UK General Discussion: Rishecession

[Torrain]

Ah. Thanks for the run-down.

No worries - hopefully it won't all be out of date by the morning!

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Ah. Thanks for the run-down.

No worries - hopefully it won't all be out of date by the morning!

"A week is a long time in politics" - Harold Wilson

[Torie]

How are goods handled that are shipped into the EU from NI that have had substantial value added in Great  Britain with a bit more in NI that would be subject to tariff and regulation if shipped directly from London to Paris? How are hybrid goods handled?

[Antonio the Sixth]

This whole process seems rife for fraud. Why is the EU bending over backwards to accommodate the Tories' insane demands when we have all the leverage and they're a moribund government that can barely hope to limp around another year or two? This is pathetic.

[Cassius]

This whole process seems rife for fraud. Why is the EU bending over backwards to accommodate the Tories' insane demands when we have all the leverage and they're a moribund government that can barely hope to limp around another year or two? This is pathetic.

Exports from NI to the EU accounted for approximately 0.04% of the EU’s total GDP in 2021 (it’ll be higher now given that we’re post pandemic but not massively so). Even if there is some fraud (which is basically unavoidable under any trading arrangement) it won’t amount to anything more than a drop in the ocean (and of course, trade from NI to the EU will still be subject to normal customs processes). I assume the EU negotiators took the view that, given the enormous problems the bloc is facing due to issues arising on… the other flank, a tiny amount of fraud was a price worth paying for maintaining amicable relations with the British government and putting the running sore of the Northern Ireland protocol to bed for the foreseeable future so the EU can deal with more pressing problems.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This whole process seems rife for fraud. Why is the EU bending over backwards to accommodate the Tories' insane demands when we have all the leverage and they're a moribund government that can barely hope to limp around another year or two? This is pathetic.

Exports from NI to the EU accounted for approximately 0.04% of the EU’s total GDP in 2021 (it’ll be higher now given that we’re post pandemic but not massively so). Even if there is some fraud (which is basically unavoidable under any trading arrangement) it won’t amount to anything more than a drop in the ocean (and of course, trade from NI to the EU will still be subject to normal customs processes). I assume the EU negotiators took the view that, given the enormous problems the bloc is facing due to issues arising on… the other flank, a tiny amount of fraud was a price worth paying for maintaining amicable relations with the British government and putting the running sore of the Northern Ireland protocol to bed for the foreseeable future so the EU can deal with more pressing problems.

I'd imagine there are a lot of producers who want into the common market but would be happy to avoid playing by its rules. If the net is too loose, you bet they're gonna go right through it. Maybe I'm misjudging how loose it really is - hopefully I am. We'll see. But this is a concern you'd expect Eurocrats to take seriously at least.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

One thing to note is this agreement scuppers (and for good) the insane plan of the Johnson government to simply ignore the rules around the NI Protocol, legislation for which was technically still moving through parliament and which will now be scrapped. Dodging a completely stupid and entirely unnecessary trade war is a good thing from pretty much any sane perspective. Another thing to note is that, and for various different reasons, this will make the process of moving towards greater alignment between the EU and the UK easier over the medium-term.

[Torie]

One would think that if exports from NI to the EU went up to the degree that it could only be explained by illegal trans shipments from the UK, rather than internal NI economic activity, that there would be a course correction.

I was wondering myself whether Ukraine had something to do with the more positive atmosphere.

[Oryxslayer]

One thing to note is this agreement scuppers (and for good) the insane plan of the Johnson government to simply ignore the rules around the NI Protocol, legislation for which was technically still moving through parliament and which will now be scrapped. Dodging a completely stupid and entirely unnecessary trade war is a good thing from pretty much any sane perspective. Another thing to note is that, and for various different reasons, this will make the process of moving towards greater alignment between the EU and the UK easier over the medium-term.

This I think is the reason for the outcome. Because while it appears the EU has a lot of leverage,  the UK here has the gasoline and matches. Nobody except maybe the true blue Tories and the DUP wants a situation that encourages a return to vigilante violence. Maybe this will change if SF forms the next Irish govt and pursues accerationism, but for now all actors want the status quo. Therefore,  the UK threatening with brinkmanship encourages both to seek an amenable outcome.

[Antonio the Sixth]

One thing to note is this agreement scuppers (and for good) the insane plan of the Johnson government to simply ignore the rules around the NI Protocol, legislation for which was technically still moving through parliament and which will now be scrapped. Dodging a completely stupid and entirely unnecessary trade war is a good thing from pretty much any sane perspective. Another thing to note is that, and for various different reasons, this will make the process of moving towards greater alignment between the EU and the UK easier over the medium-term.

This I think is the reason for the outcome. Because while it appears the EU has a lot of leverage,  the UK here has the gasoline and matches. Nobody except maybe the true blue Tories and the DUP wants a situation that encourages a return to vigilante violence. Maybe this will change if SF forms the next Irish govt and pursues accerationism, but for now all actors want the status quo. Therefore,  the UK threatening with brinkmanship encourages both to seek an amenable outcome.

