UK and EU agree Brexit trade deal

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/24/uk-eu-agree-brexit-trade-deal-agreement

by Tomte • 6 years ago

239 690 6 years ago

Tomte3• 6 years ago

Johnson about to speak: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC7ofw33XbQ

zests2• 6 years ago

Is this the final shoe to drop? The gamble payed off. Brexit does not seem like a terrible idea if they get tariff free trade. I can’t believe the EU would agree to this.

mytailorisrich6• 6 years ago

We need to look at the actual deal but tariff-free trade in itself is still much worse than the previous situation.

Being in the EU/single market meant that UK businesses and individuals could do business, including in services, throughout the single market (EU, Switzerland, Norway) like if it was all in the UK: completely free and unrestricted for everything. Going from that to just being able to export goods with no tariffs would be a massive step down that would have a profound impact, especially on services (the bulk of the UK's economy).

blibble6• 6 years ago

the single market for goods is vast and nearly complete, but the single market for services never really existed

orange_tee7• 6 years ago

As always with any trade agreement there will be winners and losers on both sides.

Sure on the macro level you can run some numbers and conclude that one is the overall winner, but this is of little meaning to the people. What is more meaningful is for each individual to figure out if they stand to gain or lose.

If the EU agreed to "sell out" an industry, that is only because they got something in return for some other industry. This is one of the criticisms of trade agreements in general. The government basically picks winners and losers... their say can make or break whole industries.

rjknight• 6 years ago

Normally we don’t think of trade in terms of “winners” and “losers”, at least in absolute terms. Any restriction on trade reduces the overall level of possible economic activity, so a situation that reduces trade relative to the alternative is an overall loss.

We can talk about “winners” and “losers” in relative terms, if we accept that “winning” just means “losing less than the other side”.

Of course, this isn’t a purely economic question: people who voted for Brexit did so in part because they valued other things (e.g. restrictions on immigration, national sovereignty, national democratic self-determination) more than the economic cost that comes from having them.

JohnTHaller• 6 years ago

"Businesses will face extra paperwork and costs when trading with the UK’s biggest export market. Freedom of movement for most UK nationals will end, with restrictions imposed on stays in EU member states. As a “third country” to the EU, coronavirus travel restrictions could be imposed on UK nationals as of 1 January."

zests2• 6 years ago

All I can remember from the last month is “Brexit was a bad idea —- without a trade deal the UK is ruined.”

YawningAngel• 6 years ago

The UK economy is mostly services based, so tariff free trade in goods, while obviously useful, is not that impactful for us

Fanch22• 6 years ago

Maybe? Until the fishing right are denounced by France and the deal vetoed?

Honestly, i think they will be a war between Brittany and britain's fishermen if the deal is not done correctly. I've heard fishermen cooperative planned their motor issues front of port entries for the next two month, issues that will prevent them to move out the way and prevent England to sell fresh fish (at least around St-Malo, and Malouins are the less obtuse bretons imho, i will probably be worse west of there).

I fear this small issue of fishing will be a pain for the next decade

IfOnlyYouKnew4• 6 years ago

Nobody cares about fishing. It's a rounding error in any economic statistic. Its only use was as a nationalistic red herring, something that people actually understand and that could ultimately be sold as a win while giving the EU everything it wants on the matters that matter.

tsimionescu2• 6 years ago

It sounds bad, but it actually means that Britain gets to export everything they exported before to the EU (so the EU is no worse off), but now the UK have no say on the rules for what they are allowed to export or not.

As a silly example, if the EU decided to ban any candy painted in british racing green, the UK would have to abide by that decision; while, if it were in the EU, it could have likely blocked it.

richrichardsson2• 6 years ago

"we are not bound by EU rules"

Except if the UK wants to export anything to the EU they must abide by the EUs rules for those things (without any say in those rules what-so-ever).

Retric6• 6 years ago

Plenty of other places to export stuff outside the EU, which makes compliance optional.

EForEndeavour• 6 years ago

The EU comprises roughly half of the UK's total trade activity [0], making this attitude of "plenty of other places to export stuff outside the EU" seem rather overconfident. Why would the UK consider compliance with the entity that generates half their trade "optional"?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_pa...

lou13062• 6 years ago

Sure, but the European economic zone is both the closest & richest foreign market. Replacing it is not that easy.

jorge-d• 6 years ago

While this is true, the UK export to the UE was around 45% of the total shares (2018)[1]. So the Brits might look at new markets but cutting that share because they don't want to comply with regulations would disrupt their exports.

[1] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...

imtringued3• 6 years ago

That argument would be fine if the UK already had some negotiated trade deals lined up. The truth is that for the UK the Brexit happened way too quickly despite all the cries that the EU will try to keep them as long as possible. Yet it took them four years to figure out what they even wanted from the EU. If it took them so long how come they were so confident about Brexit in the first place?

zelos• 6 years ago

Yes, the Brussels effect:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect

One could say the UK has given back control...

blibble6• 6 years ago

this becomes less of an issue with each passing year as the EU's share of world GDP decreases

https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/GDP%20graph%20world%20vs%...

patrickaljord• 6 years ago

Isn't that the case of any country around the world? Doesn't mean the whole world should join the EU.

Leherenn• 6 years ago

Most do not have the same volume/percentage with the EU though.

richrichardsson2• 6 years ago

Sure, but the point is that we had some sort of say in the regulations whilst being bound to them, now we don't. That doesn't sound like "control" to me.

rualca• 6 years ago

Isn't that the case of any country around the world?

And now bear in mind that complying with EU regulation was one of the main propaganda points of the pro-Brexit campaign.

It really makes no sense, but hey at least nacionalista demagogues got their way.

pgcj_poster• 6 years ago

Doesn't mean the whole world should join the EU

Maybe this is a stupid question, but why not?111

lispm• 6 years ago

A country might want to trade with its direct (and near) neighbors as frictionless as possible. That's where usually the majority of the trade is going to and coming from... for example factories in the UK have been a part of the production networks in the EU with extensive just-in-time production logistics.

mhh__10• 6 years ago

Most countries aren't 20 miles from the EU

DiogenesKynikos• 6 years ago

This is a visualization of the UK's export destinations: [1].

Exports to a big chunk of that diagram are about to get much more difficult.

1. https://oec.world/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/export/gbr/show...

LatteLazy13• 6 years ago

Don't forget, before we had a say (even a veto sometimes) over EU rules. Now we actually do have to just accept whatever Brussels decides for the bendiness of our bananas...

hardlianotion12• 6 years ago

Quite some effort has been expended to ensure that this is not the case.

krona4• 6 years ago

One tends to loose friends and get alienated when you start throwing veto's around. It's just not very British, is it?

throwaway22452• 6 years ago

I'm not sure that Britain is exporting a huge number of bananas to the EU...

lmm4• 6 years ago

And how did that work out for the UK? The UK opened up their procurement to anywhere in the EU, but the EU found ways to avoid offering service contracts to UK companies. National operators from the EU run most of the UK's trains, while the UK's government gets blocked from even running its own, yet alone anyone else's. Countries with manufacturing economies and a... relaxed attitude to actually following the rules benefited; countries with service economies and a strong sense of fair play lost out.

gorgoiler4• 6 years ago

Two counter examples worth mentioning: prisoner suffrage and air quality. Two different kinds of EU centralism. Both rejected by the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/14/uk-faile...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirst_v_United_Kingdom_(No_2...

hardlianotion12• 6 years ago

And vice versa.

cosmiccatnap• 6 years ago

Four years ago the various members of the UK parliament voted on wether or not to stick their genitalia into an electric switch. After 4 years of debate between the half that wanted it and the half that did not they have come to the conclusion that they should just pretend to do so in order to make the various people they represent believe that their best course of action is to once again bear the blunt of the pain for a stupid decision some politicians made.

Soon many UK citizans will be quite shocked to find out that this might not have been the best idea for them and it won't really effect those who ask them to go through with it to begin with.

NikolaeVarius• 6 years ago

It doesn't seem like its completely over yet? Both the EU and the UK seems to need review interally before it passes. I think Brexit is still technically on the table?

mytailorisrich6• 6 years ago

Brexit happened months ago.

