Macron to discuss Brexit with Johnson on London visit – RTE.ie

French President Emmanuel Macron travels to Britain today for talks with Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

Mr Macron's visit will mark 80 years since exiled wartime resistance leader Charles de Gaulle made his famous call to a defeated France from London not to give into the Nazis.

It will be Mr Macron's first foreign trip since the coronavirus pandemic began.

Harking back to General de Gaulle's dramatic appeal on 18 June, 1940 from BBC studios will give Macron a chance to underline the importance of Anglo-French relations even after Brexit.

But beyond the historic symbolism, Mr Macron's meeting at 10 Downing Street with Mr Johnson will also focus on the grinding search for an agreement on Britain's exit from the EU.

Britain, which left the EU in January, is negotiating a trade deal to govern relations after 31 December, when it stops abiding by EU rules.

Mr Macron has on occasion expressed impatience with the drawn-out Brexit process.

In a sign of the tensions in the talks, Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said in an interview with the French daily La Croix that he still did not rule out a "no deal" scenario.

He said the UK might not have "understood the full magnitude of their withdrawal".

Mr Macron's status as a visiting foreign dignitary will spare him the controversial two-week virus quarantine now demanded by the British authorities of all visitors from abroad.

Before heading to Britain, he will take part in the traditional annual ceremony at Mont Valerien outside Paris, a memorial for the French who fought against the Nazis and those who were killed by the occupying forces.

On arrival in London he will meet Prince Charles, with both set to pay their respects to General de Gaulle and make speeches.

Mr Macron will award the Legion of Honour to London, making it the seventh city to be decorated with France's highest order of merit, after Algiers, Belgrade, Brazzaville, Liege, Luxembourg and Volgograd.

Latest Brexit stories

He will then head to Downing Street for the talks with Mr Johnson, himself an avowed fan of Britain's wartime leader Winston Churchill who allowed General de Gaulle to broadcast from the BBC.

Mr Johnson has announced honorary British MBE awards to four surviving French resistance fighters - one aged 100 and three in their late 90s.

The London statue of Churchill that was controversially boxed up after anti-racism protests will be uncovered for Mr Macron's visit.

In his radio broadcast from London, de Gaulle urged all those who could to carry on fighting for France, words that laid the foundation of the resistance movement and helped keep alive hope that France would be liberated, as it finally was in 1944.

"Has the last word been said? Should hope disappear? Is the defeat final? No! Believe me, I... tell you that nothing is lost for France," he said.

Go here to see the original:

Macron to discuss Brexit with Johnson on London visit - RTE.ie

Brexit Britain is forced to confront its inglorious past – The Star Online

HAD he been alive, Edward Colston would surely have recognised the rage of the crods that pulled down his statue in his home city of Bristol and dumped it into the harbor.

Born in 1636 into an age of revolution, Colston lived through three civil wars and the execution of King Charles I before he became a merchant and made his fortune from the burgeoning slave trade.

The trouble for Britain is that Colstons story is far from unique in the countrys turbulent past. As the events of last weekend reverberate across the UK, they are turning into a moment of national self-reflection at an awkward time for a government thats evoked a glorious history of buccaneering spirit as reason for a bright future outside the European Union.

The Black Lives Matter protests that spread from the US have a particular resonance in the UK, with its track record of colonising countries from India and Australia to swaths of Africa and the Caribbean. But its a colonial past that has never really been reckoned with.

The danger for Prime Minister Boris Johnson is that opening it up now risks drawing attention to some of the most brutal and shameful episodes in British history and risks further polarising a nation already deeply divided socially, economically and increasingly ethnically.

Four years of wrangling over Brexit has seen an increase in reported anti-immigrant hate crime, while the coronavirus pandemic has hit black and Asian communities disproportionately harder.

It is an uncomfortable truth that our nation and city owes a large part of its wealth to its role in the slave trade, London Mayor Sadiq Khan said this past week. Khan, a member of the opposition Labour Party, ordered a review of the capitals statues and street names to vet them for links to slavery.

The reaction to the anti-racist revolt in the US cuts to the heart of British identity. As the growing list of memorials targeted for their questionable associations attests, the first incarnation of the Global Britain championed by Brexit supporters was the British Empire.

Monuments to civic leaders with a dubious heritage risk becoming the front line in a brewing culture war taking place against the backdrop of the governments much-criticised response to Covid-19 and a recession that threatens to be exacerbated by a disruptive break with continental trading partners.

Already, protesters are demanding the removal of monuments to figures including imperialist Cecil Rhodes, whose statue stands outside an Oxford college, and Henry Dundas, who obstructed early attempts to abolish slavery and whose image stands on a 150-foot-high column in central Edinburgh.

After a statue of World War II leader Winston Churchill was defaced, far-right groups have put out a call for supporters to gather in London this weekend to defend the legacy of war heroes, raising the prospect of clashes. Churchill and other key statues have been boarded up as a precaution.

Johnson acknowledged the depth of emotion triggered by the killing in the US of black man George Floyd by a white police officer, saying on Monday that those feelings are founded on a cold reality and more needs to be done to tackle inequality. He didnt mention Britains imperial past or the idea that it shoulders any historic complicity through its colonial actions.

Last July, in his first speech as prime minister, Johnson alluded to the union of the UKs constituent nations, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland the awesome foursome that are incarnated in that red white and blue flag and its positive role in the world.

The UKs brand and political personality is admired and even loved around the world, he said then, citing traits from inventiveness and humor to assets including universities.

That is, at best, half the story, according to historians such as Diane Purkiss, author of The English Civil War: A Peoples History and professor of English literature at Oxford University. She argues that Britains rise to a world power was financed on the back of slavery.

From the Elizabethan age on, England muscled in on the triangle trade, whereby Africans were enslaved and transported to the Americas by Europeans who used the same ships to bring back sugar and tobacco. They then exported textiles and manufactured goods to Africa.

By the mid-18th century, just three decades after Colstons death, the newly minted Great Britain had displaced the Portuguese to control the lions share of the slave trade when it was at its most profitable. With the addition of colonial India the Jewel in the Crown the money went to fuel the Industrial Revolution and allowed civic buildings to be erected across the UK, with statues raised to city benefactors.

What ended up happening in India and along the slave coasts in Africa is very analogous to what the Spanish had done in the New World to the Aztecs and Mayans, said Purkiss. We came across these huge wealthy civilizations and rather than actively conquer them and occupy the land, what we did was trade with them at incredibly advantageous terms for us.

A heap of economic theory was devised asserting that Britains success was built on meritocracy and enterprise, she said, but all along what characterised the triangle slave trade and our dealings with India was basic racism.

Shashi Tharoor, an Indian opposition Congress lawmaker and former senior United Nations official, challenges head on the argument that Britain was a benevolent colonial master, providing education, irrigation and order. Instead, he says that reparations are owed since Britains rise for 200 years was financed by its depredations in India.

In a 2015 Oxford University debate that has been viewed more than six million times on YouTube, Tharoor argues that as many as 29 million Indians died of starvation in British induced famines.

That gives the lie to all notions that the British were trying to do their colonial enterprise out of enlightened despotism, to try and bring the benefits of colonialism and civilisation to the benighted, he said. Violence and racism were the reality of the colonial experience.

For sure, Britain wasnt alone. The French, Spanish and Portuguese hardly have unblemished records when it comes to colonial times. Belgium has never fully come to terms with its brutal 19th century rule of Congo, though a statue of the then ruler, King Leopold II, was removed in Antwerp this week.

Some historians point to infrastructure such as railways and legal systems that the British left behind compared with rival European powers. Yet the only institution dedicated to exploring the effect of British colonial rule overseas, the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum, opened in Bristol in 2002 and then entered voluntary liquidation 11 years later.

Johnson has meanwhile acknowledged a historic responsibility to Hong Kong, a former British colony, and said that the U.K. will put forward a route to citizenship for up to 3 million residents if China applies national security legislation to the territory. Its an offer thats hard to square with Johnsons role as the face of the 2016 Brexit campaign that traded on an aversion to immigration.

