In a surprise end-of-year gift to UK taxpayers and tax advisors, the UK will no longer be fully implementing the EUs Mandatory Disclosure Regime (DAC 6) reporting requirements. Under the Free Trade Agreement between the UK and EU signed 30 December 2020, the UK will, following a consultation process, implement legislation to apply the OECD mandatory disclosure rules (MDR) instead of DAC 6, marking a significant reduction in UK tax reporting requirements.

With effect from 25 June 2018, DAC 6 is an EU directive requiring certain intermediaries and/or taxpayers with a connection to EU member states to disclose cross-border arrangements which meet certain hallmarks. Despite having voted to leave the EU, the UK had previously introduced regulations to bring the DAC 6 requirements into effect in full. Under the Free Trade Agreement, however, the UK will now apply the MDR rules instead. As an interim measure, the UK has amended its regulations so that DAC 6 applies only to arrangements that meet the category D hallmark: generally, those that undermine reporting obligations or involve non-transparent legal or beneficial ownership, offshore entities, or structures with no economic substance. In the coming months, HMRC will repeal legislation implementing DAC 6 and implement the OECDs MDR (being broadly similar to the category D hallmark).

Certain practical aspects of the amended UK regulations still need to be confirmed by HMRC, including how the rules apply to the period prior to 1 January 2021.

The rest is here:

DAC 6: Post-Brexit Reduction In UK Tax Reporting Obligations - JD Supra

It is probably safe to say that when Keir Starmers colleagues elected as leader an MP committed to European internationalism, who had become known as Labours remainer-in-chief after unilaterally calling for a public vote with the option to remain, they did not expect to be signing up to a Tory Brexit before the end of the year.

Starmer whipped Labour MPs to vote in favour of Boris Johnsons post-Brexit trade deal yesterday, and 37 of 200 almost one in five chose to defy his instructions. The decision to instruct a vote for the bill is even more surprising when you consider that Starmer was the only leadership candidate of the final three not to agree that Labours Brexit position was a key factor in its 2019 election defeat, and earlier this year vowed to defend freedom of movement after Brexit.

The EU future relationship bill passed the Commons with overwhelming support, by a majority of 448 votes. The prime minister was compared to Pericles and Alexander the Great by one Conservative backbencher during the Brexit debate, and the government suffered just two Tory abstentions. Starmer, meanwhile, was getting grief from all sides. He was asked what happened to his six tests for Brexit. The SNP highlighted the difference between UK Labours approach and Scottish Labours position, ahead of a Holyrood vote in which the latter denied consent to the deal. The leader of the SDLP, Labours sister party in Northern Ireland, concluded that the United Kingdom is coming to an end. Theresa May criticised Starmer for not backing her better deal, involving a closer UK-EU relationship. And the debate closed with Michael Gove mocking the Labour leader.

Among the 37 rebels, just three were frontbenchers compelled by their decision to quit, while other anti-Brexit campaigners who might have been tempted to abstain such as Rosena Allin-Khan and Tulip Siddiq remained in post. No shadow cabinet member broke ranks. But the rejection of Starmers whip was delivered by Labour MPs from across the factional spectrum: you cant get a much clearer illustration of the partys broad church nature than Diane Abbott and Neil Coyle. As usual with Brexit, splits were less along the traditional political dividing lines of left-right and more about geography. With a parliamentary party that is even more representative of remain-voting areas after last years general election defeat, hard work had to go into keeping Labour MPs in line.

Potential rebels were persuaded to follow the whip with the argument that voting for the deal was the only way to avoid no deal, a line they could use to easily explain their vote to constituents. This also fits with Labours consistent theme of responsible opposition. But those close to the leadership have first and foremost pointed to private polling sent in a briefing to MPs that reported 50% would be favourable if Labour voted for the deal, compared to 22% for voting against and 18% for abstaining. As research by YouGov and Opinium confirms, while the British public dont think much of the Brexit deal, a strong majority also want MPs to vote for it. Since taking over in the spring, Starmer has consistently argued that voters broadly feel politicians should get on with Brexit and move on.

The difficulty for Labour is that this crunch moment, the vote, represented only the end of the beginning, rather than the conclusion of Brexit. Keir Starmer told the Guardian on the eve of the vote that he does not expect Brexit to feature on Labour MPs leaflets in the 2024 election campaign. Is that realistic, or wishful thinking? The economic impact of Brexit will start to be felt over the coming months, and the government wont be able to lay the blame entirely on Covid. Holes in the deal guarantee future disputes between the UK and EU. There is also a review date built into it: with the UK set to evaluate how the trade arrangements are working in 2025, how could this not feature prominently in the next general election?