Tsiklon• 6 years ago

Brexit happened at the end of January past. The UK has left the European Union. From February through to the end of this year is a transition period to facilitate further discussions to sort out the state of the future relationship with the EU on Trade and other matters. For the transition period the UK remains aligned with the EU, and a part of the EU Customs Union.

There was a real fear of a cliff edge end of this transition period - this was the "Hard Brexit" scenario which I think you were referring to. This deal - if ratified by both parties - precludes this from occurring.

My issue with the procedure with which the UK has followed here is that there is very limited time to get this deal scrutinised by both Parliament and the Lords (and the EU Parliament on the other side). This is an enormous 2,000 page agreement which will form the basis of the future relationship the UK and all it's industries have with it's closest neighbour. It is precisely the sort of legislation that requires serious scrutiny.

Worse than that, all the businesses affected have a week to prepare for the changes required - This week has two bank holidays in it (these are functionally public holidays, for non UK people). This is going to be a challenge for everyone involved.

funcDropShadow4• 6 years ago

On the EU side every member state has to ratify it as well as the European Parliament. I'd say there is a slim chance, that this will happen in one week.

tremon2• 6 years ago

So in what state does this leave the Northern Irish border? If EU freedom of movement no longer applies, does this mean there will be a hard border between Ireland and Nothern Ireland after all?

orange_tee7• 6 years ago

The border checks will happen between Northern Ireland and Great Britain instead of between Ireland and Northern Ireland. In return for this concession, Northern Ireland will continue following some EU rules.

alimw• 6 years ago

s/UK/GB/

smackay2• 6 years ago

The Americans would never tolerate a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Too much time, effort and blood went into getting the Good Friday Agreement. The border with Northern Ireland still exists, only it got moved to the Irish Sea.

mtmail• 6 years ago

The Americans were not part of the negotiations.

tambourineman88• 6 years ago

No. There's been the Common Travel Area since 1923.

mytailorisrich6• 6 years ago

That does not mean no border. That just means that Irish and British can freely cross the border but may need to show passport/id.

TazeTSchnitzel• 6 years ago

There are special provisions for Northern Ireland, the so-called “backstop”, in the EU withdrawal agreement which was signed a year ago.

MLR• 6 years ago

The UK and Ireland impose passport controls on the EU (Common Travel Area) which won't change, with regards to customs checks we're engaging in a bit of legal theatre to claim that NI is remaining inside the UK customs area but de facto it will be in a customs union with the EU/the Republic of Ireland and the customs border will be between Great Britain and the island of Ireland as a whole.

te_chris• 6 years ago

And there goes the professional services industry

siscia2• 6 years ago

As strong believer in EU, at this point I am quite unsure what the EU it is all about. It is just being able to freely move between countries without officially need a VISA?

As if the problem of moving in a new nation is the strictly bureaucratic one and not the cultural one.

In my understanding from this article UK got everything from they wanted AND they control the supply of their currency. What is the advantage for Italy or Spain to stay in the union?

mytailorisrich6• 6 years ago

The UK will obviously say that they won. The EU will obviously let them. This is politics and letting the UK sells the deal to its own.

The reality is that the UK has lost a lot compared to its previous position as EU member whatever the details of that deal.

siscia2• 6 years ago

What did they lose exactly sorry?

Because at least to me it is not clear at all.

daenney• 6 years ago

I don’t see how one can come to that conclusion based on the article.

As noted, the agreement is 2k pages long. The only real thing the article digs into, and that’s a very generous use of dig, is fisheries, which though a political sticking point isn’t all that interesting or relevant in the grand scheme of things.

The UK already did and always has controlled the supply of their own currency as do many EU member states.

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

It’s really incredible the lack of technical detail there is in reporting of the EU and Brexit. As you say, it’s very difficult to pick out exactly what this means.

Some limitations which I do know of:

* British nationals can’t live and work freely on Europe, so an architect based in London can’t jump on a Eurostar and take a business meeting in Paris by default, they would have to get a visa specific to the country and activity. And their professional qualifications may not be recognised, so would have to operate through local professionals (not sure how that would work in practice).

* Products sold into the EU will have to be recertified for that market, no assumption of regulatory compliance or compatibility. So a lot more red tape and checks in moving products across borders, in particular that will impact food and products built as part of just in time supply chains.

* No ability for British firms to operate in other European countries with equivalent rights as a local company, will have to form subsidiaries instead in many cases.

Would be interested what else people can add.

Closi• 6 years ago

That first limitation you mentioned is not true - you do not need a visa to go for a business meeting, just as you don’t need a visa to go for a meeting in any other country.

The second also isn’t true - no recertification appears to be required but could be required in the future should legislation diverge.

aries19803• 6 years ago

No ability for British firms to operate in other European countries with equivalent rights as a local company, will have to form subsidiaries instead in many cases.

This has never been the case.

To enjoy full rights, you have to have a local office. Tax forms e.g. Hungarian employment tax forms doesn't even accept the UK postcodes as administrative address, let alone grant application forms.

Isinlor3• 6 years ago

No, moving without visa and passports is not related to EU. That's a Schengen Agreement establishing Schengen Area [0]. UK was never part of Schengen Area in the first place.

In practice, free moment of people means that I can go to any EU country and register there as a resident. I just need a birth certificate. Then I can get employment on the same rules as native citizens. It's really easy to do.

Overall EU provides 4 fundamental freedoms:

- Free movement of goods - Free movement of capital - Freedom to establish and provide services - Free movement of persons

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Area

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

My understanding is Schengen is about physical infrastructure and managing visas for third parties, and the EU about the actual rights for member state citizens. The UK was never in Schengen, and that meant that a French person coming to the UK could be stopped at the border, but they would be let through on the basis of rights enshrined in the EU.

funcDropShadow4• 6 years ago

To be clear here: The four freedoms are not related to the Schengen Agreement, they are guaranteed by the European Single Market [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Single_Market

briandear2• 6 years ago

Free movement of goods? Unless it’s Spanish wine. Or vegetables.

Or British meat..

https://www.france24.com/en/20160406-spain-summons-french-am...

https://www.catalannews.com/business/item/catalan-farmers-an...

https://apnews.com/article/8bfc0cd5b74bb238fce6c8c64af416d6

GreenWinters• 6 years ago

As if the problem of moving in a new nation is the strictly bureaucratic one and not the cultural one.

Could it be that you are underestimating the importance of (not dealing with) bureaucracy? It determines if you need to collect lots of documents like criminal-records certificates in each country you've lived in, to verify your degree abroad, to do a bunch of medical tests in approved institutions.

It determines what legal restrictions you need to deal with if you change jobs while your work-permit card has the name of your employer on it.

Many opportunities simply won't happen for a person separated from them with a bureaucratic boundary.

mrtksn2• 6 years ago

Not to mention the huge pain in the ass if you want to bring along family or SO.

When it comes to working visas, most of the time you will need to have formal relationship(like marriage) and he/she would't be allowed to work or the options would be extremely limited.

mrtksn2• 6 years ago

That's from UK's perspective. From EU's perspective EU got everything they want and they made a brochure about it: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/eu-uk_trade_and_c...

What is the advantage for Italy or Spain to stay in the union?

The single market and and access to trade deals EU negotiated with the rest of the world. You may say that maybe Italy and Spain should get their own trade deals instead of EU's but EU's trade agreements are theirs already.

EU is not a shop in Brussels where some foreigners produce regulations or agreements. Each country elects and appoints people who do these things.

yokaze• 6 years ago

The financial sector is not part of the agreement. So a lot of financial trades based in London for the EU will likely relocate.

And as others pointed out, they are still bound by EU regulations apparently also future ones without having a say in it.

Of course, they will tell you that they got what they wanted.

akmarinov2• 6 years ago

All the financial institutions have already opened a EU office. They didn’t wait around until New Year’s to see whether a deal would come through.