Educated at the 15th century Eton College and at Oxford University, Johnson is a symbol of the British elite, and has been accused of using racist language in newspaper articles written during his journalistic career.

He came under fire for a Daily Telegraph column in 2002 that referred to some black Africans as piccaninnies. The same year, he wrote a piece in the Spectator magazine saying that Africa is a mess, but we cant blame colonialism. Johnson said this week Britain should work peacefully and lawfully to defeat racism and discrimination.

For Bristol Mayor Marvin Rees, current tensions underline the need to constantly reappraise history including the events of last weekend.

You cant chuck history out, he told Bloomberg Radio on Wednesday. What were doing is seeking to have a better understanding of history: why decisions were made, who was what, what they represented and how the events in our past have created the city of today.

Colston, however, is not going back on his plinth, certainly for the foreseeable future, said Rees. We need to take it out of the harbor and assess it and the best place to do that is in a museum. Bloomberg

View post:

Brexit Britain is forced to confront its inglorious past - The Star Online

EU ‘terrified’ of successful UK ‘on its doorstep’ says Widdecombe in brutal Brexit warning – Express.co.uk

Former Brexit Party MEP Ann Widdecombe attacked the EU's stance in the Brexit trade talks with the UK. While speaking on Youtube channel Brexit Watch, Ms Widdecombe insisted the EU was afraid of the UK becoming a financial powerhouse, similar to that of Singapore. She argued the EU is negotiating with the intention of protecting itself for the future.

She added the British Brexit negotiators should be aware of this and refuse to bow down to these demands to ensure the UK gets the best deal for itself.

Ms Widdecombe said: "I will tell you exactly what the EU has been afraid of.

"I will tell you what the EU has been terrified of throughout Brexit even before coronavirus.

"They are terrified of a Singapore on their doorstep.

DON'T MISS:EU MUST cave: Expert hits out at Brussels 'extreme' stance on fishing

"They are afraid of a Singapore right on the doorstep of the EU."

Ms Widdecombe expressed how she felt about the EU's demands for a level playing field agreement by the UK.

She said: "Because they are afraid that is why they are insisting on a level playing field.

"Level playing field my foot, we have left and we are not on a level playing field.

"That is why it is trying to insist on that, they are trying to ensure that we are not going to be able to compete on unequal terms."

She added: "They want to protect their own position, what it is all about, protecting the EU.

"Well frankly no, I want to protect Britain."

READ MORE:

Labour's 'alienation' of Brexit voters forced 'red wall to crumble'[VIDEO]EU MUST cave: Expert hits out at Brussels 'extreme' stance on fishing[VIDEO]Brexit breakthrough: EU 'backing off' on fishing demand as UK confident[EXCLUSIVE]

The Brexit trade negotiations between the UK and EU have been a standstill for the past few weeks with no major leeway being made.

However Prime Minister Boris Johnson has insisted he intends for the talks to speed up.

He has claimed both the UK and EU must ramp up discussions to keep to the current timetable and ensure an agreement is made.

Despite this, it still remains clear when breakthroughs will come during the talks as both sides remain firm on their demands and expectations.

Originally posted here:

EU 'terrified' of successful UK 'on its doorstep' says Widdecombe in brutal Brexit warning - Express.co.uk

Britain, EU need Brexit agreement in the autumn – Merkel – Reuters UK

FILE PHOTO: German Chancellor Angela Merkel speaks during a news conference after coalition meetings over stimulus measures to reboot post-coronavirus economy, at the Chancellery in Berlin, Germany June 3, 2020. John Macdougall/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

BERLIN (Reuters) - The European Union and Britain need to reach a deal by the autumn on their future relationship in order to get it ratified, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said after a video conference with other EU leaders on Friday.

Britain left the European Union on Jan. 31 and their relationship is governed by a transition arrangement that keeps previous rules in place while new terms are negotiated. Britain does not want to extend that transition beyond 2020.

We recognised that the negotiations must be accelerated ... as in the autumn there must be an agreement as this agreement must still be ratified by both sides, Merkel told a news conference in Berlin.

Reporting by Paul Carrel; Editing by Michelle Martin

Read the original here:

Britain, EU need Brexit agreement in the autumn - Merkel - Reuters UK

Westminster’s actions mean devolved governments have had ‘no meaningful input’ in Brexit trade talks – Press and Journal

Brexit negotiations have not been materially influenced by Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland and any consultation by Westminster has served only as window dressing, devolved leaders have claimed.

In a scathing attack, Europe minister Jenny Gilruth said there had been no meaningful input from the devolved administrations in talks, and on fisheries she claimed Whitehall had ruled out keeping the Scottish Government in the loop.

The comments come just days after the UK Government rejected calls from the Scottish and Welsh first ministers to extend the Brexit transition period.

Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford argued in a letter to Boris Johnson that a delay was needed in order to support businesses through their recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.

But Michael Gove confirmed there would be no extension beyond December 31.

Ms Gilruth, appearing at an Institute for Government event, said an extension would give business time to plan.

Well do the best we can, but we are being hampered by not knowing what we need to implement because its still being negotiated, and its being negotiated at ridiculously tight timescales.

She added: I think, from a Scottish perspective, it should be said that we have paused our work on independence to focus on the coronavirus crisis; its really deeply regrettable that the UK Government has not paused their work on Brexit to focus on saving lives.

The minister said that the Scottish Government wanted to reboot the way cross-governmental discussions were held.

Were asking for a reboot in the way the UK Government involves the devolved governments in the Brexit process; were not looking for read-outs, we need to have more of a proactive and meaningful discussion, she said.

Our view is that engagement between the UK Government and the devolved governments has often only served as window dressing rather than playing any meaningful role.

Citing fisheries specifically, she said: We tried to get movement on fisheries and requested that our officials were in the room, that has been ruled out.

Its really worrying that these talks are now going to go into detail without us being in the room on that matter.

Welsh Europe minister Jeremy Miles, appearing before the same panel, said: The promise was that once we got beyond the withdrawal agreement, that we would be in the sunlit uplands of closer engagement.

If anything, engagement has become worse and certainly worse jobs under the Johnson government than under the May government.

However this negotiation turns out, for good or ill, it will have been the UK Governments negotiation, theres no sense in which it has been materially influenced by the devolved governments.

The UK Government was contacted for comment.

Original post:

Westminster's actions mean devolved governments have had 'no meaningful input' in Brexit trade talks - Press and Journal

TCW’s Brexit Watch: Will Johnson cave in a second time? – The Conservative Woman

BREXIT Watch is starting to resemble the months before October 31 last year. Any extension to the UK leaving date had been ruled out. The UK was definitely leaving the EU and lorry drivers were reminded about the new cross-Channel documents needed. Prime Minister Johnson was making speeches rejecting a future relationship with the EU of vassalage, saying that the WA/PD was dead. Then suddenly he caved in and signed the WA/PD with trivial alterations, and signed the Irish Protocol economically sundering Northern Ireland from the UK, breaking a direct promise he had given the DUP the previous year. Though hailed as a victory, it left the UK in a very bad negotiating position for the next phase. Surely he had read and digested this toxic WA, thrice rejected by the Commons? Why had his officials let him sign it? Why had Dominic Take Back Control Cummings agreed to this unnecessary self-imprisonment? We do not know, but the PM blinked when faced with a no-deal Brexit.

Once more the PM insists that there will be noextension to the leaving date of December31.Once more the UK is resisting the annexation of UK fisheries, this time on the principle of sovereignty, as well as ongoing EU regulation the level playing field which would negate Brexit but which the EU continues to insist on.

The UK is arguing thatArticle 50 entails no such EU controls over a state choosing to leave, and that it is merely proposing the same terms and conditions as with Canada and Japan.