But what you're describing is basically the logic of appeasement. If the UK can threaten to tear up is own treaties, renege on its commitments, and potentially spark a new civil war, and gets something out of it, then it will be encouraged to do it again. This is basically the same logic of those who argue we should stop supporting Ukraine in order to deescalate tensions with Russia (albeit obviously with much lower stakes).

The only way we have international rules is if there is a price for breaking them. To throw the Tories and DUP a bone here is to enable their irresponsible behavior and make the next border crisis all the more dangerous.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That's not what's happened here at all: Sunak isn't Johnson and stupid threats won't have been made. Instead it just happens that this is mutually beneficial, and removing Johnson's brainless and thuggish strategy from the table entirely will have been part of the attraction to the EU. Where there is deference to the Conservative Party's toxic internal politics is the fact that everyone is carefully avoiding drawing too much attention to that fact. Negotiation doesn't have to be a contest and generally works better when it isn't: the platonically ideal outcome is generally an arrangement that both sides can live with but which leaves each perhaps mildly (but only mildly) disappointed. That a lot of the Brexit negotiations have taken on a more aggressive, competitive (and can we say macho? Unfortunately, yes, we probably can) aspect has been more of a comment on the sort of people conducting them, especially after the fall of May, than the nature of negotiation.

[Antonio the Sixth]

That's not what's happened here at all: Sunak isn't Johnson and stupid threats won't have been made. Instead it just happens that this is mutually beneficial, and removing Johnson's brainless and thuggish strategy from the table entirely will have been part of the attraction to the EU. Where there is deference to the Conservative Party's toxic internal politics is the fact that everyone is carefully avoiding drawing too much attention to that fact. Negotiation doesn't have to be a contest and generally works better when it isn't: the platonically ideal outcome is generally an arrangement that both sides can live with but which leaves each perhaps mildly (but only mildly) disappointed. That a lot of the Brexit negotiations have taken on a more aggressive, competitive (and can we say macho? Unfortunately, yes, we probably can) aspect has been more of a comment on the sort of people conducting them, especially after the fall of May, than the nature of negotiation.

That's fair, but even from this perspective, it still seems to me that the thuggishness of BoJo's strategy might have played the role in helping the EU acquiesce to more than it would have otherwise - even if only in the sense that they're all the more eager to get a deal now that there's someone more responsible in charge of things. I'll grant that my worries about this "setting a precedent" might be a bit exaggerated - after all, Sunak is probably staying on until 2024 and then Starmer will have a good five years to himself, so it will be some time before the Brexit arsonists will be in charge of things again. Still, though, I hope you can see why the dynamics of how this went leave a bitter taste in my mouth. Especially if you compare it to how the EU dealt with Tsipras, who actually had legitimate reasons to oppose the sh*t the EU was forcing down his throat, and was forced to accept even worse conditions as a result. Of course, the power balance is different here, but if all there is to these negotiations is a power balance, well, then the question of whether there are any actual rules can and will be raised again.

[CumbrianLefty]

I do think you are reading this slightly wrong.

Sunak has actually had to accede to a fair amount his party won't really like - in particular his saying the ECHR's jurisdiction is here to stay will not please quite a few Tory MPs at all.

[Storr]

Too bad UK never had a situation like that before...

https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1630588288758173697?s=20

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I do think you are reading this slightly wrong.

Sunak has actually had to accede to a fair amount his party won't really like - in particular his saying the ECHR's jurisdiction is here to stay will not please quite a few Tory MPs at all.

Implicitly he's also making it clear that regulations will not differ substantially from EU ones in the near future. Now, while there's no reason for them to (quite the opposite), there's an element in the Conservative Parliamentary Party that would wish for substantive differences just to have substantive differences.

[Cassius]

That's not what's happened here at all: Sunak isn't Johnson and stupid threats won't have been made. Instead it just happens that this is mutually beneficial, and removing Johnson's brainless and thuggish strategy from the table entirely will have been part of the attraction to the EU. Where there is deference to the Conservative Party's toxic internal politics is the fact that everyone is carefully avoiding drawing too much attention to that fact. Negotiation doesn't have to be a contest and generally works better when it isn't: the platonically ideal outcome is generally an arrangement that both sides can live with but which leaves each perhaps mildly (but only mildly) disappointed. That a lot of the Brexit negotiations have taken on a more aggressive, competitive (and can we say macho? Unfortunately, yes, we probably can) aspect has been more of a comment on the sort of people conducting them, especially after the fall of May, than the nature of negotiation.