Hamuko• 6 years ago

EU is basically a system to keep a bunch of closely located countries to not wage a global war with each other every 25 years by making them co-operate and co-depend on each other.

ihateg00gle• 6 years ago

Nonsense. EU exists since 1993 and there were no wars in Europe (except couple of small conflicts) since 1945.

estaseuropano8• 6 years ago

EU provides trade, geopolitical weight, smooth proceeded across borders (no passport or customs checks from Poland to Portugal..), reduces friction and competition between the neighbours (first big policy ~60 years ago was the Common Agricultural Policy CAP, which provides common subsidy levels and avoids conflicting subsidies/races to the bottom), enables standards, builds trust in institutions across borders (from passports to taxes to the legal system), provides great trade agreement terms with third countries and visa-free travel to 50+ countries, and most of all it always was and remains a peace project.

riffraff4• 6 years ago

Currency is independent from the EU participation, plenty of EU countries are outside of the eurozone.

deergomoo2• 6 years ago

What an enormous waste of time and money for everyone involved Brexit has been. To think this entire farce followed from a non-binding referendum with a 2% majority in favour.

danishdev• 6 years ago

There's lots of citizens of UK happy today. For some it could be a waste of time. For some others, knowing UK laws are written in UK, it's a relief.

deergomoo2• 6 years ago

I'm happy for them (truly—this isn't snark), but unfortunately I have far more faith in EU legislators to support my rights, my community, and my general wellbeing than a Conservative Party government.

rasz3• 6 years ago

Im guessing those are upper owner class, the ones never setting a foot in a supermarket.

mhh__10• 6 years ago

Put it this way, people will lose their jobs because of increased friction with our closest trading partner - the whole sovereignty-argument is complete drivel: If we were able to leave unilaterally then we were - by definition - never not sovereign.

This may be lost on those not from the UK, but a huge amount of the cultural angle of the leave-vote was based on a "We don't want to be ruled by Germans, we beat them in WW2" - it was never about anything concrete, it's just about a vague fuck-you (in the wrong direction) in response to the Status Quo.

The whole modus operandi of Brexit - for decades - is to just make up anything that sticks and blame it on the EU, and because the EU doesn't have a public face in British life there's no feedback.

For example: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/18/boris-johns...

In Summary: We've either done something bad or pointless, all to please people who will be long dead before we get to have our cake and eat it in the future.

IfOnlyYouKnew4• 6 years ago

Well, they are somewhat delusional. I don't mind them being happy, so don't tell them the following:

Most of what they think of as "law", such as criminal law or the rules of the road, always were written in the UK.

The "law" that was being written in Brussels (with plenty of UK input) was to a large extend rather specific and trade-related. Yes, it was evil EU legislation that mandated orange juice to contain actual juice from real oranges. Terrible!

All that will remain, though.

jasdine8172• 6 years ago

Considering that UK businesses will now have to follow rules that the UK has no say in making, doesn't really feel like a great improvement. Especially since UK law was always legally supreme and new EU laws had to be ratified by parliament anyway.

shostack• 6 years ago

For certain hostile foreign actors I'm sure dividing the EU in this manner has payed off in spades.

estaseuropano8• 6 years ago

UK threatened several times in the negotiations to basically make itself a tax haven...

hermitcrab2• 6 years ago

I can imagine Putin laughing himself to sleep every night thinking about Brexit and Trump.

hermitcrab2• 6 years ago

And that referendum was only called to try to shore divisions over europe within one political party.

And the leader of the leave vote clearly didn't expect or want to win the referendum. He was just intending to use it as a political springboard.

And many of the people voting leave clearly had no real idea what they were voting for.

And it is very likely to lead to Scotland leaving the UK. What a mess that is going to be.

What a tragedy.

tobylane2• 6 years ago

Two parts of this I feel need stressing.

The trade agreement – running to 2,000 pages – ... a week before the end of the Brexit transition period.

2020 was supposed to be the transition period. We've been told by the government for the last few months that we need to prepare, but for what future circumstances would we have worked on before today? There is technically one work hour left before Tuesday.

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

I was assuming they’d announce the deal with a few months of extra time before it’s actually enforced, surely this is not actually coming into force in a week?

Tomte3• 6 years ago

Yes, it is. Provisionally.

The UK plans to push this through Parliament this year, I think, but the EU side will need a few weeks.

rasz3• 6 years ago

Been to a supermarket lately? Empty shelves and rationing like former Soviet Bloc :o

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20201222-supply-trucks-st...

pjc506• 6 years ago

Other way round: announcing it in advance allows time to bicker. This is at the last minute so it can be presented to am exhausted parliament who have to sign it before the truck backlog gets worse. There was no other way a deal could be achieved.

(Does anyone know if the deal includes ECJ jurisdiction for anything? That was a sticking point)

notahacker5• 6 years ago

It's not accidental. Less opportunity for scrutiny makes it easier for the UK government to sell it as a win. Same as 14 months ago when we got a similar amount of grandstanding about 'no deal' being a realistic option, followed by an 'oven ready deal' and transition arrangement that saw so little scrutiny the government itself decided it was suboptimal several months and one 'we got a deal' election later. And a quarter of zero economic growth before COVID, because uncertainty is almost as unhelpful to people who don't bullshit the public for a living as it's helpful to certain politicians.

pydry• 6 years ago

I thought this too. The EU probably got what they wanted but Boris timed this to escape scrutiny and put the screws on parliament.

joefife2• 6 years ago

No trade deal will ever come close to the deal we had as full members of the EU.

ed25519FUUU• 6 years ago

Being part of the EU was all good and nothing at all bad.

izacus• 6 years ago

Is there a source about this from a non-UK media as well? The title and quotes seem cherry picked to reinforce media propaganda from one side.

djmobley22• 6 years ago

For the benefit of non-UK readers, the source in question (The Guardian) is a left-wing newspaper that is highly critical of the current UK government, and has been opposed to Brexit throughout the process.

hardlianotion12• 6 years ago

The Guardian has gone from being a left wing newspaper critical of Conservative governments in general to something rather shriller that I will no longer subscribe to.

And the alternative "heavies" are as bad or worse. Something rather horrible has happened to British newspapers.

sorokod• 6 years ago

The Guardian is also a relatively reliable source of world news, one of the reasons it is frequently mentioned on HN.

Orthw20202• 6 years ago

As bad as it is it offers a good insight into minds of a large portion of the population.

orange_tee7• 6 years ago

ERASMUS is gone for UK. Quite interesting.

Probably universities felt like they were losing out, since they can sell those places to international (non-EU) students for much higher prices.

EDIT: I'm talking about UK universities obviously.

BTinfinity• 6 years ago

Being replaced with a new scheme (The "Turing Scheme") which will be very similar to ERASMUS but will be worldwide instead of limited to Europe. [1] Sounds like British students will have a little more mobility, not sure if it'll benefit the British universities themselves though

[1] https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1342138413831630849

lentil_soup• 6 years ago

Let's wait until it's actually implemented. Also, there was nothing stopping having that promised worldwide scheme before

felixr• 6 years ago

I am pretty sure such a scheme cannot be introduced unilaterally. It also requires other countries and universities to receive your students. Where Erasmus is an established student exchange programme, the UK or the UK universities will have to build relationships with foreign unis. And I doubt somehow that this programme will short/mid-term provide any more mobility due to lack of a university network.

sleavey4• 6 years ago

Continued membership of ERASMUS was negotiated but the UK was unwilling to continue to pay the same rate it did before, which makes me think the replacement UK scheme will either fund fewer places or only fund them in cheaper countries.

oxfordmale3• 6 years ago

The Turing scheme is only for UK students, and, given the Tories track record, will be underfunded.

vr465• 6 years ago

Good luck to students who can’t afford to fly around the world to these new universities, as opposed to busing it into the EU easily.

zvr• 6 years ago

It will also be interesting to see what the university fee structure will eventually be like.

EU students who have started a degree with a reduced fee are especially worried about next years. And in Scotland there are already four tiers of fees: Scotland, rest of UK, EU, and international (other).

pjc506• 6 years ago

I've not heard anything like this from UK universities.

Symbiote8• 6 years ago

The British universities are disappointed. They profited from ERASMUS (in money, though I'm not sure how).

I found a statement from their "leader" earlier, I'm not sure where.

Symbiote8• 6 years ago

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/dec/24/uk-student...

Here is a source.

rvba5• 6 years ago

Even less Brits learn foreign languages and EU countries.

Raising a new generation of ignorants.

And Brits already lagged behind - a very small number can speak any foreign language.

smurf_t• 6 years ago

A summary can be found here https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_...

rwmj4• 6 years ago

An even better one here: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attach...

TechBro8615• 6 years ago

Is there any similar summary available from a UK government source?

rwmj4• 6 years ago

The UK government prepared this:

https://www.scribd.com/document/489048219/Government-Analysi...

It was leaked, but then the government decided not to release it, likely because it's nonsense.

seanwilson• 6 years ago

Are there any major benefits for the UK in the deal? The list of changes so far on the BBC site just reads like a big list of negatives.

azalemeth• 6 years ago

Therin lies the fundamental problem of Brexit. (I voted against it). It is _inherently_ a regressive move.

nailer2• 6 years ago

Why? Joining up with a bloc that has so vastly different values between its members, with multiple points of internal chaos - Greece, Ireland, Germany, Portugal, Poland, Sweden - raised against it. An army an an anthem that nobody asked for, when they just wanted a single market. A single nation able to admit anyone they like, who become citizens and therefore able to immigrate to any other nation - it's very clear there are many downsides of EU membership. Not just for the UK but for everyone else.

Keep in mind I was a Remain campaigner - you can find the submissions to HN back in 2016 if you check my post history.

rwmj4• 6 years ago

Not for the UK, but it's been good for Vladimir Putin and others who want to break up the international order for their own selfish reasons.

(Unless you are very well connected evil billionaire, these reasons probably do not align with those of you or your family)

mhh__10• 6 years ago

As documented in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

Threeve303• 6 years ago

I know you're getting downvoted because this sounds political but it is true... Russia is related to this and it is much more than any kind of shenanigans with the Brexit referendum. The geopolitical reality is simple... The EU is expanding East and Russia is expanding West, and so the UK does not want to be pulled into a situation like that where the EU is making all of the decisions. Not to say this is the only reason for Brexit. It is just one of a million.

mhh__10• 6 years ago

It said we're going to get a £350E6 a week on the side of a bus, what more could we need!

aembleton11• 6 years ago

It's incredible how powerful that advert was. Did they even show it outside of London?

brnt• 6 years ago

The whole idea of the EU was to make sure we all find a benefit, and end zero sum thinking. If you've read any of the leaked scoring cards out of London you see how they're fundamentally a bad fit. I pity the British citizens really.

notahacker5• 6 years ago

The benefit to the deal is that without the deal, there would be no free trade with the countries the UK does the majority of its free trade with.

In comparison to remaining, the overall decision to leave whilst putting the deal in place ensure that UK [i] decoupled from a political project it had already negotiated an arms-length relationship with [ii] satisfied the sort of person enraged by seeing Polish shops that we could start denying Polish people visas should we wish to do so, whilst net migration is actually expected to continue at similar levels to before and we now face similar mostly theoretical restrictions on our own ability to live in EU countries and [iii] negotiated a slightly larger share of a fish quota, a political priority which has seen significantly more lucrative industries take the hit instead.

We also have more ability to not follow EU law or product/service guidelines, but whether that's a benefit or not depends on which person you ask who's affected by which regulation

gghhzzgghhzz2• 6 years ago

The four freedoms of the EU are asserting the primacy of free markets and the importance of trade. Much of the rest of the EU is structures to try and tame and regulate the negative effects of these freedoms, and then endlessly work around closing loopholes in the previous regulations.

I think much of the EU laws were breakable / bendable / vetoable especially as one of the large members, so I don't think that was really a concern.

The issue was that the EU was held up as an example onto which to project (in the case of the UK at least) some rather right wing economics. The primacy of markets, the need for competition, the unease of public or cooperative ownership, the importance of trade no matter what was being traded, fiscal responsibility i.e. 'balancing the books' which was the theoretical underpinning for austerity.

It will still function in this role, but maybe with less of a role.

In addition . The Common Agricultural Policy. This is a horrific way of subsidising some environmental destructive practices, and in the case of the UK at least a way of reinforcing regressive historical land ownership and inequality issues. This now ends in the UK.

The main thing I see though is that it will force UK to focus on structural issues in their economy and society and environment that were previously at best just ignored (and contributed themselves to the result of the Brexit vote), at worst assumed that they were being handled by an assumed enlightened and benevolent superstrate. When all that existed was just another artificial power structure that was subject to just the same issues of all power structures; politics, vested interests, lobbying, control by capital, corruption. Only it was of a distance from everyday life and normal political scrutiny and engagement that people could just outsource some idealised values onto it and ignore it or at least offer it none of the scepticism and scrutiny that structures closer to them were subjected to.

LatteLazy13• 6 years ago

Doesn't cover services, aka 80% of UK gdp!?

mhh__10• 6 years ago

That sounds like Remoaner talk, we wouldn't want that now would we.

Edit: I'm curious if downvoters think I'm not being sarcastic?

LatteLazy13• 6 years ago

The most frustrating thing about this will be leavers acting like they won. They achieved exactly what everyone said would happen: a mix of no trade for vital sectors (FS) and trade for pointless ones (fishing!?) only under EU rules that we now have zero say in.

So frustrating.

Indont think anyone would vote for this over just remaining if they actually understood it.

/FrustratedBrit

LatteLazy13• 6 years ago

Sorry you were down voted, I enjoyed our chat :)

cameronh905• 6 years ago

Services don't have tariffs anyway, and the EU single market was pretty poor when it comes to services. It has improved a bit over the last decade - and it was a focus for the future - but the situation as it stands is there isn't much of a single services market to do a deal with anyway.

LatteLazy13• 6 years ago

Financial services don't have tarrifs because they're totally banned in many cases. You can't offer banking services or insurance in the EU unless your regulated by an EU member or covered under a trade agreement. But a bank etc in one member country can offer them in all other member countries, that's called passporting.

Right now, if you want to IPO a Germany company, your friendly Goldman Sachs banker in London can do the whole thing over email.

But from 00:01CET 01/01/21, that banker will need to move to the EU, establish residency, get approval to open GoldmansEU, open it (including getting the correct training and certification and moving a tonne of money there), setup to pay taxes and abide by local and EU regs, and then call the client back.

He'll sack his UK staff or try and take them. He'll stop paying UK taxes. He'll stop funding the UKs Museums and Operas and Lamboghini dealerships.

Financial services for the world's largest, most developed market has been a massive boon for the UK. Its funded everything else we've done.

Passporting was the core economic thing we wanted in a trade deal. Fishing and farming and manufacturing are all worth less than just banking. And we didn't get it.

But we can continue to sell some cod as long as we abide by Brussels decisions so I guess I need to retrain...

tgsovlerkhgsel• 6 years ago

What's the situation with GDPR and data transfers? Can companies still claim GDPR compliance by providing a point of contact in the UK? Are there new restrictions on EU->UK data transfers (e.g. a EU company hiring a UK data processor)?

oxfordmale3• 6 years ago

There is at least temporarily equivalence until July. This was agreed before this deal was announced.

newdude116• 6 years ago

Brexit had many reasons. Many different motivations. I don't think Clown Boris even understood this. For him Brexit was a (successful) train ride to Prime Minister.

The original, very interesting ideas for brexit, you can find here: https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2020/12/15/alastair-campbell-t...

The average guy who voted for Brexit because of 300MM per week more for the NHS was just an idiot that is getting used.

The UK was the sick man of Europe. Then three things happened.

1. Thatcher made reforms. This is given as a the main/only reason.

2. The UK joined the EC, the precursor of the EU. This is rarely mentioned.

3. The UK found shitloads of oil in the northern see, oil that has mostly run out by now.

So the rise of the sick man of Europe had many reasons. I doubt that the Brexit will bring many benefits. If you are imaginary enslaved, your freedom can also only be imaginary.

gerdesj• 6 years ago

BJ is 56 so six years older than me. He's old enough to remember pre EU UK. The UK joined the EC in 1973 and then we all moved towards the EU. I remember some of the teething troubles: Maggie getting a rebate coz "reasons". We got Concorde (with an e) off the ground with la belle France, etc etc.

There were endless discussions and hand wrangling over wine and grain lakes, butter mountains and other rather rubbish efforts to make inefficient forms of farming work by throwing money at it and storing a huge surplus until it was thrown away. The CAP was not exactly the EU's most glorious achievement. The UK as a manufacturer had already failed to adjust and improve in that area but services found its feet here instead. The old, failing ruler of a massive empire eventually found some peace with her neighbours with some forms of integration. We tried to join the ERM as a prelude to a single currency and that was a bit of a buggeration - it was Black Tuesday (can't remember the day) and we sank millions or billions into that experiment.

The UK is legendary when it comes to creating a massive bureaucracy, add a dash of our EU allies and between us we can create an edifice of truly grand proportions with the worst of all worlds. To cater to the usual prejudices: Instead of getting Germanic efficiency with UK innovation, and French magic and Italian flair and Spanish/Portuguese passion etc etc, we ended up with infighting, intrigue and bitching.

I voted "remain" but now I think that I was wrong. We - the UK can be a far better friend than a SO.

You are not from these parts: a clown is not a proper noun (hence the initial letter is not upper cased), you don't know what a colon is and a see is a form of government and not the big blue wobbly thing that I call a sea. I can't be arsed to comment on your last sentence.

ipnon• 6 years ago

A fair comment until the last paragraph. You should be respectful.

ksec• 6 years ago

I guess Sir Humphrey can rest in peace. :)

( Do Tell me if I am wrong though )

hardlianotion12• 6 years ago

I submit that there is no such thing as an average guy who voted for Brexit because of 300MM per week more for the NHS.

randomsearch3• 6 years ago

Watch Cummings’ presentation on the Brexit campaign and you’ll see how central that was.

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

"I submit that there is no such thing as an average guy who voted for Brexit because of 300MM per week more for the NHS."

It was the overwhelming centrepiece of the Leave campaign, are you really saying it had no effect?

amelius• 6 years ago

The average guy who voted for Brexit because of 300MM per week more for the NHS was just an idiot that is getting used.

Nobody tried to sue him for that lie?

galvin4• 6 years ago

There have been a bunch of fines and sanctions imposed on the various leave campaigns but as far as I can tell they are mostly due to technical violations such as spending over the limits rather than the content of the messages.

That number in particular is grossly misleading but not an outright lie. £350 is a gross figure and doesn't account for the rebates or the money the EU was spending in the UK, not to mention the indirect benefits to the UK's economy.

In other words the UK was supposed to be paying £350 million per week but IIRC the net amount was closer to £150 and even that doesn't account for a variety of other considerations.

Edit: fixed typo

dmje2• 6 years ago

We're basically in the position we were in before Brexit only now it's more expensive and difficult to trade with Europe, it's more expensive and difficult to travel to or work in Europe, and it's stretched the Northern Ireland peace agreement to the edge. But it's ok because that group of posh muppets in the ERG stand to make a wad of cash from their crony mates and we're now a "Sovereign" nation. Which is excellent apart from the fact it's made up faux history bullshit from another era of "great" Britain that never actually existed and certainly doesn't exist in a globally transient world.

The whole thing has been a very, very expensive, entirely farcical (laughable if it wasn't going to royally bugger large swathes of the country) exercise in nihilism.

Bitter much? Yes. Yes I am.

breakfastduck22• 6 years ago

That's a very Europe centric view, though.

It essentially makes compliance to EU law optional for companies operating in the UK. That's a huge advantage. Choose to trade on EU terms with the single market, or choose to trade on other terms with different international targets.

That may not be precisely what you want, but it's not a bad deal for the UK, it's just a different set of terms.

Plus, the EU will do better without us. We've always just complained and delayed their desire for further deep integration between countries.

To paraphrase Boris' quote of 'Having a successful, independent UK over the channel isn't a bad thing for the EU', well neither is it bad for the UK to have an independent EU to trade with, where they can crack on with what they want to do without us disrupting it.

Edit: people seem to be taking this as me 'selling' brexit. Just wanted to discuss the situation, at least it kicked off a chat!

sleavey4• 6 years ago

It essentially makes compliance to EU law optional for companies operating in the UK. That's a huge advantage. Choose to trade on EU terms with the single market, or choose to trade on other terms with international targets.

When the UK was in the EU, it was never a requirement for goods sold to non-EU countries to meet EU regulations. On that front, nothing has changed: selling to EU, you need to meet EU laws; selling elsewhere you need to meet theirs.

Someone3• 6 years ago

“It essentially makes compliance to EU law optional for companies operating in the UK.”

As long as they do not export to the EU or do not sell half-products to firms that export to the EU.

Most exports from UK companies go to the EU, and will have to comply with EU regulations.

For those firms also exporting to non-EU countries, chances are it won’t be worth the hassle to make both EU-compliant and non-compliant products (as an example, look how the RoHS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restriction_of_Hazardous_Subst...) drove the world to ban lead in soldering)

ljm2• 6 years ago

Putting the self-sacrificial, better without us bullshit aside (the sheer arrogance of which in itself is nonsense because the UK had a huge influence in making the EU what is today), the view is europe centric because we are geologically and historically European, and the UK has just given away the incredible influence it had in the world's largest trading bloc, the one that has brought about the longest period of peace within the continent.

Whatever you and others might believe, don't try and spin Brexit as an act of nobility designed to protect the EU from the all-powerful, magnanimous British empire of yore. This agreement, and the past four years, has been an incredible loss and have set the UK back by a good 40 years. We have been in the throes of populism for half a decade and are only digging deeper into it.

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

I think the "not a bad deal, just a different set of terms" is key. This isn't or shouldn't be about trying to get one over on the other side, the UK and the EU are not in a zero sum game, clearly levels of trade integration require harmonization of regulation, some countries are going to be happy with that in particular areas, some aren't, and to decline to integrate has economic consequences within that local context. And similarly just because the UK doesn't want to be part of the EU political union, that's not some calculated insult, it's just something we aren't happy to do. Not every partner of the EU needs to be part of the EU.

Zenst2• 6 years ago

We've always just complained and delayed their desire for further deep integration between countries.

Exactly that - we have as a country, never really embraced the whole EU direction and dare say that short stretch of water between Mainland Europe and the UK - has historically set a different cultural mindset. Equally the whole WW1+2 experiences would of also had some rippling legacy impact I dare say.

However you look at it, if you have a disruptive employee and they want to leave, wish them the best and both will be better of.

But certainly be interesting what reforms the EU will do in the comming years, certainly that whole area of reform was conceded by many including Donald Tusk right after the 2016 vote and as last stood, was being driven by Macron - though only once the UK has left. So be interesting how that progresses and how that manifests.

noxvilleza• 6 years ago

All over this thread you seem to mention potential trade benefits for the UK based on being separate from the EU. Can you name some benefits (perhaps let's say 3) that you expect will be negotiated more favourably for the UK within a year that the UK was unable to get as part of the EU.

Also ... being part of a a trade bloc always has benefits and positives, but the two key negatives touted as 'deal-breakers' in the Brexit negotiations have been related to (1) sovereignty and (2) concessions. A few weeks ago Peter Verovšek wrote a short but pretty good article on effectively the illusion of sovereignty (https://www.socialeurope.eu/brexit-and-the-misunderstanding-...) for the UK, and in terms of concessions it seems that a small nation with limited resources hardly makes a net loss by being part of a larger trade bloc: access to a huge market while exposing a small market of your own.

nextos• 6 years ago

The critical problem I think is that this trade deal only covers products, not e.g. financial services. And a very significant fraction of UK exports to EU were services.

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

40% of UK to EU exports were services. Although how deep the actual single market in services was in reality, and what the cost is of losing that, is difficult for me to grasp.

CodeGlitch• 6 years ago

Missing the point yet again. Sorry to sound bitter back at you, but the remainers still fail to recognise why a lot of people voted Brexit. The current state of the EU/UK relationship is fine mostly, it's the direction that the EU is going in that is their problem. An army, an anthem, a single "state". That is the end goal of Brussels.

I voted remain, and I blame the remainers for messing it all up.

simonh5• 6 years ago

Leaving the EU in case it became this or that makes no sense. As a member of the EU we have never once, ever been “forced” into anything. It’s always been about negotiation, and if we ever wanted to opt out of anything we did.

We opted out of the working time directive, the Schengen agreement, the Euro, the charter of fundamental rights, the social chapter. We even had an explicit opt out from the treaty goal of an “ever closer union”. This narrative that were were being coerced into things against our will is simply not true. Yes we sometimes gave up painful concessions, but we also gained valuable benefits. It was always a negotiated outcome.

rayiner9• 6 years ago

At this moment, maybe. But the EU is sliding toward becoming one country. It’s inevitable now that there is an agreement to take on shared debt. The UK has dodged the bullet of further EU integration. From the other side of the pond, trust me you don’t want any part of it.

koheripbal• 6 years ago

... and that's just one policy area. The truth is that the UK has many policy differences with mainland Europe - foreign policy, energy policy, immigration, etc...

Unity is always a good thing, but hwhen views diverge then inaction results. An EU without the UK will let both take more decisive action in their policy areas.

BjoernKW2• 6 years ago

Well, that's not going to happen unless the EU adopts a single official single language not just in terms of bureaucracy but when it comes to everyday business (hint: that language is neither going to be French nor German)

The language differential is by far the most eminent obstacle standing in the way of a closer integration or even nationhood.

Ironically, the UK leaving might've opened up an opportunity here since that hypothetical official language now indeed could be English, with no dominant country having that language as its own official language anymore.

justinclift4• 6 years ago

Bitter much? Yes. Yes I am.

Same here. I moved to the UK years ago (UK ancestry) specifically for access to the EU. eg Danish gf (now ex), working in EU both in person and remotely, UK/EU start up was in progress

To have my EU hmmm... "citizenship" be removed (when I damn well wanted to keep it), by the other half of the UK population just because they don't care for the EU.

There are no words that can adequately convey the sense of betrayal I feel over this.

It has destroyed many years of my life effort thus far, and has taken considerable time to start recovering from (moved back to Australia, now rebuilding, etc).

oska7• 6 years ago

So you moved to the UK, which has a long history of euroscepticism going right back to when it joined in the 70s, and now feel 'betrayed' when the population majority voted to leave the EU, after receiving a referendum that had been campaigned for for decades.

Certainly comes across to me as a very strong sense of personal entitlement, and also disrespect towards the democratic decisions of your adopted country.

Fine for you to feel disappointed. But 'betrayed' is really too much.

dcsan• 6 years ago

Can you explain more the profit motive?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Research_Group

posh muppets in the ERG stand to make a wad of cash from their crony mates

klelatti8• 6 years ago

The Brexit referendum was the answer to a long running battle within the Conservative party between Eurosceptics and the rest dating back to the early 1990s. As such Brexit may be seen to be a success. It has united the party behind a common policy (those who objected have been kicked out) and healed the division.

Even better (for the party) they have created a 'foe' which can be blamed for Britain's ills with political impunity. If Scotland leaves the UK - which looks likely - they will be close to guaranteed a majority in parliament. Their recent election majority has given them the opportunity to ignore, weaken or ignore controls on the executive's behaviour.

For all his buffoonish behaviour and administrative incompetence Alex Johnson is a ruthless political operator.

I make no comment on the benefits or otherwise for the UK and its people which should be obvious by now.

thinkingemote4• 6 years ago

Re Scotland, I suspect that the EU made some concessions to make them leaving less likely. On the whole the EU doesn't like countries becoming independent (Catalonia, for example) of their parent country. Coherence is key for the EU

breakfastduck22• 6 years ago

Really relevant point. EU wants deeper integration, the last thing it needs is a second independent nation with a land border to the UK.

sleavey4• 6 years ago

I completely disagree. The EU remained silent during the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 because they didn't want to be seen to be publicly undermining the UK government, but since relations have soured they've been pretty open to say that Scotland would be welcomed back into the EU and that it already meets the requirements.

Not to say that Scotland rejoining the EU would be a massive moral victory for the EU over England.

antr• 6 years ago

Your comment is the exact definition of a false premise: the use of an incorrect proposition (Catalonia is or was a country) that forms the basis of an argument (the EU doesn't like countries becoming independent).

dTal• 6 years ago

Who's Alex Johnson?

klelatti8• 6 years ago

Boris is a stage name. Alex is the name he uses when not in his "persona".

hardlianotion12• 6 years ago

I think events have shown that the debate was not simply within the Conservative party.

klelatti8• 6 years ago

I didn't say it was. The referendum was as a result though of Cameron's wish to have his party 'stop banging on about Europe' and his desire to make the party secure against UKIP.

jariel5• 6 years ago

"We have a European bureaucracy totally unaccountable to anybody, powers have gone from national parliaments - they haven't gone to the European Parliament, they've gone to the Commission and to some extent the Council of Ministers. These are quite serious matters."

— Jeremy Corbyn (who was a Eurosceptic for most of his life)

Please don't politicize too much the modern notion of 'Brexit' as actually being an easy left/right issue, it's much more complicated than that.

oxfordmale3• 6 years ago

This deal will only bring a short term truce in the Conservative party. As the economic reality of Covid starts to bite, certain fractions in the party wil urge for a more generous deal with the EU, especially as a quick trade deal with the USA no longer seems to be on the table. Boris is not likely going to last until the next GE, either by choice or because he will be forced out.

When the Tories will finally be relegated to the opposition benches, it is very likely the party will tear itself apart about this too. There is a pro business section in the Tories that do not like where the party is headed, but are so far powerless to anything about it.

klelatti8• 6 years ago

The historian David Edgerton has an interesting take on the last part - he says that there is no longer a British national capitalism - that is that most big business in the UK is internationally owned or has an outlook that doesn't see itself as particularly British. Good examples would be motor manufacturing and chemicals (so no ICI but instead we have Ineos). There are exceptions of course but the trend is clear.

If you look at the backers of the tories now it's not big business any more (in the sense of the CBI say) but often niche financial services firms - who often loathe the EU. If you follow the money then I can't see the Tories worrying too much about traditional business in the UK.

wayanon• 6 years ago

In a fairer world people would end up in jail for this catastrophe. It’s been a gigantic scam start to finish.

Orthw20202• 6 years ago

I know many people are sceptical about EU these days but you have to give it more time. And jailing the people who created it would be not fair, those were simply different times!

oska7• 6 years ago

A fairer world entails jailing politicians for going to the people for a vote and then enacting that vote?

shafyy6• 6 years ago

We just started a plant-based cheese business in Germany. We can sell and ship within the EU as if it were one big country. It doesn't really matter if a customer is in Berlin or Barcelona.

Of course, selling to the UK (and Switzerland) is a pain in the ass and therefore we don't ship to those countries.

Just an anecdote of how disunity within Europe affects small businesses and customers.

Synaesthesia• 6 years ago

I just think it's a shame since it makes sense for regions to move towards integration. It's a shame the EU management in Brussels has been so sycophantic to the power of banks.

alisonkisk5• 6 years ago

Nowhere in Europe is more sycophanic to banks than London, where the banks have pushed the human residents out while messing with the economy.

Kognito• 6 years ago

Curious what the barriers you face exporting to the UK currently?

Given the transition period the UK has been going through with the country still effectively in the EU without being a member state, I’d have thought it would be the same exporting to the UK as any other EU state, at least until the end of the year.

Surely you’d have to wait until 2021 to feel any pain unless I’m missing something?

EDIT: Also, I’m fascinated. Are you allowed to market your product as “cheese” under EU regulations? From what I understand they’re quite strict on what constitutes basic foodstuffs like cheese. The dairy industry has lobbied hard against this sort of thing.

shafyy6• 6 years ago

Until Dec 31 we can ship to the UK as if it were part of the EU, that's correct. But we opened for business in November and we knew the deadline was coming, so the UK was out of the game for us from the get go. We'll need to see how shipping to the UK will work after that, but for now we've got other things to worry about :)

Unfortunately, the product can't be called "cheese" (or "plant-based cheese" for that matter). Currently, "cheese alternative" seems to be fine as there's one precedent (in Germany at least) where a plant-based cheese company won the case. My understanding is that it's ok to talk about "cheese" on your website, but when the customer makes the buying decision it needs to be made clear that this is a cheese alternative.

Honestly, there are no clear guidelines here and the law is very fuzzy. It's a big pain in the ass, especially for a small company like ours with little resources to spend for unnecessary, zero value-adding legal actitivies like these.

roenxi4• 6 years ago

But presumably this is because the UK government doesn't want to import German cheeses.

It seems likely that post-Brexit UK is in full control of how easy it is for things to be imported in to the UK. They don't need a deal with Europe to influence that. Countries have near-unilateral control over imports (although an exception can be made to that principle for military tech).

So this sort of thing is an example of why the UK voters decided to leave - a bit more control over what is entering the country.

alisonkisk5• 6 years ago

If UK tries to limit what enters, they invite relatiation from what the EU allows to enter.

Anyway based on polling, that's not why (a slim majority of) UK voters voted leave (except for controlling which people can enter, not which cheese). Lies about NHS funding and the like were a larger reason.

dan-robertson• 6 years ago

The U.K. imports plenty of cheese from Europe. When you are a small business, you have less access to capital and so you tend to need a larger, faster return on investments. Presumably the expense of working out how to ship cheese to the U.K. (or Switzerland) is not worth the expected near term return. A larger cheese maker could afford this investment (and would be in a better position to sell more cheese to eg supermarkets or wholesalers).

newacct583• 6 years ago

But presumably this is because the UK government doesn't want to import German cheeses.

I'm no expert, but I'll go out on a limb and say definitively that no Brexit proponent listed "no German Cheeses" on their manifesto. This is a retconned explanation.

Now, it's true that in principle that nations want some control over imports somewhere. But the point of the post above is that most of the time you don't, and exiting a free trade agreement means that many of those goods suddenly stop being available locally due to simple regulatory friction.

stewbrew• 6 years ago

Only the English voters decided to leave. The UK will become more fragile because of this.

kmeisthax• 6 years ago

Countries' control over imports is not absolute; they are bound by international treaties (at least in a game-theoretic sense). More specifically, everyone is a WTO member and the WTO sets rules on how countries are allowed to control imports. You are required to grant all WTO members the same level of market access, absent a comprehensive free-trade agreement. This is known as the "most favored nation" rule.

So, the UK can't say they don't want to import German cheese. Once they allow any foreign cheese into their market, the MFN rule means they have to allow all foreign cheese into the market. Likewise, if they wanted to ban German cheese, they'd also have to ban cheeses from everywhere else. The only situation in which they'd be able to allow one country's cheese and not the other is if they had a comprehensive free-trade agreement or a customs union... you know, the exact sort of thing that they just left.

tonyedgecombe3• 6 years ago

shaffy wants to sell to UK customers, his customers want to buy his product. Why should the government get in the way of that. Making that transaction difficult is going to lower economic activity, reduce consumer choice and increase prices.

So this sort of thing is an example of why the UK voters decided to leave

UK voters voted because of the high levels of immigration. Without that the leave campaign would have lost by a wide margin.

snambi2• 6 years ago

How much business you will get from UK?

giantrobot• 6 years ago

Well, none now.

shafyy6• 6 years ago

I think after Germany it would be the second most important market for us in Europe. So it might worth jumping through the hoops and see what's the best way to import to the UK :-)

pierrebeaucamp• 6 years ago

We can sell and ship within the EU as if it were one big country.

Is that really true though? To my understanding, there are still laws such as the European packaging & packaging waste legislation (PPWD) that require registration in each country you're selling to. The exact law differs from nation to nation as well, so you still require knowledge about each jurisdiction before you can safely sell to other EU members.

Also, while sending products directly to consumers shouldn't be much of an issue, I would imagine that there is some re-packaging / re-labeling needed if you'd actually want to have your German product in the supermarkets of Spain.

merb• 6 years ago

actually pwd (94/62/EG)) is a no brainer, since you only need to register in your local country and mark your packaging in categories, export and non exporting waste (you either pay only VerpackG or you pay for 94/62/EG). in germany you register on verpackungsregister.org, you get a number and take this number to some weee company, that makes the rest.

shafyy6• 6 years ago

I'm only talking about direct ecommerce B2C sales here. As long as you don't go over the threshold values (I think it's around €35k / year / country) you don't need to register with the tax authorities in that country.

Yes, if you sell to supermarket in Spain there would be more admin stuff that you need to get done first.

oska7• 6 years ago

How ironic that you use cheese as an example. The incredible richness and diversity of cheeses across Europe is directly due to them being mostly made and consumed locally in historic times. We would certainly not have that richness now if there hadn't been various historical barriers to trade. And indeed, that richness is already dying out as people increasingly buy EU-subsidised 'standardised' cheeses from outside their own countries and overlook their locally made cheeses.

The infinite variety of French cheeses — one of the finest achievements of French culture — is gradually being eroded and dumbed down. Only one in ten of the cheeses now consumed in France is made with raw-milk or “lait cru” in the authentic manner.
Search where you like in the finest cheese shops in France, you will no longer find a Bleu de Termignon or a Galette des Monts-d’Or. They are among 50 species of French cheese that have vanished, like rare flowers or butterflies, in the last 40 years. Other varieties, like Vacherin d’Abondance and M. Michelin’s hand-made Mont d’Or have been reduced to a single producer.

https://unherd.com/2020/02/the-slow-death-of-french-cheese/

maest6• 6 years ago

Out of all the things to complain about the EU, arguing that it is killing cheese diversity is probably one of the stranger ones I've seen.

1. It's not clear that's happening because of EU action.

2. It's not clear that's a bad thing (varieties are disappearing because people aren't buying thrm, right?)

3. The EU actually often hets criticised for being _too_ protective of foodstuff variations with their DOC laws.

touisteur• 6 years ago

I thought, discussing with little local producers, that the problem was tougher and tougher sanitary regulations ? Yes they're coming from EU mostly, but it seems France and the French people agree it's best to reduce the number of food poisoning cases, or they would have put a stop on this (or wouldn't enforce it...).

samtuke• 6 years ago

Having recently been involved with a 90k VAT settlement with the German tax authorities due to contradictory interpretations of EU VAT obligations within the Union, I'm wondering what your expectations of operating like a "one big country" are.

Another personal example: how VAT is treated on EU grants is different in every nation, despite EC directives supposedly mandating consistency.

Oh and legal signatures are also different across the 27 states - eg Poland does not accept them in any form, but organisations representing the EC often require them.

EU Harmonisation for my startup feels mythical. Wish it weren't so.

Symbiote8• 6 years ago

I don't have personal experience, but the USA has a similar population to the EU, and we hear on HN about different tax rates in different states, different rules etc.

Tiktaalik2• 6 years ago

During this whole process it's been interesting to hear the takes from my pals from the UK that left and became Canadians. Obviously this is a self selecting group, but the Brexit referendum and subsequent political fallout essentially "proved them right" on their reasons for leaving in the first place.

For them it's a sad feeling of being correct but wishing you weren't.

afavour• 6 years ago

Count me among those people. The U.K. is home to some absolutely wonderful people but those in power (and those who wish to be close to that power) are depressingly small thinkers, to me. Their vision is locked on a semi-fictional past where Great Britain was an exceptional country without fault or failure. They want to recapture something that never existed and are willing (if not eager) to throw away a position that was enviable for those in and out of the EU.

BurningFrog3• 6 years ago

I'm confused. These people are pro EU, so they moved to... Canada?

daveoc64• 6 years ago

If you think your country is heading in the wrong direction, moving to a country you think is doing well seems logical to me.

Tiktaalik2• 6 years ago

More that the political system is completely dysfunctional I think. The fact that Brexit was even conceived as a solution to anything. Many, many more problems beside Brexit, with Brexit only being a symptom of other deeper issues.

DanBC3• 6 years ago

No-one's mentioning the NHS, but we're fucked because we didn't really sort out MRPQ.

That means nurses, doctors, any healthcare professional, who wants to work in the UK (and we really really need them) needs to get their professional qualification approved before working here. When we were part of Europe we had a mutual recognition system worked out.