The UK is now saying talks need an extra impetus and that it needs an endpoint in October to prepare for the exit on December 31; in turn the EU is denying this is possible. Though talks with the US have finally started, they are in danger of being sabotaged by the farming lobby and DEFRA, who, fearing competition, are deploying what look to be mythical and unscientific smears on US production methods.

What is the likely outcome? The EU is fairly sure that all this is theatre for the UK audience and that the PM will cave in just as he did last year, despite all his robust promises to the contrary. In a fascinating report forRTE, Tony Connelly reprises last years UK quick surrender to the dead WA vassalage following a phone call from Chancellor Merkel to Johnson:

On 7 October last year, there was a defining phone call between Boris Johnson and Angel Merkel.

It had been a turbulent week. The EU had rejected Johnsons plan for a hi-tech customs border on the island of Ireland.A no-deal exit was just over three weeks away.Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, accused Johnson of engaging in a stupid blame game.

But it was how a Downing Street source had characterised the phone call that sent the political temperature soaring.

The source had told journalists: Merkel said that if Germany wanted to leave theEUthey could do it no problem, but the UK cannot leave without leaving Northern Ireland behind in a customs union and in full alignment for ever.

Blood was boiling. The DUP leader Arlene Foster accused the EU and Dublin of wanting to trap Northern Ireland. Officials in Brussels and Berlin questioned whether the notoriously circumspect Merkel would have used such language. A Downing Street source suggested a deal was now essentially impossible, not just now but ever.

However, senior sources close to developments that week say Merkels interventionwaspivotal. Ireland, the European Commission, and other member states had been insisting Johnsons plan a blend of customs processing centres near the Irish border, streamlined by technology and derogations from EU law was not acceptable. Now the German Chancellor was telling Johnson directly it would not work. It has a different type of weight when it comes from Merkel, says one key source. It played a role, definitely.

The role it played was to force Johnson to abandon his Irish border plan. Three days later he met the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar at Thornton Manor near Liverpool. To considerable surprise, they emerged after 90 minutes proclaiming a pathway to an agreement.

The worry is that Merkel will succeed in bullying Johnson into surrendering the UK again into the vassalage hes so famous fordecrying, and that the PM is just not up to holding his ground late in the battle. He needs to accept that the long-term interest of the UK as an independent coastal state means walking away from EU regulation economically, politically and indeed militarily.

Alexandra Phillips and Ben Habib, both former Brexit Party MEPs, also worry about the PM bottling it when the denouement comes. They worrythat Monsieur Barnier has the UK in a grotesque grip, using at every opportunitythe Political Declaration which Johnson dismissed as not legally binding.

Theirdevastating account sets out the catastrophic surrenderthatJohnsons signing of the WA/PD was.and how it handed control ofthe negotiations tothe EU again, with the Political Declaration shepherding the UK towards ongoing EU regulation. They say:Following the resumption of face-to-face parleys at the start of the week, indeed the mood music coming from the Prime Minister is undaunted, uncompromising and unapologetically advocating full-fat freedom. But weve been here before. Peel back the swashbuckling spin and what lies beneath is the samewretched set of arrangements Boris Johnson once protested as vassalage.

Meanwhile Barnier simply has to keep banging home his level playing field a field that will be even more tilted to EU unfairness, it seems.

Everything hangs on Johnsons nerve. Has he the nerve to walk away and to make the necessary WTO preparations for this? For all his patriotic rhetoric, is he a Chamberlain not a Churchill? Given the passive-aggressive remainer inertia from the governmental support machine, witnessed a year ago in Sir Mark Sedwills dire Project Fear warning letter on a no-deal Brexit,the pressure will be on Johnson to cave in. Worried that this will happen, Nigel Farage threatens to fire up the engines of his Brexit Party again.

I fear it will almost certainly be needed.

- Advertisement -

Excerpt from:

TCW's Brexit Watch: Will Johnson cave in a second time? - The Conservative Woman

Brexit has reopened a divide within the Tories that cannot be bridged – Telegraph.co.uk

Moreover, if US chickens are sold here and are properly labelled, no one has to buy them. But price is important for many consumers. Free-range chickens can cost four or five times as much as a broiler sold in a cut-price supermarket. The American birds may be cheaper still. In any case, a deal with the US also opens a huge market for UK farmers whose higher quality and ethical standards will be a marketing advantage in pitching for the custom of better-off Americans.

Under the Agriculture Bill, farmers will continue to receive most of the support they were paid under the CAP until 2022 through a series of transition arrangements that will also protect the environment and ensure high production standards. But, they ask, what will be the point of these if they are then left to the mercies of cheap imports from the US and elsewhere? In addition, if there is no UK-EU trade deal by the end of the year, their exports to Europe will become more expensive.

Are we really looking at the possible extinction of British agriculture? Aside from the impact on the livelihoods of farmers and the countryside they manage, it would be a serious matter, given how vulnerable this country which imports 40 per cent of its food is to a breakdown in supply lines.

If the vaunted free trade deal with America looks like foundering over agriculture, which way will Boris Johnson jump? He needs to land this deal, especially as talks with the EU are not going well. But he faces the age-old choice for Tory prime ministers: farmers or consumers? It will be hard to placate both, as Peel discovered.

Here is the original post:

Brexit has reopened a divide within the Tories that cannot be bridged - Telegraph.co.uk

Britain wants to reinvent UK-China relations in the Brexit age – Quartz

In February 2016, when Boris Johnson was still mayor of London, he wrote in The Telegraph newspaper that if the UK voted to leave the European Union, its government would be embroiled for several years in a fiddly process of negotiating new arrangements on trade and business with other countries. As prime minister, Johnson has just made that process much harder for himself, by picking a very public fight with China, one his countrys largest economic partners.

Relations between Europe and China have soured over the last few years. Beijing and Brussels regularly butt heads over Hong Kong,Taiwan, and human rights violations in Xinjiang. Last year, the European Commission called Beijing a systemic rival in a strategic outlook paper (pdf, p. 1). With Covid-19, things have only gotten worse.

The UK mostly stayed out of the fray, having declared in 2015 a new golden era in relations with China. But with Johnson at its head, Downing Street has become more aggressive and vocal lately on at least two issues: Hong Kong and the Chinese technology giant Huawei. As Johnson attempts to restructure the Sino-British relationship in the wake of Brexit, its not clear what leverage he has, or who could step into the void if China chose to reducethe scale of its investments in the UK.

When Johnson was chosen to succeed Theresa May as prime minister, he said his government would be very pro-China.

Times have changed.

The first major turning point was the US-China trade war, and the accompanying pressure on Britain to choose a side. Economically, the choice is stark (pdf, p.6). In 2018, Washington and London traded 201.6 billion ($255 billion) worth of goods, while trade with China was worth 68.3 billion. Exports to the US represented 18.8% of the UKs total exports that year, compared to 3.6% for China. The US was the UKs top trade partner, and China was the fifth.

At first, it appeared like the UK was willing to defy Washington on at least one issue: Huawei. The US believes that Huawei is a security risk, and has threatened to withhold intelligence from countries that use the companys gear in their core 5G networks. But in spite of intense lobbying by American officials, in January, the UK government declined to ban Huawei from its network.

Then, the novel coronavirus started spreading around the globe. Evidence emerged that, when the first cases of Covid-19 were detected in Wuhan, Chinese officials covered them up, and later delayed releasing information about the virus to the World Health Organization. The pandemic shed light on how dependent the world is on Chinas factories, which produce up to 85% of the worlds supply of face masks. It also made clear that Beijing is willing to use its economic might as a political bargaining chip: After Australia called for an inquiry into the origin of the virus, Beijing slapped tariffs on its barleyandstopped buying meatfrom its major abattoirs.

As a result, anti-China sentiment has risen in Britain, where it was already quite high. According to a survey conducted by the British Foreign Policy Group (pdf, p. 6), only 18% of UK citizens trusted China to act responsibly in the world in May, down from roughly 21% in January.