Sources close to Starmer say he does not want to ignore Brexit. The leader is committed to plugging gaps in the deal, such as taking part in the Erasmus exchange programme and helping travelling musicians who have been hit hard by Covid. But he wants to make clear that Labour will not be offering a wholesale renegotiation of the treaty in its manifesto: the proposals will be around fine-tuning the relationship and building on the existing agreement. This throws up another issue for many of Starmers most vocal supporters, as it suggests the pledge made as a leadership candidate in January to bring back freedom of movement after Brexit has been dropped.

It is reasonable to assume that people will forget how Labour voted on the deal this week if it proves to be a problematic decision. As many party insiders have pointed out, nobody bangs on about Labours support for joining the European exchange rate mechanism in 1990, despite Black Wednesday occurring two years later. It is not so easy to argue that Brexit will be forgotten altogether, however. This seems overly optimistic, given that the Labour leadership itself believes almost all other political parties particularly the SNP in Scotland will poke at this Labour sore point, to their own electoral benefit. Starmer may prefer to focus on long-term solutions addressing the roots of Brexit, with a constitutional commission looking at devolution across the UK, but his opponents are unlikely to allow weeping Brexit wounds to heal. Labour must be prepared.

More here:

Labour's vote for Johnson's deal is not the end of its Brexit problems - The Guardian

Delays linked to post-Brexit border controls are expected this week as freight traffic arriving from Britain increases, new technology is tested and traffic systems set up for a surge in checks, Tnaiste Leo Varadkar has said.

Monday will be the first day back for many after the Christmas break, and greater volumes of roll-on, roll-off lorry traffic will follow after the traditionally quiet new year period for freight traffic.

Stena Line and Irish Ferries will operate full ferry services from Holyhead to Dublin, the busiest Irish Sea crossing for trade between the State and Britain, from Monday, with each company having a ferry arrive at roughly the same time in four waves over the course of the day.

We will see next week traffic increasing at the ports and that is really when systems will be tested. We think there will be some delays. We will manage them, Mr Varadkar, the Minister for Enterprise, told RT Radio on Sunday.

Traffic volumes were light last Friday, the first day of post-Brexit border controls on lorries arriving from Britain, and over the weekend.

Some lorries were turned back and prevented from boarding ferries at Holyhead because they did not have the correct paperwork or did not input customs data correctly into the systems.

Most lorries arriving on the first ferries in the hours after Brexit came into effect last Thursday did not know whether or not their goods had to be checked by customs, leading State agencies to call on hauliers to check on Revenue's website 30 minutes before docking.

Mr Varadkar said that his own department and the departments of Agriculture and Health, along with Revenue, were monitoring traffic flows through the ports on a daily basis.

He told the This Week programme that there were small issues coming up as a result of the new trading arrangements with Britain.

Food importers have raised concerns about delays being caused by the requirement to give the Department of Agriculture 24 hours notice of food products of animal and plant origin arriving at Dublin Port to undergo strict sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks at inspection facilities.

Food Drink Ireland, part of business lobby group Ibec, has called on the EU and the UK to introduce facilitation and easement measures under the chapter covering SPS processes in their post-Brexit trade deal that allows them to review border clearance processes to facilitate trade.

We think this should be a priority issue to reflect the reality on the ground of highly integrated Ireland-Great Britain supply chains and the friction and costs now being faced as a result of Brexit, its director Paul Kelly said.

Aidan Flynn, general manager of Freight Transport Association Ireland, said that the changes mean supply chains have to be re-engineered to ensure goods continued to flow freely.

This lengthens the supply chain where we might have been able to put requests for goods at 6pm on the evening and have them arriving into Dublin at 6am the next morning, he said.

That is going to have to be extended by at least 12 hours.

Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan said the low volumes of transport and trucks in recent days has meant State agencies have been able to tease out problems but he does not expect major traffic or travel disruption.

It will be a pain in the neck for the companies because there is a huge amount of background bureaucratic forms, procedures to be filled out, but once we get used to that I dont believe it will be disruptive to our own everyday life, he told Newstalks On the Record programme.

Read the original here:

Delays expected at ports as post-Brexit checks surge - The Irish Times

A Brexiteer has been left fuming after the EU failed to update its website to include a reference to its newly-signed trade agreement with the UK.

John Redwood used a blog on January 2 to complain that the bloc had yet to update its list of trade deals agreed with other countries.

Referencing the "negotiations and agreements" section of its website, the Tory MP pointed out that reference of a Brexit deal does not appear in any of the sections headed "Agreements in place", "Agreements being adopted or ratified", "Agreements being negotiated" or "Agreements on hold.

