Brexit: Now What? Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
jimbob said:
Can you explain how to implement this.
Click to expand...

Certainly I can explain that. If the EU were being reasonable rather than vindictive, they could simply say, "We know that Aston Martin cars currently being produced are 100% compliant with our regulations, so until our regulations change here's your certificate of compliance to carry on making and selling those vehicles."
 
Last edited:
ceptimus said:
Certainly I can explain that. If the EU were being reasonable rather than vindictive, they could simply say, "We know that Aston Martin cars currently being produced are 100% compliant with our regulations, so until our regulations change here's your certificate of compliance to carry on making and selling those vehicles."
Click to expand...
The EU27 could pass such a directive but it would have to be implemented somehow. Just wanting it does not make it so. There needs to be some legal mechanism.

The EU would have to form an agency that either monitors the UK for compliance or makes it possible for EU competitors to complain and trigger an investigation. Then the EU would have to turn back the offending class of product at the border. This would cause an unanticipated disruption of trade.

It's not entirely clear why it should be reasonable for EU to implement such a costly and risky measure unilaterally.
 
Possibly good news for The Don:
https://www.ft.com/content/9e637940-c95a-11e7-ab18-7a9fb7d6163e
"Government seeks to reassure bankers and other professionals with free movement"

But what about all the other sectors that won't have this freedom? Creative sector (eg. music), manufacturing, agriculture (we don't want anymore food rotting in the fields)...
In fact didn't most ministers demand special measures for their department similar to this?
 
Some interesting figures on Radio 4 today.

Scottish aerospace industry sector building commercial satellites and sub assemblies over 6000 employed.
Scottish fishing industry less than 5000 employed.

Makes you think.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Some interesting figures on Radio 4 today.

Scottish aerospace industry sector building commercial satellites and sub assemblies over 6000 employed.
Scottish fishing industry less than 5000 employed.

Makes you think.
Click to expand...


Modern industrial fishing practices are pretty effective. 5,000 fishermen can haul in an awful lot of fish. Maybe that's all they need.

Maybe it's too many.
 
wobs said:
Possibly good news for The Don:
https://www.ft.com/content/9e637940-c95a-11e7-ab18-7a9fb7d6163e
"Government seeks to reassure bankers and other professionals with free movement"

But what about all the other sectors that won't have this freedom? Creative sector (eg. music), manufacturing, agriculture (we don't want anymore food rotting in the fields)...
In fact didn't most ministers demand special measures for their department similar to this?
Click to expand...

Damn FT paywall. Cannot read the article.

The government can assure all that they like but until there's some kind of deal struck then it's just words. Sounds to me like empty promises to stop very mobile industries executing their contingency plans whilst the government is fumbling its way through the Brexit negotiations.
 
The Don said:
Damn FT paywall. Cannot read the article.

The government can assure all that they like but until there's some kind of deal struck then it's just words. Sounds to me like empty promises to stop very mobile industries executing their contingency plans whilst the government is fumbling its way through the Brexit negotiations.
Click to expand...

Who believes British government in those industries?
 
quadraginta said:
Modern industrial fishing practices are pretty effective. 5,000 fishermen can haul in an awful lot of fish. Maybe that's all they need.

Maybe it's too many.
Click to expand...

The commercial fishing and associated industries accounts for less than 0.5% of GDP for the UK as a whole.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38345826

It commands a lot of attention (perhaps through memory of the second world war and the brave fishermen who kept us fed), but isn't a major part of the UK economy.
 
quadraginta said:
Modern industrial fishing practices are pretty effective. 5,000 fishermen can haul in an awful lot of fish. Maybe that's all they need.

Maybe it's too many.
Click to expand...

My brother's office deals with some fishing quotas and when I said that fishermen were one group where voting to leave was rational, he disagreed - they sold their quotas to the other fishing vessels, and the amount of fish in teh sea is the main problem.

So that suggests that your comment is correct.
 
The Don said:
The commercial fishing and associated industries accounts for less than 0.5% of GDP for the UK as a whole.
Click to expand...


Not germane to the point I was making.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38345826

It commands a lot of attention (perhaps through memory of the second world war and the brave fishermen who kept us fed), but isn't a major part of the UK economy.
Click to expand...


This either.

The fish are a limited resource. 5,000 fishermen may be as many as can be employed and still keep a useful population of fish sustained.

Comparing an electronics industry to a resource removal industry is 'apples to oranges'.
 
Most of the stuff landed in Whitby is Langoustine, Prawn, Lobster and Crab.
They are landed alive in special individual containers (the langoustine sit in a water filled, segmented tray with one in each segment.
They are kept ashore in special tanks on the queyside and depart for Europe in specialised lorry trailers filled with tanks and plant to keep them alive.
Leaving the EU with no deal on trade will lose them their main market. Whitby fishermen voted to leave.