Downing Street has also become more hawkish on China. Johnson is reportedly drawing up plans to cut Huawei out of the UKs 5G network entirely by 2023. And the government is attempting to speed up plans for a bill that would tighten controls over Chinese corporate takeovers, after British intelligencewarned lawmakers in April that they needed to restrict Chinese influence over strategic industries.

What weve seen is the UK being shaken out of its complacency, says Kerry Brown, director of the Lau China Institute at Kings College, London.

Another major turning point came in mid-April, when Beijing imposed a new security law on Hong Kong that restricts the citys independence. Setting itself apart from the EU, which simply issued a statement, the UK announced that it would create a pathway to citizenship for nearly 3 million eligible citizens of Hong Kong who were born before Britain handed the city over to China in 1997. A spokesperson for Chinas foreign ministry threatened countermeasures.

Some in the UK also find their governments move incomprehensible. Brown, who doesnt mince his words, qualified Johnsons decision to hand out passports like confetti in Hong Kong as fatuous, gestural grandstanding politics.

When he was campaigning for Brexit, Johnson sold his supporters a vision of a truly global Britain, which hinges on the countrys ability to deepen its financial ties with Beijing. Now, says Thomas des Garets Geddes, a junior analyst at the Mercator Institute for China Studies, the prospect of an imminent Sino-British free trade agreement already seems rather remote.

Last year, the UK was the second-largest recipient of Chinese FDI by volume. China also represents the worlds largest consumer market, with a middle class expected to grow to 550 million people by 2022, according to McKinsey.

That is a tough hole to fill. Johnson has previously expressed an interest in deepening economic ties with members of the Commonwealth, a 54-nation group of mostly former British colonies. But Brown argues that its not really very likely that the Commonwealth is going to be a coherent and cohesive market. Britains attempts to lay the foundation for a bilateral trade deal with India, the Commonwealths largest economy, have stalled in the past.

Peter Lu, an expert in mergers & acquisitions who leads Baker McKenzies China practice in London, represents Chinese investors wanting to buy or invest in European companies. He says recent developments in the UK-China relationship have given his clients pause. Its very hard for the key decision-maker to invest in a country which is not friendly, he explains, because faith is a very important factor in Chinese culture and they cant justify investing a lot of money in hostile countries.

Some argue Downing Streets newfound hawkishness is little more than a distraction from Johnsons domestic troubles over his widely-criticized handling of the pandemic and scandal-prone senior advisor, Dominic Cummings. But Geddes says the growing hawkishness vis--vis China that is emerging across the UKs political spectrum is very real and unlikely to disappear any time soon.

That, argues Brown, is a strategic mistake. The danger is that we shoot our mouths off now about Hong Kong and about all these other issues and back ourselves into a corner, he says. If the economy is as bad as it looks its going to be in a few months time, then the UK cant really be picking and choosing who it does business with.

Beggars, unfortunately, cant be choosers.

Link:

Britain wants to reinvent UK-China relations in the Brexit age - Quartz

Brexit deal now unlikely without extension, and time is running out – Verdict

Securing a full deal on Brexit within the required timeframe is looking increasingly unlikely, and with the deadline for an extension just weeks away, a no-deal Brexit is now a serious concern, according to a report published today by thinktank UK in a Changing Europe.

The report, The Brexit Negotiations: A Stocktake, has found that there are a number of what Jill Rutter, senior research fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe, describes as an entirely predictable set of stumbling blocks, including fishing, governance and a level playing field, with the two sides locked into completely incompatible positions. On some of these issues.

As a result, the organisation argues that an extension is currently the best option, however the deadline for asking for one is less than a month away.

June is clearly crucial. If were going to extend transition as a lot of organisations have asked, weve got to ask by the end of June, said Professor Catherine Barnard, senior fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe, speaking at a press conference on the launch of the report.

She added that while the EU was open to an extension, the UK was adamant that it would not be asking for one.

If we havent asked for an extension by next week or the week after, that is it for asking for an extension.

If the UK does decide to continue with negotiations in an attempt to secure a deal on Brexit the path that the UK in a Changing Europe expects it to take then it will face a very tight timescale to do this by.

Rutter highlighted that both sides have their own deadlines for when they need negotiations to be finished by. The UK has said it wants an agreement in place by the end of September, while the EU has given 31 October as its deadline so that it has time to ratify all aspects of the deal.

Its probably the EU deadline that matters more than the UK deadline, she said, adding that this created a Halloween II scenario, echoing the previous deadline the UK was working towards under Theresa Mays government.

This gives an extremely tight negotiating window to resolve the many sticking points still present,

Assuming the UK doesnt walk away, then we would be negotiating throughout the months of July, August, September, said Barnard.

If this isnt successful, a no-deal Brexit is the most likely scenario, which will see the UK default to trading on World Trade Organisation terms. This would, according to the UK in a Changing Europe, cause a GDP slump of up to 8-9% over the next decade.

Get the Verdict morning email

For businesses, this adds considerable uncertainty at a time when many industries can least afford it.

Whats missing from all this narrative is how on earth business is going to adapt, said Barnard.

Supply chains in particular are a key concern for many businesses, with Professor Jonathan Portes, senior fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe, warning that the UK might find itself excluded from supply chains and markets as it rebuilds.

There is also the issue of immigration, although Portes stressed that on this issue, it is not about whether we do a deal as immigration is generally not a key topic in the trade negotiations.

The UK is going to have a new system either way. Were going to need radical changes to immigration, he said.

If transition isnt extended, we need a new immigration system in January 2021, deal or no deal.

This is of particular concern to the UK technology industry, which relies heavily on talent from the EU, and which is being seen as a key driver of UK growth in the post-Brexit era.

There are also fears that bungling this could have severe reputational damage to the UK for years to come at a time when it is trying to portray itself as having a global, business-friendly mindset.

The thinktank also acknowledged that doing this during the coronavirus pandemic has created an additional unexpected complication, with many member states unwilling to engage heavily with the Brexit deal negotiations while they are fighting an unprecedented health crisis.

The EU is very irritated that the UK is insisting on doing this while member states have things that they think are much more important to deal with, said Rutter.

There are also competing schools of thought on whether dealing with Brexit during the pandemic is a good call.

While some see it as adding dangerous additional stresses to businesses and the economy at a time when they can least afford it, others believe that tackling the two at once will cause less overall damage than them being handled as separate incidents.

Our view is that on balance Covid-19 does make the economic risks of exiting transition without a trade deal in January even larger than they already are, said Portes, but there are a lot of uncertainties.

Read more: Absence of services sector from Brexit negotiations risks profound impact

View original post here:

Brexit deal now unlikely without extension, and time is running out - Verdict

The pandemic is being used as cover for a no-deal Brexit – The Guardian

Most of us who have followed Brexit closely believed coronavirus would soften the governments stance in trade talks with Europe. The economic shock triggered by the pandemic, and the fact Whitehall is so overwhelmed managing it, made it more likely the government would extend the transition period, due to expire at the end of this year, or strike a deal. It turns out that the opposite is true. Rather than encouraging a more flexible and pragmatic approach, Covid-19 has instead reinforced the case for no deal at the very top of government.

Perhaps the most important driver is the belief among ministers that the UK economy will be permanently reshaped by the crisis, as companies create new supply chains and reshore production to provide greater resilience in the future, not least in case of another pandemic. The government wants a free hand to facilitate this change, one that it believes would be constrained by the EUs demand that the UK remain tied to its labour and environmental standards and state aid rules.

On the other side of the same coin, there are growing fears in cabinet that maintaining close EU ties would lock the UK into the EUs post-Covid-19 economic measures designed for its 27 member states, with little regard for the UKs interests.This is nonsense, as theEUs rescue package unveiled last Wednesday assumes no UK financial contribution. But it is a powerful argument on the Eurosceptic backbenches and has scared many in cabinet.

Anotherargument popular with backbench Brexiteers, but now more prominent among ministers, is the belief that coronavirus presents the government with an opportunity to bury theloss of growth from no trade deal under the cover of the much more dramatic drop in GDP caused by coronavirus.