But with the deal only agreed on Christmas Eve, it is likely to have been an administrative delay preventing it from being published online sooner.

MEPs also still have to vote on the agreement.

MORE:The Brexit deal represents the triumph of the bastards

Nonetheless, Redwoodwrote:The EU website today has no record of the EU/UK Trade Agreement under trade deals.

Nor does its site give any indication of how to trade with the UK, left out from a long list of nations they refer to in the Trade section.

Do they not want to keep on selling us so much, or are the just unable to update their site for the new realities?

Surely they should put up the EU/UK Agreement subject to ratification, as I understand that is what they intend to do.

Alternatively, if they do not think they will be ratifying it they should put up the WTO terms to alert people to that.

The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. We believe our voice is important - both in representing the pro-EU perspective and also to help rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.

The rest is here:

Brexiteer fumes after EU fails to update website with mention of Brexit deal - The New European

Membership bodies have welcomed provisions for the establishment of a Civil Society Forum as part of the UK's Brexit deal with the European Union.

The more than 1,200 page UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement,published last week, covers every aspect of the UKs future relationship with the EU.

Two articles under the heading "Institutional Framework" outline the role of the voluntary sector in the implementation of the deal and any further discussions.

Article six says: The parties shall consult civil society on the implementation of this agreement and any supplementing agreement, in particular through interaction with the domestic advisory groups and the civil society.

Article eight has a number of recommendations that include the organisation of a Civil Society Forum to discuss the implementation of part two of the agreement.

In addition, the forum should meet at least once a year, and include not only civil society organisations established in the UK and the EU, but also domestic advisorygroups such as non-governmental organisations, business and employers' organisations, and trade unions, the agreement states.

Richard Hebditch, director of external affairs at the Association of Charitable Foundations, said: Its really important that the agreements institutional framework doesnt shut out civil society from discussions that take place between the EU and UK ministers and officials.

As the UK government will lose its right to take part in EU policy formulation, paradoxically it may well be the case that UK organisations will spend just as much time if not more working with European partners to try to influence the EU than they did before Brexit.

Small charities must be included in the forum if it is to be representative of the sector, said Rita Chadha, chief executive of the Small Charities Coalition.

Coupled with proposed changes to procurement, there is a real opportunity here for the government to stand by small charities and enable them to play their part in the levelling-up agenda, she said.

Clare Mills, head of communications and external affairs at the local infrastructure umbrella body Navca, warned there would be many competing voices across the sector.

Those voices must be heard and acknowledged alongside those from business, employers organisations and trade unions, she said.

Chris Walker, public affairs manager at the National Council for Voluntary Organisations, said while civil society had the expertise to inform the implementation, the extent of its involvement remained to be seen.

We have always argued that the UK should maintain rights and standards fought for by civil society," he said.

Protections have been written into the deal, but only in the context of trade and investment, so UK civil society will have to remain vigilant."

Geoff Nuttall, head of policy and public affairs at the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action, welcomed the forums establishment.

We strongly support this vital engagement mechanism, which will bring valuable experience from across society to bear on the development of all future co-operation arrangements," he said.

Read the original here:

Civil Society Forum to be set up as part of Brexit deal - Third Sector

EU and British Brexit negotiators will continue talks in Brussels on Monday and until around mid-week, sources on both sides said on Sunday, in a sign both sides are still pushing to avoid a damaging breakdown in trade in less than nine weeks.

Intensive and secretive, the talks are a final bid to seal a new partnership agreement for when Britains transition out of the European Union runs its course at the end of this year.

If the sides overcome their differences, the new deal would govern everything from trade and energy to transport and fisheries. If they fail, an estimated $900 billion of annual bilateral trade in goods and services would be damaged from Jan.1 by tariffs and quotas.

An EU diplomatic source and a UK official said negotiations would continue face-to-face in Brussels on Monday following a full weekend of talks. An update on their progress and the chances of a deal was expected on Wednesday or Thursday, they added.

EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said on Friday that much remains to be done to seal a deal.

Another EU diplomat following Brexit in Brussels told Reuters over the weekend that talks were still difficult on the most sensitive issues, including those of economic fair play, fishing rights and how to settle disputes in future.

Both sides have, however, previously signaled their readiness to compromise on fisheries a politically sensitive issue for both Britain and France, as well as several other EU states and Reuters reported on Oct.23 that Paris was already laying the groundwork to net a deal.

With time running out, financial markets and businesses are increasingly jittery as Britain and the EU face three main scenarios: a deal this year that salvages free trade, a tumultuous economic split, or a fudged arrangement that would settle future ties in a handful of areas but leave the rest up in the air.

