noticing ?

    Not a hope. The EU are not creating Switzerland mark II


  • #2


    Brexit creating new jobs


    in France

    https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jan/23/cheshire-cheesemaker-says-business-left-with-250000-brexit-hole?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&__twitter_impression=true

    Investment that would have been spent in the UK, moving to the EU.

    I know many companies were doing this quietly (the company I work for moved loads of jobs from London after 2016, it didn't do any big bang, just jobs that people left were hired in EU countries, mine didn't exist in Dublin before 2019) post referendum.

    The main question is why did it take the end of the transition for these companies to realise that they'd need to move investment to the EU. For all last year it was looking like no deal or a crap deal.


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Is it possible that once the media glare dies down the UK can do a load of little individual deals which will essentially make them an EFTA without people noticing ?

    No.


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Is it possible that once the media glare dies down the UK can do a load of little individual deals which will essentially make them an EFTA without people noticing ?

    Yes but it'll take many years and a change of government.


  • #2


    Michel Barnier interviewed in the latest episode of RTE’s podcast “Brexit Republic” - well worth a listen.

    https://podcast.rasset.ie/podcasts/audio/2021/0122/20210122_webexclusi-brexitrepublic-franklyspe_c21897230_21897231_232_.mp3

    Nate


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Is it possible that once the media glare dies down the UK can do a load of little individual deals which will essentially make them an EFTA without people noticing ?

    Which line represents the single market in that diagram


  • #2


    20silkcut wrote: »
    Which line represents the single market in that diagram

    Does any one single line represent it ?


  • #2


    Michel Barnier interviewed in the latest episode of RTE’s podcast “Brexit Republic” - well worth a listen.

    https://podcast.rasset.ie/podcasts/audio/2021/0122/20210122_webexclusi-brexitrepublic-franklyspe_c21897230_21897231_232_.mp3

    Nate

    I only listened to part of that but he's amusing in his - I am not going to plamas you, you are just as important as all the other countries directly affected, the EU undertakes to protect all members. And - don't be bothering me with Irish-specific details, go and read the document.

    Obviously has a vast and total understanding of the whole thing - and Brexit is Brexit, if they don't like the result well tough, we are protecting EU concerns and jobs. Great! I will listen to the rest later.


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Does any one single line represent it ?

    Apologies for this basic question but is Turkey in the single market?


  • #2


    20silkcut wrote: »
    Apologies for this basic question but is Turkey in the single market?

    Customs Union.


  • #2


    20silkcut wrote: »
    Apologies for this basic question but is Turkey in the single market?

    We have a customs treaty with them.

    I don't know why you are directing these questions at me as if you are trying to catch me or teach me in some weird round about way .

    I was just thinking maybe in time the UK will try get closer or into one of those bubbles behind its own people's backs


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    We have a customs treaty with them.

    I don't know why you are directing these questions at me as if you are trying to catch me or teach me in some weird round about way .

    I was just thinking maybe in time the UK will try get closer or into one of those bubbles behind its own people's backs

    You mean like the way they got out of all those bubbles.

    I think it might help the graphic if they included North Korea.


  • #2


    You mean like the way they got out of all those bubbles.

    I think it might help the graphic if they included North Korea.


    would you not argue that the uk is defacto in the customs union and north korea is far from that


  • #2


    peter kern wrote: »
    would you not argue that the uk is defacto in the customs union and north korea is far from that
    UK is very much not in the customs union; it's one of the major driver of issues currently with stories of VAT surcharges and what not. UK has a basic thin FTA and nothing more; this is one of the driving issues of Brexit currently.


  • #2


    peter kern wrote: »
    would you not argue that the uk is defacto in the customs union and north korea is far from that

    No. Countries in the customs union cannot negotiate their own free trade agreements so this was never an option for political reasons.


  • #2


    Nody wrote: »
    UK is very much not in the customs union; it's one of the major driver of issues currently with stories of VAT surcharges and what not. UK has a basic thin FTA and nothing more; this is one of the driving issues of Brexit currently.

    what are the tangible benefits of turkey over uk? its certainly not in steal and agriculure products .

    would i be right in saying if chesshire cheese was based in turkey they
    would have to pay tariffs on top of the health certificate ? ok that would be wrong since it is processed food


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    We have a customs treaty with them.

    I don't know why you are directing these questions at me as if you are trying to catch me or teach me in some weird round about way .