The politics of this are very juicy for the Vote Leave team in the driving seat in government. Not least because it is only really a no deal that fully delivers on their substantive divergence agenda, while anyversion of a deal with the EU, no matter how distant, will ultimately tie the UK into EU rules and regulations in some way, an idea they hate and are loth to accept.No deal alsofacilitates a trade deal with the US, and the symbolism of Global Britain is key for ministers far more important than the limited economic benefit a UK-US trade pact would bring.

Time is also running out. Despite three rounds of talks so far, no progress has been made and negotiators on both sides are downbeat about the likelihood of a breakthrough this week.Big gaps remain in the UK over whether and how far to align to EU standards, the role of the European court of justice and the EUs demands to fish in UK waters. Butthe government wont extend the transition period. Boris Johnson believes he would struggle to sell to voters the extra 10bn in financial contributions and further spell of EU control of UK laws that this would bring.

A political intervention on both sides will therefore be needed to move beyond the current stage. There will l be an opportunity this month, when Johnson meets the European commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, virtually, around the time of a long-planned EU leaders session in June to review progress.But the EU is unlikely to change its mandate and absent progress, ministers plan to make a judgment in September so they can give business clarity about the trading arrangements from 1 January. They may switch to assuming and preparing for no deal then.

Finally, the survival of Dominic Cummings, Johnsons closest adviser, despite allegations he broke the lockdown rules, also enhances the prospect of no deal. One reason why Brexiteer ministers and aides rallied behind him is that he sees it as his personal mission to prevent Johnson extending the transition period in June, and delivering a version of Brexit that lets the UK take back control. It would be wrong to underestimate his impact on the outcome of these negotiations.

Of course, this could all be tactics and bluster. Johnsonand his cheerleaders on the backbenches have convinced themselves that such brinkmanship worked during the withdrawal agreement talks, so it is no real surprise they intend to repeat the trick now. Especially as they believe, wrongly, that coronavirus will make the EU more desperate to conclude a deal and buckle at the last moment. But Downing Street is right that December is the real deadline.

Germanys role will be key. I say this not as a naive Brit, believing that Angela Merkel will ride to Britains rescue, but as someone who has spent more than two decades studying and working on EU affairs. With Germany at the head of Europes rotating presidency, and Merkel in the final throes of her chancellorship, she will find it very hard to sign off on no deal. Of all of the EUs member states, Germany has been the most focused on the longer-term, geopolitical risk of no deal, and the necessity for the UK and EU to maintain constructive ties.

But even Merkel cant and wont save the UK from itself, and will not agree to a deal at any price.If the net effect of Covid-19 is that ministers see more benefit than cost from no deal, with the dominant view in cabinet now opposed to extending the transitional period, then that will indeed be the outcome at the end of this year.

Mujtaba Rahman is the managing director for Europe at Eurasia Group, a political risk research and consulting firm

Read the original:

The pandemic is being used as cover for a no-deal Brexit - The Guardian

Brexit Britain has a much better alternative than the EU: Canzuk – Telegraph.co.uk

Brexit-watch.org recently interviewed former Australian deputy prime minister John Anderson, former leader of the government in the Australian Senate Eric Abetz, as well as Erin OToole - a candidate to be the next leader of the Canadian Conservative Party - on our YouTube channel.

All three spoke at length about the potential of Canzuk. For many commentators and politicians in Australia, Canada and New Zealand, closer ties between the three countries and Britain represents a perfect realignment for post-Brexit Britain. Canzuk also represents a perfect realignment for all four nations in a post-coronavirus world economy.

Today, the United States is starting to retreat from global leadership. Yet the Western alliance needs formalising and leading, while the EU will never fulfil that role. Canzuk - and the United States - already share Five Eyes and the UKUSA Agreement. Formalisation, after Brexit, of the economic and military ties between Canzuk would enable not just greater prosperity, but more geopolitical reach and military interoperability.

After Covid-19, we can assume Australia, Canada and New Zealand will not want to put all their eggs in one Sinocentric basket. Australia has been particularly vigorous in its response to China, while Canzuk parliamentarians recently joined forces over Hong Kong. Cross-pollinating the Canzuk economies would be a winning formula, given the desire to onshore critical industry and lessen reliance on China after Covid-19.

No one is suggesting Canzuk has a common currency. When trust and bonds are embedded, there is no need for EU-style bureaucracy. But whether in the realm of economics or security, Canzuk is a no-brainer. The EU, meanwhile, has showcased its divisions for the world to see. Italy is not to Germany what Australia is to Britain (and lets not even get started on the cultural Iron Curtain between central and eastern Europe on the one hand, and western Europe on the other). The bonds and trust exist between the Canzuk nations to do something far greater than what exists today.

Try as it might, this is something the EU can never replicate. This is also a moment where the Western world needs a united front but at a time when the US is (perhaps understandably) unwilling to carry the Western alliance. Geography has never mattered less but cultural proximity will always count. Canzuk would bring the best out of each country. Get Canzuk done!

More here:

Brexit Britain has a much better alternative than the EU: Canzuk - Telegraph.co.uk

Brexiteer called out for claiming Brexit Party was ‘most diverse’ in European Parliament – The New European

PUBLISHED: 09:11 08 June 2020 | UPDATED: 09:14 08 June 2020

Andra Maciuca

Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage speaks in front of newly elected Brexit Party MEPs, including Annunziata Rees-Mogg (L), Dr David Bull (2nd L) and Ann Widdecombe (2nd R) at a Brexit Party event. (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images) (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)

2019 Getty Images

Email this article to a friend

To send a link to this page you must be logged in.

Become a Supporter

Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only continue to grow with your support.

The claims came from Belinda de Lucy, as part of a tweet complaining that the media accused the Brexit Party of racism on a regular basis.

The tweet was sent in response to a tweet from the official account for Sophy Ridge on Sunday in which the presenter asks health secretary Matt Hancock how many black people there are in the current cabinet - to which Hancock says there is a whole series of people from this background.

De Lucys tweet read: Hey Sophy, we had the most diverse party in the whole of the EU Parliament, and it didnt stop the constant accusation and insinuations from the mainstream media that we were racists.

Its a false narrative that is pushed on anyone not left wing.

Unsurprisingly, Twitter did not support her claims.

Responses to the Brexiteers tweet included have you tried not being racist.

One user tried to explain to de Lucy that BAME MEPs as a proportion of the total MEPs show Brexiteers were far from being the most diverse party.

De Lucy replied: In the EU Parliament - to which the user said: I know. That is why I said MEPs.

An analysis carried out by The New European found that, out of the main national parties in the UK which had MEPs following the May 2019 European Parliament elections, the Brexit Party had the smallest percentage of BAME MEPs only 10% of their members in the European Parliament were not white.

By comparison, Labour had 22% BAME MEPs, while the Green Party had 14% and the Lib Dems had 13%.

The European Network Against Racism (ENAR) found, in the light of last years EP elections, that the UK is the country with the biggest number of minority ethnic MEPs. However, the number is still very small at only eight MEPs, considering the UK had 73 representatives between 2019-2020.

Because of Brexit, which Nigel Farages organisation was built on, the number of both ethnic minorities and people of colour will go down 1% after the UKs exit from the European Union resulting in 4% and, respectively 3% of the European Parliament being made of each group.

The Brexit Party also fared the worst in terms of gender diversity out of the main UK parties in EP 72% of the partys MEPs were men, as compared to 50% of the Tories, 38% of the Lib Dems and 29% of the Greens.

Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press with your support. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.

Read the original post:

Brexiteer called out for claiming Brexit Party was 'most diverse' in European Parliament - The New European

Nissan comes out of lockdown and braces for Brexit – The Guardian

It must have been a strange last four years for the workers at Nissans Sunderland factory, as they went about their business of making cars while at the same time being caught in a symbolic tug of war between a divided Brexit nation.

When things are going well for the plant, it apparently shows that Global Britain is surging ahead of rivals; when the wind turns, it is a symbol of the UKs industrial decline, with government having to go chequebook in hand to bureaucrats in Japan to keep it afloat.