As an aside. Whitby frozen Scampi (small pieces of breaded prawn or langoustine) used to be made from local catch but as it is now far more valuable as a live export to European restaurants the factory uses prawns imported from Indonesia.
 
quadraginta said:
Not germane to the point I was making.




This either.

The fish are a limited resource. 5,000 fishermen may be as many as can be employed and still keep a useful population of fish sustained.

Comparing an electronics industry to a resource removal industry is 'apples to oranges'.
Click to expand...

The point I think Captain_Swoop was making was that the fishing industry has got government attention (and promises of all kinds of future subsidy) out of all proportion to its importance to the UK's economy.

The government is doing backflips to placate the fishing industry and sweet FA for the satellite industry which employs more people and delivers more to the UK economy and which, unlike the fishing industry, has significant growth potential.
 
ceptimus said:
Certainly I can explain that. If the EU were being reasonable rather than vindictive, they could simply say, "We know that Aston Martin cars currently being produced are 100% compliant with our regulations, so until our regulations change here's your certificate of compliance to carry on making and selling those vehicles."
Click to expand...
Well there are these, highly pertinent points:
Wudang said:
And who would settle disputes?
Click to expand...

GnaGnaMan said:
The EU27 could pass such a directive but it would have to be implemented somehow. Just wanting it does not make it so. There needs to be some legal mechanism.

The EU would have to form an agency that either monitors the UK for compliance or makes it possible for EU competitors to complain and trigger an investigation. Then the EU would have to turn back the offending class of product at the border. This would cause an unanticipated disruption of trade.

It's not entirely clear why it should be reasonable for EU to implement such a costly and risky measure unilaterally.
Click to expand...
And then there is the simple fact of "bandwidth".

The government identified 58 sectors, for which they commissioned sectoral assessment reports. "it is not the case that 58 sectoral impact assessments exist"

This means that the government hasn't even worked out how the 58 economic sectors are likely to be affected, so how can they know what they want for these 58 sectors?

A simple one-off rule by exception (say with equivalent of bonded warehouses or free-trade zones - maybe with industrial sites being declared as part of the EU and with special EU rules) is still going to be very complicated to implement, and the parts that fall down the cracks are going to have major problems.
 
The Don said:
The point I think Captain_Swoop was making was that the fishing industry has got government attention (and promises of all kinds of future subsidy) out of all proportion to its importance to the UK's economy.

The government is doing backflips to placate the fishing industry and sweet FA for the satellite industry which employs more people and delivers more to the UK economy and which, unlike the fishing industry, has significant growth potential.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
The Don said:
Damn FT paywall. Cannot read the article.

The government can assure all that they like but until there's some kind of deal struck then it's just words. Sounds to me like empty promises to stop very mobile industries executing their contingency plans whilst the government is fumbling its way through the Brexit negotiations.
Click to expand...

Try this...
https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjA3ou6osHXAhUmIcAKHTUyC-QQFghXMAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2Fb56d0936-6ae0-11e7-bfeb-33fe0c5b7eaa&usg=AOvVaw1rvZSrETjOO18a-ma8UEif

ETA: Or this...

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjexozyx8HXAhXCC8AKHW1ICY8QqOcBCCgwAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F9e637940-c95a-11e7-ab18-7a9fb7d6163e&usg=AOvVaw1izBkBXF-gjPqdeKP5Xr2X
 
Last edited:
 
The Don said:
Sadly no, :(

I guess I'd need a proxy...
Click to expand...

ft.com let's you read their articles if you come in via google (if you haven't searched for the article too obviously).
These keywords gave the article as the 2nd hit for me:
uk government bankers free movement
 
GnaGnaMan said:
ft.com let's you read their articles if you come in via google (if you haven't searched for the article too obviously).
These keywords gave the article as the 2nd hit for me:
uk government bankers free movement
Click to expand...

Thanks :)

Empty meaningless promises:

Repeating his reassurances about protecting bankers and City workers ability to work in the UK after the referendum, Philip Hammond said restricting high-skilled migration was “not where the problem lies”.

“When the public says they have problem with migration, they are not talking about computer professors, brain surgeons, or senior managers”, Mr Hammond told MPs at the Treasury Select Committee on Wednesday.

He said he “cannot conceive” of any new migration controls that would prevent large banks from moving workers around difference parts of their business as this was “essential for the smooth operating of the [UK] economy”.
Click to expand...

Will likely require far more paperwork and in any case it'll be pointless if passporting is lost

In any case it's clear in Germany, if you're not from the EU the barriers are higher
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom