Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

Yes - but the EU has granted equivalence (and the ECB made relevant changes to their banking regulations) to keep the lights on. But equivalence is the extent of trading access for UK firms - aside from that it's third country. But this is what the City has been planning for for three years so it's not a surprise. No-one was expecting financial services to be in the deal.

Edit: Sorry thought that was in response to me - did not se eyour edit.

[Zanza]

Yes, that's the reality on the ground and all rationale businesses have made their preparations.

But I think Hamas point is valid: The Tories are still promising things that they will not be able to achieve regarding the EU relationship. So on a politics level the deceit has still not stopped.

In general the British Brexit twitterati are not impressed by the deal and how it is sold. Might cause future disappointment and further distrust in politics.

[Sheilbh]

I'm not sure - I think Sunak's actual quote is true but just positive spin:

Rishi Sunak has offered financial services firms the prospect of closer access to EU markets than outlined in the Brexit trade deal, after Boris Johnson conceded that this aspect of the agreement fell short of UK hopes.

[...]

Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Sunak said the aim was to firm up agreements on the system of equivalence, whereby UK banks and other financial institutions can trade, on a regulatory basis, as if they were still in the EU.

The chancellor said he hoped a planned memorandum of understanding on the issue between the UK and EU in the next few months could smooth over many obstacles.

"This deal also provides reassurance because there's a stable regulatory cooperative framework mentioned in the deal," Sunak said.

"I think [that] will give people that reassurance that we will remain in close dialogue with our European partners when it comes to things like equivalence decisions."

He's not saying it'll be better than EU membership but that it could become better than this deal.   

In general the British Brexit twitterati are not impressed by the deal and how it is sold. Might cause future disappointment and further distrust in politics.

Maybe. I think most of British Brexit Twitter commentators are saying what you'd expect them to say it's all very predictable on all sides.

I don't know if this will matter for politics because I think it could either become a bit like Trump and China where there is now a new bipartisan consensus - so this deal and a looser but still quite close relationship (Gove has called it a "special relationship" ) with EU and UK becomes the norm and broadly accepted by most parties. I think the alternative is that contiunuity remain become like the Brexiters did after Maastricht but on the left: they are almost single issue MPs, they split the Labour party and hurt its chances of winning elections for a decade (by constantly banging on about Europe) and, possibly in the long run, win.

I think the least likely is what the Brexit Twitter expects which is basically constant negotiations with the EU like Switzerland. Because I think our situation is different than Switzerland, but more importantly I just don't think there is political appetite for that- that's why I think the clever thing for Starmer to do would be promise no new referendums nationwide and no new negotiations with the EU if Labour wins (but it's very difficult because I think he will be caught between the Corbyn wing on one hand and continuity remain on the other).

[Zanza]

There does not need to be appetite for constant negotiations. It will be the trade gravity, shared interests and common security situation that pull EU and UK back to the negotiation table. And there are many review clauses in the deal, e.g. the fisheries deal.

[Sheilbh]

I think that underestimates the importance of politics or the weight of other gravities/pulls in politics - purely based on trade, shared interests and common security we would not be where we are. You're right about the review clauses and I expect there will be future haggling on fish - but I don't know the details of them and some seem quite technical so it will, in effect, be civil servants reviewing rather than a political review of the treaty.

I also think it underestimates the ability of British politics to distract itself from things that matter if it doesn't really want to expend the energy on them - see housing, regional inequalities, etc

Edit: And in fairness I don't think that's a uniquely British spin - I don't think many countries have shown the political appetite to really deal or engage with climate yet - at some point that'll be forced on them though.

[The Larch]

Surprising nobody, here are some first cries of betrayal from the British fishing industry. 

PM 'caved in' to EU on fish, says fishing industry chief
National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations says fisheries 'were sacrificed' to save trade deal

The UK's leading fishing industry body has accused the government of "bottling it" over the Brexit deal with the EU, after details were published on Boxing Day morning.

Barrie Deas, the chief executive of the National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO), said the deal had secured just "a fraction of what the UK has a right to under international law", arguing that fishing had been "sacrificed for other national objectives".

"Lacking legal, moral, or political negotiating leverage on fish, the EU made the whole trade deal contingent on a UK surrender on fisheries," he said. "In the endgame, the prime minister made the call and caved in on fish, despite the rhetoric and assurances that he would not do what Ted Heath did in 1973."

Under the deal, new quotas reducing the EU's share by 25% are due to be phased in over five and a half years, and a quarter of the EU's catch by value will be "repatriated" to UK-flagged vessels during the same period.

While Deas said the deal "will inevitably be seen by the fishing industry as a defeat", he said the government had been successful in "having fought off EU's attempts to tie the UK back into common fisheries policy-like arrangements". He said this would allow the UK to "develop and apply its own fisheries management systems, tailored to its own fisheries."

Deas has previously said the EU "benefited disproportionately from free access to fish in UK waters and unbalanced quota shares agreed in 1983".

The UK Fisheries chief executive, Jane Sandell, said: "We're pleased that the UK-EU deal will bring some kind of certainty to parts of our industry, although we're still looking for the 'prodigious amounts of fish' we were promised, and for us it changes nothing.

"The government must now urgently turn its attention to striking a good deal with Norway and other third countries if we are to be able to fish in the distant waters from January 1."

A senior member of the UK's negotiating team rejected criticism of the fishing arrangements, saying that while both sides had been forced to compromise, the deal would give the UK "full control over our waters".

"The crucial thing on fisheries policy is that although there is a transition, at the end of the transition it returns to normal arrangements and we have full control over our waters," the official told PA news agency.

"There's a transition to that point and ideally we would've got out of it a bit faster but where we've got to is acceptable and offers gains for the fisheries industry in the short run and a huge right to control everything and work within that after this five-and-a-half-year transition."

Nicola Sturgeon has also criticised the deal's treatment of the fishing industry, saying promises made to Scotland's fishing sector had been broken. The Scottish government has said the Brexit deal could cost Scotland £9bn by 2030.

Writing in the Times, the first minister said Brexit was happening "against the wishes of most people in Scotland", after the country voted for remain in the 2016 referendum, and said it would "hit jobs and living standards at the worst possible time".

However, the UK's Scotland secretary, Alister Jack, insisted the government had struck a "fantastic deal", as he added that coastal communities would be able to "thrive outside the EU's unfair common fisheries policy".

Unsurprisingly, fishing associations are complaining about the same thing over here.

[Sheilbh]

Is it even a Euro-deal if all of the fishermen aren't unhappy? I would worry that the deal was imbalanced if there weren't fishing boats burning outside Downing Street and the Berlaymont at the end of this.

Edit: Incidentally in weird Crown-style news, lots of rumours about an honour for Tony Blair. There's two sides to this but basically in both of them Blair is seen as "block" to other people getting honours.

There's several royal orders that are entirely at the discretion of the Queen - the Order of the Garter most famously but also Order of the Thistle, Order of Merit etc. These mean nothing (i.e. it doesn't mean you're in the House of Lords) but they're very exclusive - only 24 members of the Garter and about 15 of the Thistle. They normally go to aristocrats in the royal household, senior military figures (normally after retirement), former PMs/very senior politicians/Privy Councillors, senior civil servants, diplomats etc - basically the most establishment establishment. But the key as I say is the Queen picks them. Apparently Buckingham Palace is now concerned that they look imbalanced - there are about 20 Tory members of the various Orders that the Queen runs, while there are only 4 Labour members (plus 3 Lib Dems).

The issue is Tony Blair. The royal family loathe Tony Blair for what they perceive as his grandstanding and inappropriateness in the aftermath of Diana's death - so the Queen hasn't given him the nod. But they can't give it to other Labour politicians who came after him without it looking like a snub. So the Queen wants to ask Gordon Brown to join the Order of the Garter but can't until Blair's situation is resolved - and there are others who may get the nod such as Margaret Beckett or Harriet Harman.

Apparently the solution that's been worked out is to knight Tony Blair - decisions about who gets a knighthood are made by a committee and politicians can make recommendations. Blair gets some form of honour so the system is "unblocked" and the Queen can give gongs and capes to all her favourite Labour politicians. Of course the snub will still be obvious because Blair will be the only PM the Queen has had who wasn't appointed to the Order of the Garter (except for Douglas-Home who was appointed to the Order of the Thistle because his very aristocratic family is Scots in origin).

[The Larch]

Is it even a Euro-deal if all of the fishermen aren't unhappy? I would worry that the deal was imbalanced if there weren't fishing boats burning outside Downing Street and the Berlaymont at the end of this.

The kind of protests are slightly different in each side, though. Our fishermen seem to be protesting for any kind of loss they'll take, in what I feel is paving the way for requesting (even more) handouts, IIRC the EU has already announced that there'll be a fund to compensate those fishermen who will be taking losses with the implementation of the reduced quotas. British fishermen seem to be protesting because they've been over-promised and under-delivered, as I guess they were promised the moon and stars in a new post-Brexit era, and now they see they'll still have to deal with the EU and continental fishing fleets in the coming years.

[Josquius]

Whenever fishing is brought up with regards to brexit (which is all the bloody time) I can't help but think of that factoid that Warhammer is worth more to the economy than fishing.
I wonder how they compare in terms of people employed.

Fishing is one key area where lobbyists all need bonking on the head and international cooperation firmly established. To hear some of the brexit cultists it really seems there's some belief that there isn't actually any problem with fish stocks and its all the EU's fault we don't fish as much as we used to.

[Zanza]

I read that Games Workshop claim as well, but find it rather questionable. It does not seem to be true.

In the end, Johnson traded better access for energy and manufacturing for fish. That's a no brainer when looking at the numbers.

[Tamas]

Whenever fishing is brought up with regards to brexit (which is all the bloody time) I can't help but think of that factoid that Warhammer is worth more to the economy than fishing.
I wonder how they compare in terms of people employed.

Fishing is one key area where lobbyists all need bonking on the head and international cooperation firmly established. To hear some of the brexit cultists it really seems there's some belief that there isn't actually any problem with fish stocks and its all the EU's fault we don't fish as much as we used to.

I'd imagine this is because fishermen (and fisherwomen) want exclusive access to as many fishing waters as possible and thus push narrative that way. Understandable, but also I don't think sustainability and international cooperation is anywhere on their priority list, well maybe sustainability is, from their own point of view. And, you know, it's not like it's different from other businesses.

But it sure is hell annoying. We used to have farmers do the same. Bad  harvest? Protest and moan for subsidies because they don't have enough produce to sell. Very good harvest? Protest and moan for subsidies because prices collapsed.

[The Larch]

But it sure is hell annoying. We used to have farmers do the same. Bad  harvest? Protest and moan for subsidies because they don't have enough produce to sell. Very good harvest? Protest and moan for subsidies because prices collapsed.

Fishermen do exactly the same thing, it's a primary sector habit.

[Josquius]

Checking up as I'm curious if this is true.

In 2019, the UK imported 721 thousand tonnes of sea fish, with a value of £3,457 million. It exported 452 thousand tonnes with a value of £2,004 million.

   Games Workshop, the maker of fantasy war game miniatures, said full-year profits jumped 10 per cent despite the shutdown of the entire business for six weeks due to the pandemic.

Sales in the year to the end of May were up 5 per cent to £270m, while pre-tax profit was £89.4m, above the company's previous forecast of about £85m.

Seems sadly not

[Richard Hakluyt]

Journalists are prone to confusing wealth and income, turnover and profit etc etc in order to back up whatever argument they are making.

Games Workshop has a market capitalisation of £3.7bn which is nearly twice as much as the UK's annual fish exports...........that is probably the root of the specious comparison being made.

[The Brain]

In the far future there is only fish.

Edit: IIRC they had a running joke for years that they would release Fishmen.