Workers will return to the plant on Monday, with a phased restart as it gradually raises its output from the zero cars produced in April and May towards the 28,000 monthly total achieved on average in 2019.

Britains largest single car factory has the potential to build 600,000 cars a year, but it last broke the 500,000 mark in 2016. Even if carmaking restarts quickly, production for 2020 will surely be the lowest in years. What happens beyond that is an open question, as a result of comments last week from Nissans chief operating officer, Ashwani Gupta.

You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue, he told the BBC. We are committed.

Two sentences; two inaccuracies. First, Nissan made 346,871 cars in the UK in 2019, against Jaguar Land Rovers 385,197 (although the latter were produced at various locations). The second caveat was rather more important: the carmaker is committed, but only up to a point.

Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, its not our intention, but the business will not be sustainable, Gupta said. Thats what everybody has to understand.

Standard World Trade Organization tariffs would add 10% to the cost of exports to countries with which the UK does not have a trade deal. For companies used to shaving off fractions of a percentage point in efficiencies, the prospect of carrying on as before in such circumstances is as absurd now as it was before the referendum.

The exasperation of car executives at still having to deal with Brexit on top of everything else is almost palpable particularly at Nissan, which has already said it will be shedding 2,800 workers in Barcelona as part of a deep restructuring in favour of the UK plant.

Sunderland is one of 35 Nissan plants worldwide, according to industry data company Marklines, even when those operated by its alliance partners, Renault and Mitsubishi, are not included. It has survived one crisis so far; a second might be tempting fate.

As Adrian Hallmark, chief executive of luxury carmaker Bentley, put it last week after announcing 1,000 job cuts, a no-deal Brexit would add another human-made disaster on top of the virus. Thousands of redundancies at Aston Martin, McLaren, Renault and parts manufacturer ZF are testament to the difficulties facing the entire global car industry. My message to politicians is this: please dont push us off a second cliff, Hallmark told the Financial Times.

So where does this leave Sunderland? A symbol of Great British quality or of Britannias declining fortunes? The truth is, as in most cases, somewhere in between. Britains largest car plant is a genuine exemplar of car-a-minute efficiency, and Nissan does not want to let it go. At the same time, the pandemic has shown how everything can change for the worse overnight whether because of politics or otherwise.

More here:

Nissan comes out of lockdown and braces for Brexit - The Guardian

EU crisis: Brexit risks bloc’s ‘economic threat’ crumbling – ‘We should leave too!’ – Express.co.uk

Former Brexit Party MEP and director of the Academy of Ideas, Claire Fox, exposed the biggest threat facing the EU. During an interview with Express.co.uk, Ms Fox claimed the EU would be worried about the UK thriving outside the bloc after Brexit as it could jeopardise the integrity of the union. She said other nations will look at the UK and wonder whether they should leave the EU as they will be able to see Britain reclaim its sovereignty.

Ms Fox said: "If the UK does not face a catastrophic collapse economically because of Brexit.

"If we show that we can survive, that then removes one of the threats the EU makes to any Eurosceptic member states threatening to leave the European Union.

"The EU wants to be able to say well at Britain, what a terrible experience that was for them.

"Whereas if the experience in Britain wasn't a terrible one, then you have a situation where you have contagion."

DON'T MISS:Serious SPLITS erupt as member states question what is the EU for?

Ms Fox expanded to explain why the idea of sovereignty was important to Britain and how other member states would look at the UK.

She continued: "Maybe contagion is too strong a word but it would give people the impression that actually, asserting your sovereignty and a way of saying that the accountability of all political decision is made domestically.

"It would also show that a country is entitled to make decisions about its economy, political decisions and everything else.

"They should be able to do this without referring to some top-down bureaucratic body and its rules."

Ms Fox outlined what impact a successful Brexit would have on other member states in the future.

She said: "Other countries might simply decide to do the same.

"The EU must fear that if Brexit happens that other countries will look around and say maybe we should leave the EU too."

READ MORE:

Stubborn Barnier blasted by Hancock as he demands EU concessions[VIDEO]Brexit warning: Barnier attacked for plotting 'blame game' in talks[COMMENT]Boris backed by 95% of readers to not sell out fishing in trade deal[POLL]

Ms Fox also warned the EU could see more divisions form in the European Union as the bloc attempts to recover from coronavirus.

She explained that some member states, like Italy, will question the amount of help they received from the European Union during the crisis.

In addition to this, tensions may arise between the rich and poorer states as economies attempt to restart.

Ms Fox predicted that some wealthier countries may resent having to give more money to nations more heavily impacted by the virus.

Read more:

EU crisis: Brexit risks bloc's 'economic threat' crumbling - 'We should leave too!' - Express.co.uk

The car industry now: will Brexit’s impact now be even greater? – Autocar

Having dominated the news agenda for the past five years, talk of Brexit practically disappeared in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak.

The UKs position remains that it will not extend its transitional period with the EU beyond the end of this year, and the automotive industrys position remains that anything but a free trade deal between the UK and the EU would have catastrophic consequences for the industry here. From 2021, cars coming in from abroad will be subject to a 10% import tariff if the UK and EU fail to strike a deal. Some 81% of all cars built in the UK last year were exported, with the EU taking almost 55% of that total, at 576,000 cars.

So for now Brexit remains in its seemingly never-ending holding pattern, although Felipe Muoz, Jato Dynamics global analyst, doesnt expect the pandemic to affect its likely outcome to the UKs automotive industry. The economy has already absorbed most of the risks derived from Brexit, he says. All the decisions that were due to be taken due to Brexit were already taken, and this crisis wont change them.

What the pandemic does threaten to do, however, is make the financial position of some car makers even worse and undo any progress made in recovering. A no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020 risks undoing efforts to get the auto industry back on track, says Eric-Mark Huitema, director-general of the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA).

Jaguar Land Rover, for example, has said it would cost it 500m a year in tariffs on vehicle exportsalone, and the ACEA notes that as the UK produces so few electric motors and batteries, EVs become particularly susceptible to high tariffs, given how large a proportion the battery is of a cars overall cost.

New trade deals with countries outside the EU are unlikely to be ready by 2021, either, and the UK may find the terms will be different to before the crisis, as countries may have been spooked by how exposed they are to global supply chains and have more pressing domestic problems to solve first.

Muoz says: The problem for Britain is that other potential commercial partners, like the US, are now heading to recession, so Britain will have more difficulties substituting trade with the EU.

READ MORE

Covid-19 and the British car industry

Excerpt from:

The car industry now: will Brexit's impact now be even greater? - Autocar

Brexit shock: How tensions between USA and China may affect UK’s trade options – Express

In an economic climate marred by the coronavirus pandemic and increasing global tensions, experts have warned the UK has started to find itself negotiating with all parties for trade deals, from the EU and the US to China and Australia. The US and China, both close allies of the UK historically, have recently seen boiling tensions with each other, resulting in tariffs and trade disputes. For years, the US has sanctioned Chinese telecoms company Huawei with sanctions, and despite January seeing a Phase One trade agreement between the two nations, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to major distrust and conflict between Washington and Beijing. For the UK, this complicated geo-political situation has led some to question how will Brexit go ahead.

Andrew Northage, head of the International Trade sector group at leading international law firm Walker Morris, believes that the UKs economic situation is already fraught with tension as it departs the EUs pre-existing bloc of trade, and that worsening US/China relations poses difficult questions for how Brexit will go ahead.

He toldExpress.co.uk: The UK could be expected to face a harder economic environment at a time of global economic fragility, which would increase the stress on the UK economy.

Growing US/China tensions may result in the UK seeking to obtain better market access in China and attract Chinese companies and capital to the UK, which could be seen as positive.

If China has reduced access to US financial markets and technology, the UK could look to bridge that gap."

READ MORE:They NEVER wanted a deal! Hannan lets rip at EU over plot for 'subservient' UK

However, he suggested that the UK may be weaker than the EU for trade deals, which could hinder their search for an agreement.

Mr Northage added: The US is likely to put pressure on the UK to support its efforts and may look for the UK to align itself more with Washington.

The price of such cooperation may be concessions in the free trade agreement the UK is looking to conclude with the US.

The issue of food standards (and in particular chlorinated chicken) has been in the news again recently and looks to have some distance to run yet.

But he holds that the UK may look to try to position itself as a middleman between the US and China.

He concluded: Easier said than done but potentially big rewards if done well.

Meanwhile, Professor Stefan Legge, trade expert and economist from the University of St. Gallen, also said that the UK will have a tough time finding a new deal, but more because of the US hardline stance on trade issues.

Prof. Legge pointed out that the Trump administration in the US has not made a lot of international agreements on trade, specifically referring to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Trump withdrew from.

He continues to say that trade agreements usually take years to be negotiated and ratified.

He said: In more than three years the Trump administration has achieved very little - the new NAFTA (USMCA) is not much different from the original NAFTA and will come into effect July 1, 2020.

DON'T MISSBrexit bombshell: Chance of no deal 'higher than ever'[ANALYSIS]Macron's MEP savaged over claims UK's Brexit demands are 'unrealistic'[SPOTLIGHT]Brexiteer brilliantly exposes Barnier for exploiting Remainers[FOCUS]

There is hardly any chance in my view that the UK will secure a trade deal with the US before the end-of-2020 deadline.

If talks start in the coming months, American negotiators will ask for better access to the British health care system (NHS) and food market - both highly sensitive matters in London.

It has always been clear that an `independent UK outside the EU will have a hard time securing trade agreements with key partners.

This is especially true in 2020 when the UK will want to use its scarce resources to negotiate a favourable agreement with its most important partner, the European Union.

However, John Royden, Head of Research at JM Finn added that the tensions may make it easier for the UK to gain access to these markets, due to the US and Chinas decoupling in trade elating a vacuum for UK businesses.

Royden said: "Before COVID-19 the Chinese and US were at each others throats; the US wanted to stop subsidising Chinese economic growth by ceasing to tolerate the expropriation of US technology by Chinese firms.

The expropriation took the form of Chinese laws requiring the majority Chinese ownership of local companies and poor court processes when it was alleged that Intellectual Protocol (IP) theft had occurred.

From a geo-political perspective this was all part of a greater ambition to slow Chinese progress towards the Chinese goal of matching and then exceeding the USs global influence.

Trade wars played an important part of the pressure mixture as well.

Then came COVID-19 and the suspected Chinese cover-up that followed.

Mr Royden also explained that without COVID-19 worsening, it is unlikely that state control of Chinese media will loosen, as it is essential for public relations and international condemnation will look bad on the government.

He continues: "Pressure to relax state controls of Chinese media will come from international condemnation of Xis COVID-19 cover up.

The trade war is likely to morph into a cold war of words and accusations.

The US will like this because trade wars have an element of cutting your nose to spite your face about them.

"The impact on the UKs attempts to do international trade deals should therefore become easier as the spats between the US and China move away from trade.

Watch the next G20 meeting with interest.

The rest is here:

Brexit shock: How tensions between USA and China may affect UK's trade options - Express

Brexit: NI Assembly votes to extend transition period – BBC News

Image caption The motion was opposed by unionist parties at Stormont

The Northern Ireland Assembly has voted in favour of extending the Brexit transition period.

The transition is due to end on 1 January and a new "trade border" will begin operating between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

The UK government can request a transition extension, but has said it will not do so.

The assembly vote is not binding on the Northern Ireland Executive or the UK Government.

The multi-party Executive has, so far, been unable to reach a position on extending the transition but will reconsider the issue in two weeks time.

The Assembly motion for extension was backed by nationalists, the Alliance party, greens and socialists but opposed by unionists.

That meant it passed by 50 votes to 38.

The motion was proposed by SDLP MLA Matthew O'Toole who told the assembly it was "mad and dangerous" not to extend given the current economic circumstances.

He said: "It is especially dangerous because we know how close we came, in recent weeks, to serious disruption to supply chains across these islands.

"If we end this year with no trade deal and no extension to the transition, we could face the very real prospect of significant disruption to supply chains, not just between Calais and Dover but between Holyhead and Dublin - a route that is critical to the Northern Ireland market - and at Belfast and Larne."

Speaking against the motion, the DUP's Mervyn Storey said an extension would be counterproductive.

"An extension to the transition period would prevent us from taking the radical steps needed to rebuild the post-Covid-19 economy because the United Kingdom would continue to be bound by EU rules and unable to influence them."

At the end of transition period, Northern Ireland will continue to follow EU rules on agricultural and manufactured goods, while the rest of the UK will not.

Additionally, the whole of the UK will leave the EU's customs union, but Northern Ireland will continue to enforce the EU's customs code at its ports.

This will mean some new processes and checks for goods entering Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.

The UK government has confirmed that will need expanded infrastructure at Northern Ireland's ports to carry out checks on animals and food products.

It is generally aiming for a "light-touch" approach to new checks and processes, though the detail will all have to be agreed with the EU.

Read the original:

Brexit: NI Assembly votes to extend transition period - BBC News

Boris Johnson wants to ‘fix’ Brexit deal he once claimed was ‘oven-ready’ – The New European

PUBLISHED: 17:09 07 June 2020 | UPDATED: 17:09 07 June 2020

Prime Minister Boris Johnson holds a freshly baked pie while wearing a 'get Brexit done' apron. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA.

PA Wire/PA Images

Boris Johnson reportedly wants to change the terms of the Brexit withdrawal agreement that he spent the general election promoting as oven-ready and ready-to-go.

Email this article to a friend

To send a link to this page you must be logged in.

Become a Supporter

Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only continue to grow with your support.

In November the prime minister said: This government has succeeded where no one thought we could. We not only got a new deal from our EU partners, but we got a great deal.

He added: After three and a half years of procrastination, we have a great new deal that is ready to go.

But now the UK government reportedly now claims that the agreement has unfair defects after acknowledging most of the deal was copied from Theresa Mays own deal she agreed with the EU.

One of the only changes in the document that Johnson praised surrounded the Northern Irish backstop.

The Sunday Express reports that sources close to UK chief negotiator David Frost say that the PM is looking to fix the deal.

He wants to make changes despite setting a deadline of the end of June to make progress in talks before the end of the transition period in December.

Unfortunately we couldnt fix every defect with the withdrawal agreement last autumn we had to prioritise abolishing the backstop and getting Brexit done in the face of a parliament that was trying to stop us, the source said.

Well now have to do our best to fix it but were starting with a clear disadvantage.

On Friday the EUs chief Brexit negiotator claimed that Johnson was trying to break the political declaration surrounding the withdrawal agreement.

But the UK government said otherwise - claiming that Barnier had misunderstood the purpose of the declaration.

Were committed to the political declaration, but we see it as guiding parameters it is not a treaty, they said.

In my dictionary means parameters means limits, it doesnt require us to agree to everything in it.

Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press with your support. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.

Go here to read the rest:

Boris Johnson wants to 'fix' Brexit deal he once claimed was 'oven-ready' - The New European

Claim that extending the Brexit transition period could cost 380 billion is not credible – Full Fact

Get Brexit done! Majority AGAINST Brexit transition extension in close poll

Daily Express, 17 May 2020

Britains faces 380billion bill if Brexit is delayed beyond December

Sun, 17 May 2020

Extension to Brexit bill could cost 378bn

Mail Online, 17 May 2020

After the UK left the EU on 31 January, it entered a transition period lasting until the end of this year. During this period, the UK remains in the customs union and single market, meaning that things like trade, travel and regulations continue to work as they did before the UK left.

As part of its Withdrawal Agreement with the EU, the UK can extend the transition period for up to two years provided it agrees this with the EU before 1 July 2020. The UK government has said it will not apply for any extension.