Also, we used to share information about professional regulation and any concerns or sanctions placed upon those HCPs, and we've probably lost that too.

Brakenshire15• 6 years ago

Good point, presumably the UK could just recognize qualifications unilaterally though. It's actually a situation on the import side has a clear an unequivocal incentive to recognize the standards of the other country, to draw in talent, and not lose it to the other party. It's the one case where each country wants as much of a trade deficit as possible!

nradov11• 6 years ago

If the UK needs more healthcare providers then they should just train more. By hiring a lot of employees from poorer EU countries the NHS left those places with shortages.

The Brexit vote was in 2016. The NHS has had plenty of time to prepare.

wolco2• 6 years ago

Providing more internal training opportunities is a winning long term strategy.

DanBC3• 6 years ago

Doctors: 5 year degree, 2 foundation years, 3 core trainee years, 3 years as speciality trainee = minimum 13 years.

ben_w4• 6 years ago

By hiring a lot of employees from poorer EU countries the NHS left those places with shortages.

Not so. My sister-in-law is Filipino by birth, now a U.K. citizen, and trained as a nurse in the Philippines specifically in order to leave her old country. This is apparently a common thing, and a way for Filipino kids to support their families in ways that aren’t possible by remaining in the local economy.

The Brexit vote was in 2016. The NHS has had plenty of time to prepare.

AFAICT, it’s a 3-4 year degree even just for nursing (and way longer for doctors). Given the U.K. academic year, students starting a degree in 2016 would’ve already chosen a course before the referendum, so the U.K. has really only had one full cycle of nurse training, while doctors are still limited by the decisions Labour made when they were last in office.

How well or badly this goes depends entirely on if the Home Office is willing to turn a blind eye to useful foreigners who may not be technically compliant with the new rules, and how good everyone else in government is at details. I’m not saying you’re doomed, but the current U.K. administration doesn’t have a good record with either of these things.

cameronh905• 6 years ago

We hire a lot of medical workers from non-EU countries already. AFAIK EU qualified medical personnel are hugely outweighed by non-EU ones.

The process seems fairly simple. My girlfriend is a nurse from a non-EU country, and she did have to take an English exam before moving, and then a competency exam after a month of working here. However, she described it essentially as a formality, that if you are a competent nurse who can speak English, it should not be an issue. It took a few hours.

It might be more of an issue for HCAs, porters, etc who seem to be much more frequently Eastern European. However given my mother became seriously unwell as a result of a miscommunication between an EU hospital worker who didn't speak adequate English and one of the doctors... well I can't help but feel a little bit of scrutiny on incoming healthcare workers isn't the worst thing ever.

The sanctions data is definitely a concern though.

neilwilson2• 6 years ago

And where in the world do they have a surplus of skilled medical staff that can fill the gap of failing to train sufficient people here?

What you have there is a fallacy of composition. We can exchange medical staff with the rest of the world but we cannot take them without replacement without reducing medical capacity in the source nation.

And that’s called a brain drain.

Are you happy doing that to the people of Romania and Pakistan?

emteycz• 6 years ago

The people of Romania and Pakistan are going away because it's really bad in their countries. Are you happy with that?

ben_w4• 6 years ago

The Philippines for one, according to my brother whose wife is from the Philippines and who moved to the U.K. with a nursing qualification.

senko• 6 years ago

Lest we forget, all of this started because one man wanted to win an election: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-21148282

David Cameron wanted to appear tough and miscalculated badly, and now an entire country will pay the price (literally).

nradov11• 6 years ago

It's disingenuous to blame one man. The majority of UK voters preferred to leave. They appear willing to pay the price.

If David Cameron was wrong to give UK voters the option of leaving, are the leaders of Norway and Switzerland also wrong for failing to give their voters the option of joining? Seems like a double standard.

scotty795• 6 years ago

The thing is nobody asked voters again since then to see if they haven't changed their mind.

Mistake of Cameron was asking without the ability to ensure asking again when costs of leaving become apparent to the public.

preommr• 6 years ago

It's completely fair to blame Cameron because he absolutely bungled the process.

If they had come out with a clear outline of what was to be expected, then things would be different. There were all kinds of different narratives such as how it would be the 'easiest [deal] in human history'. Not to mention how poorly everything was formulated.

The referendum should've been a lot clearer in it's goals and limits. It's not a joke, it's not possible to be brash with such things because you can't redo it because then it becomes a matter of just redoing things until the party in power gets what they want. Cameron didn't take it seriously because he was so confident that it wouldn't come to pass.

In some ways, I am genuinely not surprised that Brexit happened when you have a large coalition of people that wanted hard brexit, people that thought it would be over and done with in one night, people that bought into the lies of british politicians about the EU because it's a convenient scapegoat.

If the options outlined were May's plan, no-deal or staying in the EU, things would've been very different.

Goddamn David Cameron.

mkl4• 6 years ago

A very small majority. It seems crazy to make such a massive change when nearly half the voting population is against it. If the threshold had been 70% or something, that might make more sense.

wesleywt• 6 years ago

It's really amazing how a very slight majority is able to upend the country for generations. There should have been a series of referendums.

boomboomsubban• 6 years ago

When you vote to join the EU, you know what the trade deal and various other treaties will be before you vote. You are provided with the options of keeping things as they are or accepting EU laws and treaties.

Voting for Brexit provided none of that information, which is why it was wrong. It was a vote between keeping things as they were, or dunno we'll figure something out. The vote should have been whether they should negotiate a potential Brexit deal and then hold another vote to decide whether they leave.

mongol• 6 years ago

No it is not. It was a gamble and a political failure of enormous proportions. He needs to own it, it was him that lead the UK down the Brexit path

sourabhforu2• 6 years ago

With all due respect, its naive to blame stupidity of masses on one person. People voted to leave...

baby-yoda• 6 years ago

with all due respect, the masses used democratic process to come to a decision. im not a uk citizen and far from an expert on brexit but is it not disingenuous to call that decision "stupid" when there is not yet any proof as to whether or not it is lacking intelligence?

if one is so quick to cast judgment on something which is not yet provably good/bad, will one also be just as quick to retract that judgment in the future if it ends up being of a different result?

LudwigNagasena• 6 years ago

Yeah, let’s blame the man for solving a divisive issue using democracy.

gorgoiler4• 6 years ago

Brexit is part of Cameron’s personal tragedy but they are two different arcs that converged only for a moment in time.

incog_nit0• 6 years ago

You're correct, Cameron did miscalculate but to blame him entirely forgets the mood of the country and the political parties in 2010. There was a lot of talk about leaving the EU in the run up to the 2010 election from of course the usual suspects like Farage but also from Cable and Clegg (leaders of the lib dems).

According to the source below:

To the best of our knowledge, the Liberal Democrats were the first of the three major UK parties, including Labour and the Conservatives, to campaign for a referendum on EU membership.

Only party which didn't push for an EU referendum in the 2010 run-up was Labour.

https://fullfact.org/europe/lib-dems-first-call-eu-referendu...

golemotron• 6 years ago

It's beautiful for them to have their Independence Day on the same day as New Year's Day. Congratulations, UK.

manexploitsman• 6 years ago

I loved that gentle yet classy slap in the face that France (most likely directed by Germany) gave to the UK when they closed the border in Calais for a while.

galvin4• 6 years ago

most likely directed by Germany

Macron has been taking a harder stance than Merkel for a while so it seems more likely that this is a response to the UK threatening to guard it's waters with Naval ships.

Obviously they have a right to do so but reminding your friends that you have guns isn't the most polite way to negotiate.

It was certainly an interestingly timed move in any case and a sharp reminder that "taking back control" of the borders goes both ways.

jml7c5• 6 years ago

That was a temporary closure to assess the risk of the more infectious SARS-CoV2 varint prevalent in Britain. Or do you mean earlier in the year?

OpticalWindows• 6 years ago

Crap and suspicious timing. All of the emotional maniuplation for this? shame

snambi2• 6 years ago

Why is this even news? No one will notice whether brexit happens or not.

UK and EU agree Brexit trade deal

Related Stories