    I was just thinking maybe in time the UK will try get closer or into one of those bubbles behind its own people's backs

    Not trying anything I genuinely did not know the status of Turkey.


  • #2


    20silkcut wrote: »
    Apologies for this basic question but is Turkey in the single market?
    Customs Union since 1995 which covers all industrial goods including processed foods. Queues at the border because no free movement and checks for agri products.

    Turkey is a rule taker for CU rules and has to accept Free Trade Deals done by the EU on everything covered by the CU.
    The Customs Union entered into force on 31 December 1995. It covers all industrial goods but does not address agriculture (except processed agricultural products), services or public procurement. Bilateral trade concessions apply to agricultural as well as coal and steel products.


    So Turkey can make it's own deals with the UK for food, but the white Ford Transit vans beloved of UK small business are now covered by the UK-EU deal.

    In case you haven't been paying attention those vans are now made in Turkey, a country with the same vehicle output as the UK.


    You may remember when GAMA were building the Ballincollig bypass down in Cork, and paying their Turkish workers Turkish wages ?


  • #2


    timetogo1 wrote: »
    Brexit creating new jobs


    in France

    https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jan/23/cheshire-cheesemaker-says-business-left-with-250000-brexit-hole?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&__twitter_impression=true

    Investment that would have been spent in the UK, moving to the EU.

    I know many companies were doing this quietly (the company I work for moved loads of jobs from London after 2016, it didn't do any big bang, just jobs that people left were hired in EU countries, mine didn't exist in Dublin before 2019) post referendum.

    The main question is why did it take the end of the transition for these companies to realise that they'd need to move investment to the EU. For all last year it was looking like no deal or a crap deal.
    Blessed are the cheesemakers.

    There was lots of talk about being able to trade on WTO rules in the UK, but not pointing out that most WTO trade is bulk, so high paperwork costs per order can easily be adsorbed. But kudos to Honda for pointing out it would cost them £2.1m in paperwork. And that's in an industry with huge volumes of a limited number of products and the production lines run for years. And as a global enterprise they have lots of experience with import/export and a pathological fixation on efficiency and reducing unnecessary costs.

    If Honda costed it at £2.1m back in 2018 the people wanting it done properly tomorrow are going to be very, very disappointed.

    The reason companies are setting up centres in the EU is to avoid paperwork. So they can use ONE set of paperwork to get bulk shipments into the CU and then freely move the goods from there.


    Being in the CU was great for small UK companies. Now they will have to work some combination of charging more, reducing margins, go via an EU centre, or stop trading with EU customers. And visa versa, except that the UK has also added VAT rules with zero threshold. The EU will be bringing in similar VAT rule but with a much higher threshold and they've delayed for six months because Covid.


  • #2


    peter kern wrote: »
    what are the tangible benefits of turkey over uk? its certainly not in steal and agriculure products .
    Turkey, like Norway and Iceland exports food and raw materials. The UK is a nett importer of those.

    Most of the UK-Turkey trade is covered by EU rules so same volumes of paperwork and checks and costs.

    The bilateral EU-Turkey agreements have been rolled over, but rules of origin paperwork now needed too.

    However, Tukey will only recognise UK's rules of origin paperwork for one year instead of two the other way round and for some things Turkey benefits from lower tariffs due to the UK’s Most Favoured Nation tariff schedule. It's another full price DFS sofa.


  • #2


    Picking up on something from the tail end of Thread XIII ...
    Nissan had better have something equivalent to this for its EV batteries, or they'll be obsolete pretty soon.
    I would doubt the pretty soon part of your post. Nearly 6 years ago these guys said they would have this battery within a year. Now they are saying by 2025. You should take these lofty claims of massive improvements in battery technology with a healthy dose of salt because they have happened many times over the past few decades and they never live up to the claims or do and come with serious caveats that make them not workable.
    20silkcut wrote:
    Batteries will never compare with a 1.4 or 1.6 Diesel engine going up hills or over bad twisty roads or heating a car on a cold morning.
    It’s all fantasy. Sort of like brexit fuelled by ideology.
    listermint wrote:
    Completely off topic but wildy hyperbolic too. Over to the ev forum to be proven wrong.