A report published recently by the Centre for Brexit Policy (CBP) warned that the public did not want to see an extension, and that it could cost 378 billion.

Neither of these claims is based on credible evidence. The report presents a one-sided viewpoint on the costs of transition, and most studies into the economic impacts of Brexit show leaving the customs union and single market will mean the UK economy is smaller compared to remaining.

The study also reports findings from an opinion poll selectively, which does not fairly reflect what we know about the UK publics views on the transition period.

The CBP commissioned ComRes to poll public opinion on the transition period. The CBP reported that: The public wants the Government to either shorten the transition period or stick to its current timetable by a small margin (44 per cent to 40 per cent)

The Express incorrectly reported this as showing that a majority of the public were against extending the transition period.

In any case, the CBPs summary isnt a fair reflection of all of the polls findings.

The question thats being referred to was: As a result of the Coronavirus pandemic, there have been some suggestions that the transition period for the UK to leave the EU should be extended beyond 31 December 2020, into 2021 or beyond. Others say that the transition period should remain as already agreed between the UK and the EU, and end 31 December 2020, while others say that the transition period should be shortened so that it ends sooner than 31 December 2020. Any change to the transition period would require Parliament to agree. Which of the following statements best represents your view on the length of the transition period?

35% of respondents said the period should stay as it is, 40% said it should be extended, and 8% said it should be shortened (with the remainder saying they didnt know). This rounds to 44% either wanting the period to remain the same or being shortened.

On its own, this might suggest, by a narrow margin, that more people are opposed to extending the transition period than support it, as the CBP said. However findings from other questions in the same poll muddy those waters:

In other words, people agreed to pretty much every question that was put to them, regardless of whether it implied support or opposition to extending the transition period. So reporting the results of one question alone paints a misleading picture of public opinion. Weve discussed this hazard when reading opinion polls before.

Other polls that have been conducted in recent months have consistently shown that more adults in Great Britain are in favour of extending the transition period than are in favour of sticking to the timetable or shortening the transition period, whether or not the context of the coronavirus pandemic is mentioned. These are all older than the ComRes poll used by the CBP, so we cant say definitively what the public currently thinks.

We dont seek to fact check the CBP reports findings in their entirety, but we can set their figures in context.

The report is largely based on assumptions that sit at the extreme end of those which have been made by studies into the economic impacts of Brexit.

By far the largest components of the CBPs estimate are the potential for economic loss which stem from delaying better regulation outside of the single market and customs union (176 billion) and delaying free trade agreements with non-EU countries (132 billion).

Its true that leaving the single market and customs union open up new options in terms of reaching trade agreements with non-EU countries, and of allowing the UK more choice over regulations for businesses. But both figures offered by the CBP appear unrealistic in the context of the weight of evidence provided by other studies.

The CBPs figure on savings from deregulation is based on an assumed boost of 4% of GDP just below the middle of a range from studies it features in the reportbut well above what most estimates have been in the past.

In its own analysis of the economic impacts of several Brexit scenarios in 2018, the Treasury found that there is significant uncertainty around the potential impacts of regulatory flexibility. It highlighted that external studies had produced a wide range of estimates, ranging from a negative or zero impact, to a benefit of 1.3% of GDP.

That higher figure assumed scaling back regulations that might not be politically feasible (for example, scrapping regulations in a way that was at odds with the governments commitments on climate change).

The CBP also estimates economic benefit from new free trade agreements which would be delayed if the transition period was extended. Featuring studies showing impacts ranging from no change to GDP up to an 8% increase, the report arbitrarily assumed a 3% increase to GDP.

Again, this sits in contrast to the bulk of studies which have tried to estimate this.

According to the Institute for Government in 2018: Much has been made of the UKs ability to offset losses in trade with the EU with new FTAs with other countries. But all the studies that have attempted to quantify the benefits of such deals conclude that they are likely to be relatively modest.

It also said that: Most economic analyses of Brexit predict that leaving the EU will result in higher trade barriers. Based on past evidence on the relationship between trade barriers and economic growth, the studies predict that this increase in tariff and non-tariff barriers would lead to lower economic growth.

The analysis by CBP also does not mention any potential gains from extending the transition period that would come from retaining free trade with the EU. Its highly likely the UK will face additional barriers to trading with EU countries after leaving the single market and customs union.

Also, the CBP says that extending the transition period by two years would mean the UK loses out on two years of tariff revenue from EU imports, amounting to 26 billion. Thats because the CBP assumes the UK would leave the transition period without a free trade agreement with the EU, and so both sides would impose tariffs on each others imports.

But it doesnt try to estimate any direct economic gain from keeping tariffs on imports from non-EU countries for an additional two years. While the UK was an EU member, and during the transition period, the UK gets some income from tariffs (like taxes) the EU places on imports from countries from the rest of the world. This tariff income would be lost if, as the CBP advocates, the transition period ends as scheduled and the UK signs free trade agreements with other countries sooner.

Ultimately its still unclear what kinds of trade barriers the UK will face whenever the transition period ends, as the UK and EU have not agreed the terms of their future relationship. That alone means we should place limited trust in specific numbers that represent the supposed cost of remaining in the transition period.

Link:

Claim that extending the Brexit transition period could cost 380 billion is not credible - Full Fact

North-east skipper Jimmy Buchan warns no-deal Brexit ‘will hurt’ Scottish fishing industry – Press and Journal

Failure to find a fishing compromise in the Brexit talks will hurt the Scottish industry, insiders warned as negotiations entered extra time.

Fishing leaders have told MPs that if differences between the UK and EU are not ironed out before the end of the transition period on December 31 there will be a risk to the industry short-term.

The warnings come just days after the final round of scheduled talks between London and Brussels broke off, with EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier accusing his opposite number, David Frost, of not showing any true will to reach a deal.

Since the outset of negotiations the EU has demanded status quo access to UK waters, which would essentially mean a continuation of the common fisheries policy something that has been categorically rejected by Boris Johnson.

Jimmy Buchan, chief executive of the Scottish Seafood Association, told the Commons environment committee that, despite the differences, a deal must be done no question.

He said: The number one priority for the members I represent is for the UK to get a deal with the EU.

Weve got trade flowing both ways, probably worth about a billion pounds, on seafood coming into the UK and seafood leaving the UK, and therefore it is in the best interest of both parties to make sure they get a deal so that continues, because anything else will hurt both sides.

He added: I would hate to see any type of time delays because we are a just in time delivery service, fresh fish on the slab the next day is what weve built our market on, so we dont want to see any restrictions that is going to create time delays.

There is no question about it, getting a deal with the rest of Europe is really important to our fishermen.

Without an agreement, Mr Buchan said there would be a risk to the industry short term.

Jeremy Percy, director of the New Under Ten Fishermens Association, which represents the UKs small fishing vessels, agreed that a deal was needed.

He said: Eighty percent of the fish we catch is exported and were facing the potential, if we do have a no-deal, of both tariff and non tariff barriers.

Tariff barriers are going to be unhelpful enough, non tariff barriers are potentially far more dangerous.

Were looking at catch certificates, health certificates, transport certificates, on top of that youve got both French customs, who are not exactly renowned for their patience, but also French fishermen.

They can close down the ports or outside the port very quickly and for shellfish exports, especially, thats the death of it.

Barrie Deas, who leads the National Federation of Fishermens Organisations, was much more relaxed about the prospect of no-deal, however.

He cited reconciliations after the Cod Wars in the seventies and said he expects natural economics to work their way through following Brexit.

The comments came as Cabinet Office minister Penny Morduant hinted negotiations were nearing a conclusion.

Speaking in the Commons, she said: We cannot keep negotiating forever, we have to allow our businesses, our farmers, our citizens time to implement the decisions taken.

That is why we are at this key stage now where we have to increase and escalate negotiations because we need to arrive at a deal soon.

Read the rest here:

North-east skipper Jimmy Buchan warns no-deal Brexit 'will hurt' Scottish fishing industry - Press and Journal