Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Wondering if there was anything to this, those more in the know might be able to tease this out or dismiss it.

We know that Cross border trade has boomed, and that one aspect of this boom is an increase of NI "exports" to Ireland, and also a decrease of exports from Britain to Ireland!!

Are thse things related, as in are qe seeing goods going from Britain to NI and then shipped down south, avoiding customs etc, the very thing the EU has been concerned about ?

I know anecdotally of some b2b trade where companies are sourcing things from the UK via NI, so there has to be something to this ?

Are we seeing the failure of the UK government implementing checks resulting in goods crossing the border that should not be ?

I see where you're coming from. But "Brexitism needs to be completely defeated" is not the same thing as "Brexitism needs to be completely defeated immediately". This is simply not possible, partly because it is deeply entrenched in UK political culture, but also because, right now, I don't think the UK would be welcome back into the EU.

It took a long time for the UK to get to this point; it will take a long time to get back from it. I think selling the idea that "the UK doesn't have to be permanently antagonistic to Europe and it would probably be a good idea if it weren't" is a good start. Once any kind of clsoeness with Europe becomes politically acceptable, and is practised, and has good results, then you open the way to considering whether a higher degree of closeness might be desirable, and some reflection on why the UK left the EU in the first place. The re-entry of the UK to the EU, if it ever happens, will be the end of a very long process.

I would say they are related. I haven't looked into the statistics that are available (from ONS or CSO) in any depth to see if that could be teased out at all either. However from above posted Guardian article:

(edit: Sorry misread there and see they meant Ireland-UK trade is now easier done via NI, but I think this applies as much, or even more in other direction).

I kind of doubt (?) economic growth in NI or an increase in inputs to NI located businesses from UK, which then go into products that are sold onto Ireland or into wider EU can explain that. So, in agreement with their quote presumably alot of it is UK-Ireland stuff avoiding the full EU customs in Dublin or other ports in favour of the cursory checks from GB-NI under the semi-implemented NI Protocol.

As far as my laymans understanding from the media goes, this is just form filling, maybe with some document checks by UK and no access allowed by UK (for EU) to any of this data to know what is really happening on the ground. Since no less a personage than the UK PM himself directed business to just put customs forms "in the bin", and the UK still can't do it's own customs on EU imports, I somehow doubt the rigour of this is very high.

In July 2015 it went as low as £0.69 to the euro. But that was before Brexit.........

It's not just Biden that's driving this. Per the FT report, the administration is experiencing "pressure from Congress over the UK's threats" to trigger Art 16.

Yes, and Biden - in theory - could do the same. He doesn't, of course, and my point is that the reason he doesn't is not just that he himself is not inclined to, but also that he is under pressure from sources in Congress not to. Even if he wanted to do something like this, therefore, he would burn some political capital in actually doing it, and that might be a price he would choose not to pay.

The takeaway is that the US's stance towards the UK and its threats to the Protocol is not something driven just by Biden and his personal sentiments about Ireland; it has a much wider basis that that.

As ever, it seems Ireland and the rest of the EU are preparing for these changes (I heard a radio advert on RTE about them yesterday), but we've heard virtually nothing about this from the sham regime or their media.

Not a good web page. Typos, and bad links, descriptions that leave a lot to be desired.

This I found particularly annoying: "The UK’s deal with the EU, called the Trade and Cooperation Agreement..."

It's a treaty, not a deal. The whole page seems like they stuck a software developer (FD: retired one here) in front of a computer and asked them to slap something together. The excessive use of parentheses in the text is a dead giveaway.

Further, there are a number of terms that have "legal meaning" like 'statement on origin' that should be in a glossary. They're hand-waved through.

Very poor page.

But, it does seem like UK businesses ought to have EU subsidiaries to handle the paperwork on the EU side. Another Brexit benefit - more jobs in the EU. Wait a second....

Poor UK businesses having to deal with such poor bureaucrats.

Blue passports and less immigrants wanting to move to the UK. Both were achieved in fairness but I don't think less immigrants through torching the economy was what Brexiters had in mind

I thought I (roughly) knew what was changing in January and posted a link to the 1st UK government page I found with a google search confirming that. 

In fairness to the UK civil servants and gov.uk etc., that looks like to me like a kind of "blog" page (see the "News story" heading) and it is just briefly summarising information taken from elsewhere on their site and providing a few links.

Didn't think it was that bad (apart from fact I skimmed it at first, and I now see a few typos you mentioned), but I am not a UK business importing goods from the EU or an EU business exporting to the UK.

Once they are aware change is coming, they need more detailed information than a page like that can provide anyway.

I think people know what is supposed to happen (i.e. same controls on EU goods they do for any other imports to the UK) but probably question is whether they will be ready to bring these in from July next year or will some/all of them be postponed again.

Didn't mean to criticize you at all, I thought it was an official UK 'page.' My bad, I guess it is kind of a blog by some rando in the government.

Except very few economic migrants come over in the dangerous way. Most illegal under the counter immigrants came in legally on temporary or student visas and overstayed much like the Irish do in the US

The irony being they are only getting less skilled immigrants from the EU, the boats and trucks if anything are even fuller of unskilled asylum seekers that its very unlikely have the skills required to replace the ones lost from brexit.

Not to mention the only way they are getting trade agreements with China and India is through a large increase in visas.

That's utter nonsense. You've just demonstrated you know absolutely nothing about the French education system. I don't know what you think your source says, but it says absolutely nothing close to what you've claimed

Whatever stats your trying to use absolutely say nothing of the sort.

Also your claim about the French education system is absolute bo11ox.

The Times article is paywalled. I think they're just 'piggybacking' on an earlier announcement of 1bn sterling in a battery plant. Nissan's spending 13bn worldwide. Sunderland's getting a battery plant is all, as part of the bigger investment plan by Nissan.

If anything, considering Sunderland produces vehicles likely to undergo major modification or discontinuation, this seems like a sop.

I just love any article where a Brexit supporting, Tory-donating high-profile businessman is bemoaning that this isn't the Brexit he campaigned for. Usually it's Tim Martin in the spotlight, but this time its Sir Rocco Forte of the Forte hotel group.

Some great stuff in here - seems to blaming both the UK nationals and the settled status foreigners for his failure to find workers. Then has a ludicrous idea (also previously suggested by Tim Martin) of time-limited sponsorship visas where he thinks foreign workers will be happy to be tied to one employer.

Only a sensible immigration debate will solve our labour shortages | Financial Times (ft.com)

edit. If you type Rocco Forte in Google then this article is near/at the top of the list, and isn't paywalled if opened that way.

Based on the comments in the article, he inherited the business, lost it to a hostile takeover, started a new one with the money from the takeover and has been a big-time Tory donor (100,000 sterling donation to the party after Bojo won the PM sweepstakes, among other things.)

I think the guy's been lucky rather than good. Not uncommon at high levels in many businesses.

Also, he's pretty old to be running a big business (76). Just another Tory patsy and they took full advantage. Though apparently he was a triathlete at an earlier age so he's pretty fit.