(Reporting by Gabriela Baczynska; editing by Hugh Lawson)

Was this article valuable?

Yes No

Here are more articles you may enjoy.

Get the insurance industry's trusted newsletter

See original here:

Brexit Negotiations to Continue This Week as EU, UK Push to Save Trade Deal - Insurance Journal

LONDON When President Trump called the pro-Brexit politician Nigel Farage to the stage during his rally in Goodyear, Ariz., on Wednesday, it was a reminder that Britains bombshell vote to leave the European Union in June 2016 was seen as a harbinger of Mr. Trumps victory in the United States that fall.

And yet, four years later, Mr. Farages appearance seemed less a powerful display of populist camaraderie than a strange throwback. Britain has moved on from Brexit and Mr. Farage is viewed as yesterdays man, forced to travel abroad to seek a spotlight that has swung away from him at home.

Britain seems equally ready to turn the page on Mr. Trump. Despite his staunch support of Brexit and his effusive displays of affection for Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Mr. Trumps potential defeat next week is viewed by most Britons with equanimity, if not enthusiasm, given his unpopularity across the political spectrum.

There are millions and millions of Brits who voted for Brexit and think Donald Trump is ghastly and something quite different, said Timothy Garton Ash, a professor of European studies at Oxford University.

Even for those elite Brexiteers who had a vision of Britain and the U.S. creating an Anglosphere as an alternative to the E.U., its fairly clear that Donald Trump doesnt share that vision, he said.

Inside Mr. Johnsons government, where a Trump defeat has been a source of anxiety for months, officials now talk about how they could adjust to a President Joe Biden and perhaps even take advantage of a change in the White House. On their No. 1 priority an Anglo-American trade deal they say they could Bidenize whatever they have negotiated with Mr. Trump to make it palatable to a Democratic administration.

In foreign policy, diplomats spin visions of Britain standing alongside the United States in a coalition of democracies against the commercial and geopolitical pressure of autocrats in China and Russia. That is a role Mr. Johnson could never comfortably play with a president who relishes the company of strongmen.

They foresee Britain working with a Biden administration to tackle the global scourges of the coronavirus pandemic and climate change big-ticket projects that could elevate the Group of 7 summit of world leaders and the United Nations Climate Change Conference, which are to take place in Britain next year.

Its not as if the fundamental relationship is at risk, said Karen Pierce, the British ambassador to the United States. With any new administration, you have to show youre a good partner, and this is true regardless of whether its Democratic or Republican.

There is, to be sure, a healthy dose of rationalization in all this. A Biden administration would present Britain with a number of hurdles, starting with trade. Mr. Trump promised Mr. Johnson a lucrative deal, which the prime minister made a selling point in his own election campaign promising to Get Brexit done. But Mr. Biden has other priorities overseas and may not view a conventional free-trade agreement with Britain as much of a prize.

The British, some American experts said, were deluding themselves if they thought they could satisfy Mr. Biden by tacking on a couple of provisions on labor and environmental standards to their half-finished deal with Mr. Trump.

Its a little tone-deaf to say, We have this deal with Trump. What icing do you want on the cake to make it a Biden deal? said Thomas Wright, the director of the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

Biden is going to want to demonstrate to the middle class that there is a different way of doing foreign economic policy, he said. I dont know if starting out with a traditional trade agreement is something theyre going to want to do.

The problem is, Britain cannot afford the luxury of starting negotiations from scratch. Trade Promotion Authority, the American measure that puts trade agreements on a fast track through Congress, will expire in July. In order to ensure a deal with Britain stayed on that fast track, the White House would need to notify Congress about it by next April.

Mr. Johnson risks stumbling into another difficult area with Mr. Biden over Ireland. His governments recent move to rewrite parts of its Withdrawal Agreement with the European Union that deal with Northern Ireland is viewed by Democrats in Washington as a threat to the Good Friday Agreement, a deal brokered by President Bill Clinton that settled decades of sectarian strife.

Mr. Biden has posted a tweet warning Mr. Johnson that any trade deal between the U.S. and U.K. must be contingent upon respect for the Agreement and preventing the return of a hard border. Period.

Nov. 2, 2020, 7:03 p.m. ET

British officials said they recognized the sensitivity of Ireland for Mr. Biden, who speaks fondly of his Irish roots. But those complications, analysts say, pale beside the thorny issues that could arise in a second Trump term when, for example, the president could decide to pull the United States out of the NATO alliance.

At Mr. Trumps rally, Mr. Farage framed the American election as a referendum on the forces that drove Brexit, as well as Mr. Trumps first victory. He recalled coming to the United States in 2016 to bring the Brexit message that you can beat the establishment, and that is what Donald Trump did.