    Whatever about the hyperbole and merits of EVs, this one single topic does, in fact, encapsulate the worst risks of the Brexit gamble. Whatever way you look at it, batteries are a desperate way to store energy for locomotion, so for the foreseeable future, EVs are dependent on a network of charge points and - as we've already seen - there is no real coherence in the industry as to the how-when-where-what of these, never mind a well-established set of unwritten rules for users.

    But if the UK underwrites any manufacturer's move towards battery production, it will need to underwrite some kind of charging network too; and the UK is a net importer of the electricity needed to feed that network - importing it from the EU. Other than what they get from the EU, they've asked the French and the Chinese to look after their domestic generation. That's a lot of commitment (and international agreement) pegged to one single form of locomotive power. It would only take one someone, somewhere, to bring a viable, storable, more convenient alternative power source to the automotive sector to wipe all that investment off UK Inc's balance sheet.

    While countries in the EU must also think about what direction they want to nudge the industry, they have considerably more scope for sharing the risk, for encouraging research collaborations, and for establishing continent-wide distribution protocols for whatever comes next.


  • #2


    timetogo1 wrote: »
    The main question is why did it take the end of the transition for these companies to realise that they'd need to move investment to the EU. For all last year it was looking like no deal or a crap deal.

    I think Simon Spurrell answers that:
    “It’s as if someone forgot to negotiate this part of the deal, they forgot that there needed to be an exemption or allowance for the direct consumer sales.

    “We ship to the USA, Canada, Norway, etc, all non-EU countries; we have never had a problem with at all. It is an oversight in the agreement that does not affect EU producers at all, but is a dead stop for all UK producers selling into the EU via online sales,” he added.

    He declares himself to be a Remainer who decided to make the best of Brexit once it was done - but those quotes illustrate how even Remainers really didn't understand what they were giving up. There's no "oversight" in the agreement - his company ships to the USA, Canada and Norway on the back of rules applied in those countries that allow for certain exemptions for certain products being imported by certain customers. There was never enough attention paid by GB voters to what the EU rules would be. One can't extrapolate exemptions from one jurisdiction to another, but that's what both Leavers and Remainers have done throughout this saga.


  • #2


    Picking up on something from the tail end of Thread XIII ...





    Whatever about the hyperbole and merits of EVs, this one single topic does, in fact, encapsulate the worst risks of the Brexit gamble. Whatever way you look at it, batteries are a desperate way to store energy for locomotion, so for the foreseeable future, EVs are dependent on a network of charge points and - as we've already seen - there is no real coherence in the industry as to the how-when-where-what of these, never mind a well-established set of unwritten rules for users.

    But if the UK underwrites any manufacturer's move towards battery production, it will need to underwrite some kind of charging network too; and the UK is a net importer of the electricity needed to feed that network - importing it from the EU. Other than what they get from the EU, they've asked the French and the Chinese to look after their domestic generation. That's a lot of commitment (and international agreement) pegged to one single form of locomotive power. It would only take one someone, somewhere, to bring a viable, storable, more convenient alternative power source to the automotive sector to wipe all that investment off UK Inc's balance sheet.

    While countries in the EU must also think about what direction they want to nudge the industry, they have considerably more scope for sharing the risk, for encouraging research collaborations, and for establishing continent-wide distribution protocols for whatever comes next.

    That is reminiscent of the car assembly that Ireland started in the 1950s to get round protection of manufacturing. We had no parts manufacture, nor a steel industry, so CKD (completely knocked down) kits were imported and assembled into cars in various small factories. This enabled the government to put high import tariffs on fully built cars. Now it worked for a while when cars could be assembled or built on bricks and then driven out to the showroom. Once, real assembly was required, that was the end of it.

    This could well be what will happen to battery manufacture/assembly in the UK. They do not have the raw materials, and do not currently manufacture the batteries. They should ask themselves why they do not have that.


  • #2


    20silkcut wrote: »
    Not trying anything I genuinely did not know the status of Turkey.

    Ah ok. I thought you were asking questions you knew the answer to. That map a while ago is about the limit of my knowledge


  • #2


    That is reminiscent of the car assembly that Ireland started in the 1950s to get round protection of manufacturing. We had no parts manufacture, nor a steel industry, so CKD (completely knocked down) kits were imported and assembled into cars in various small factories. This enabled the government to put high import tariffs on fully built cars. Now it worked for a while when cars could be assembled or built on bricks and then driven out to the showroom. Once, real assembly was required, that was the end of it.