That's fair, but even from this perspective, it still seems to me that the thuggishness of BoJo's strategy might have played the role in helping the EU acquiesce to more than it would have otherwise - even if only in the sense that they're all the more eager to get a deal now that there's someone more responsible in charge of things. I'll grant that my worries about this "setting a precedent" might be a bit exaggerated - after all, Sunak is probably staying on until 2024 and then Starmer will have a good five years to himself, so it will be some time before the Brexit arsonists will be in charge of things again. Still, though, I hope you can see why the dynamics of how this went leave a bitter taste in my mouth. Especially if you compare it to how the EU dealt with Tsipras, who actually had legitimate reasons to oppose the sh*t the EU was forcing down his throat, and was forced to accept even worse conditions as a result. Of course, the power balance is different here, but if all there is to these negotiations is a power balance, well, then the question of whether there are any actual rules can and will be raised again.

The EU is not, never has been and never will be a rules based organisation. It’s a fundamentally political organisation. You should know that by now.

Anyway, from my perspective there are things about this agreement that I don't like. Nonetheless, it represents some surprisingly decent gains in comparison to the previous agreement, so we may as well support it (in the same sense as the old deal represented the "freedom to achieve freedom").

[Хahar 🤔]

Who will be the first Tory to cut the Gordian knot by pointing out that all of these problems could be solved by tearing up the Good Friday Agreement and getting rid of Northern Ireland?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Too bad UK never had a situation like that before...

https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1630588288758173697?s=20

Gibraltar probably wants in.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The EU is not, never has been and never will be a rules based organisation. It’s a fundamentally political organisation. You should know that by now.

You have this really nasty habit of responding to "ought" arguments with "is" statements. I was hoping you'd keep it on the down low for a while after I thoroughly schooled you on it a couple weeks ago, but I guess I should never underestimate your shamelessness.

Anyway, from my perspective there are things about this agreement that I don't like. Nonetheless, it represents some surprisingly decent gains in comparison to the previous agreement, so we may as well support it (in the same sense as the old deal represented the "freedom to achieve freedom").

Well, the fact that you like this deal is pretty damning evidence against it.

[Torrain]

Isabel Oakeshott, who co-wrote Matt Hancock's book, and was given access to his WhatsApp, has leaked them in their entirety to the Telegraph.

It's all still trickling out, but here's the inital highlights/lowlights:

• Hancock rejected plans to test members of the community for COVID when visiting care homes, against the advice of Chris Whitty.
• Hancock lobbied George Osbourne, then Editor of the Evening Standard, for complimentary coverage in exchange for access.
• Jacob Rees-Mogg successfully lobbied Hancock for additional COVID tests for his children, at a time when there was a national shortage.

Whole thing can be found here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/lockdown-files/

Perhaps worth noting- everyone's acting in their own self-interest here. Oakeshott is the domestic partner of Reform UK's leader Richard Tice, and appears to have broken an NDA. The Telegraph is using this to further their anti-lockdown crusade. And Hancock is Hancock.

[afleitch]

What I've found interesting in recent years is how the once 'reputable' right wing press have trashed themselves by choice. In the US you can argue there was some market demand for our but given sliding sales and online engagement, everything from constant TERF pieces, to Roald Dahl, to obsessions over Meghan... you're finding a more reasonable, in terms to what issues actually matter to most people, outlook in the red tops.

I say by 'choice'. There's some proprietary or editorial pressure on the scales of course.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why would anyone trust Isabel Oakeshott with sensitive information, ever? She accidentally got one of her previous sources imprisoned!

[EastAnglianLefty]

What I've found interesting in recent years is how the once 'reputable' right wing press have trashed themselves by choice. In the US you can argue there was some market demand for our but given sliding sales and online engagement, everything from constant TERF pieces, to Roald Dahl, to obsessions over Meghan... you're finding a more reasonable, in terms to what issues actually matter to most people, outlook in the red tops.

I say by 'choice'. There's some proprietary or editorial pressure on the scales of course.

My pet theory is that this is down to declining circulation - it's no longer possible to run it with the pretence it's a commercial enterprise, so the only reason to own a broadsheet is that you want a pulpit that regurgitates your opinions back to you. Their audience has changed from the readers to the proprietors.

[Cassius]

The EU is not, never has been and never will be a rules based organisation. It’s a fundamentally political organisation. You should know that by now.

You have this really nasty habit of responding to "ought" arguments with "is" statements. I was hoping you'd keep it on the down low for a while after I thoroughly schooled you on it a couple weeks ago, but I guess I should never underestimate your shamelessness.

Anyway, from my perspective there are things about this agreement that I don't like. Nonetheless, it represents some surprisingly decent gains in comparison to the previous agreement, so we may as well support it (in the same sense as the old deal represented the "freedom to achieve freedom").

Well, the fact that you like this deal is pretty damning evidence against it.

Oops, I forgot about that little diatribe, I must revisit it. Point is that I’m an ‘is’ type of person, whereas you’re not, so we’re never going to see eye-to-eye on the old ‘is-ought’. I do wonder what the point of having an ‘ought’ worldview is when the chances of actualising the ‘ought’ are so painfully slim, but hey-ho, I’m not an ‘ought’ kinda girl.

[Torrain]

Why would anyone trust Isabel Oakeshott with sensitive information, ever? She accidentally got one of her previous sources imprisoned!