    This could well be what will happen to battery manufacture/assembly in the UK. They do not have the raw materials, and do not currently manufacture the batteries. They should ask themselves why they do not have that.

    The Nissan announcement re battery manufacturing in Sunderland doesn't really change much. Nissan used to manufacturer their own battery packs in Sunderland (since 2012), they sold off that side of the business to the Chinese Envsion group in early 2019. It's now called AESC and still supplies batteries for the Nissan Leaf. They have a capacity of 1.9 GWh/yr which is enough to build 47,500 Leaf 40kWh packs. If you dig into the recent announcement, what they are really doing is saying they will now produce the 62kWh packs in Sunderland alongside the 40kWh packs to meet place of origin rules. This is basically a denser cell in the same form factor and overall packaging.

    The real test will be if they decide to produce the upcoming Ariya in Sunderland, as that will represent a new form factor for the battery pack, and require serious investment. The current EU trade agreement means we'll have 0% tarrifs on cars by 2026, so tariff wise, Nissan could keep the jobs in Japan and have to meet Japanese rules of origin instead.


  • #2


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    Is it possible that once the media glare dies down the UK can do a load of little individual deals which will essentially make them an EFTA without people noticing ?

    People would notice a return to free movement of people, which all of the EFTA states* have with the EU, whether as part of the EEA Agreement or bilaterally, as with Switzerland.

    You don't get to trade with the EU on Single Market terms unless you permit free movement of people.

    The exceptions for NI (which don't cover trade in services anyway) and Liechtenstein wouldn't be granted to the entire UK.

    *Liechtenstein has been exempted from allowing free movement of people into Liechtenstein, by consent of the other EEA parties. This is because its total population is only about 39,000 of whom about 1/3 are immigrants anyway.


  • #2


    14th thread? 114th thread I daresay.

    Brexit will be an active discussion until its reversed, be it 5 or 55 years time.


  • #2


    Turkey, like Norway and Iceland exports food and raw materials. The UK is a nett importer of those.

    Most of the UK-Turkey trade is covered by EU rules so same volumes of paperwork and checks and costs.

    The bilateral EU-Turkey agreements have been rolled over, but rules of origin paperwork now needed too.

    However, Tukey will only recognise UK's rules of origin paperwork for one year instead of two the other way round and for some things Turkey benefits from lower tariffs due to the UK’s Most Favoured Nation tariff schedule. It's another full price DFS sofa.

    Turkey has a customs union with the EU, although it doesn't include agricultural products except processed ones (eg. tomato paste, but not tomatoes) and, despite the diagrams doing the rounds, it is not in the EU Customs Union.

    The EU and Turkey also have a trade agreement to supplement their customs union agreement.

    This is the element of the trading relationship between the EU and Turkey that the UK has rolled over, not the customs union.

    And that's why rules of origin certification is needed for UK-Turkey trade, as trade agreements require proof that goods traded originate sufficiently in the parties to qualify for the preferential tariffs set out in the agreement.


  • #2


    timetogo1 wrote: »
    Brexit creating new jobs


    in France

    https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jan/23/cheshire-cheesemaker-says-business-left-with-250000-brexit-hole?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&__twitter_impression=true

    Investment that would have been spent in the UK, moving to the EU.

    I know many companies were doing this quietly (the company I work for moved loads of jobs from London after 2016, it didn't do any big bang, just jobs that people left were hired in EU countries, mine didn't exist in Dublin before 2019) post referendum.

    The main question is why did it take the end of the transition for these companies to realise that they'd need to move investment to the EU. For all last year it was looking like no deal or a crap deal.

    He complains that there are no exemptions or special provisions in the trade agreement for online consumer sales, regarding this as an oversight, and goes on to say:
    “Our business had high hopes of continued growth in the EU market, after seeing the avoidance of the no-deal and announcement of a free trade deal.

    “What has only become clear in the last week is that our successful B2C [business to consumer] online sales to EU consumers is now impossible to operate,” he said.

    Why would he think that the EU would have granted concessions to the UK when the UK said clearly that it was going to try to become a rival of the EU?

    His decision to invest in France is going to be repeated many times over by British-based enterprises and also to some extent by EU-based enterprises who want to make trading with Britain easier.

    But the relative sizes of the two markets means that far more investment is likely to flow into the EU than into Britain.


Sign In or Register to comment.