Mr. Johnsons government has clung to some of that anti-establishment fervor. But the bitter debates that cleaved British society for three-and-a-half years after the referendum have subsided in part because of sheer exhaustion and in part because they have been eclipsed by worries about the pandemic.

Whatever the parallels between Brexit and Mr. Trump, the president has never enjoyed the affection of the British public. In a recent poll of European attitudes toward the election, the British favored Mr. Biden over Mr. Trump by a margin of 61 percent to 13 percent, according to the research group YouGov.

If Britain were to rerun the 2016 referendum today, Mr. Garton Ash said, polls suggested that Brexit would probably lose, too, if not by as thumping a margin as Mr. Trump might among Britons. But the vast majority of voters have no interest in revisiting the issue, which is why Mr. Farage has been left without a cause in a country where he once loomed large.

Exhausted by politics and besieged by the coronavirus, British voters seem attracted to some of the same qualities in Mr. Biden that American voters are.

There are lots of intelligent, skeptical voters in Britain who like the idea of Joe Biden, Mr. Garton Ash said. Most of them see their vote for Brexit as distinct and different from Trump.

More:

In Pandemic U.K., Brexit Is an Afterthought, as Is Trump - The New York Times

The head of the UKs leading employers organisation has stepped up pressure on the government to conclude trade talks with the EU so that the country can move on from the suspended animation of the past four years.

Reflecting on her five years as director general of the CBI, Dame Carolyn Fairbairn said her biggest regret was that the issue had not been resolved earlier and warned ministers that businesses grappling with Covid-19 were unprepared for a hard Brexit.

Talks between London and Brussels have intensified in recent days as negotiators grapple with issues such as fishing and state aid.

Fairbairn, who steps down next week, said The thing thats painful is that it has taken so long to get to a resolution. I think we will get a deal. The remaining issues look soluble.

The first female CBI director general said she had barely started in the job when David Cameron announced in February 2016 that a referendum would be held in June that year.

That was the moment everything changed, Fairbairn said. I realised there was an extraordinary debate to be held, not just about the EU but about the type of economy we had created and the kind of country we had become.

Fairbairn said issues that had surfaced as a result of the financial crash of 2008-09 such as fairness and inequality became bound up with the debate about the UKs relationship with the EU.

The CBI campaigned for a yes vote in the referendum but Fairbairn says the employers organisation has always accepted the result.

At our first presidential committee meeting after the referendum the debate wasnt about trade or tariffs but about what the result said about business and its relationship with the British public, and what do we do about it.

Our position has not really changed since 24 June 2016. We completely accepted the result of the referendum and never supported a second referendum. We have campaigned for a good deal that protects jobs from day one.

It [departure from the EU] has had a momentum of its own. It has been almost a perfect storm. The economy has gone into suspended animation while we resolve this seismic issue. I hope we can have a resolution so we can move on.

Despite her optimism that a deal would be done, Fairbairn did not rule out the talks collapsing, an outcome she described as very challenging for CBI member companies.

With much of the country facing new Covid-19 restrictions, the CBI said many companies were going backwards in their Brexit preparations. She urged the government to set up a task force to speed up preparations as soon as an agreement had been reached.

A deal would still mean radical changes for business but would be hugely better than no deal, she said.

Tariff-free trade would be the difference between companies in the automotive sector staying in the UK or going. The automotive sector is 40 times larger than fishing, she added.

A deal would also make customs procedures easier, and would give the UK a base from which to build future agreements that would boost key sectors such as financial services, which Fairbairn said had been almost absent from the current negotiations. A deal is enormously better than no deal.

Despite the short-term challenges, Fairbairn said the UK would make a success of Brexit. Business will do everything possible to make the best of it. There will be areas to explore. There will be areas where it will be good to align with the EU but when it comes to AI and the industries of the future we could find new ways to shape the regulatory environment.

Brexit aside, she said business was also having to cope with a second wave of Covid-19 infections. Fairbairn said the UK had a glimpse of what recovery could look like in the summer but things now looked gloomier and there was a mountain to climb.

The CBI head said she was especially worried about young people, who had been hit hardest by the Covid-19 recession and needed better training, more job opportunities and a wider range of further and higher-education courses to give them a better chance of finding work.

She added: We are not epidemiologists, we put health first. But we need a plan for the short run to keep as much of the economy open as possible. It has to be evidence based and rely on really clear tiering.

Changes last week by the chancellor to the job support scheme to make it more generous had led some companies to rethink lay-offs, but there were sectors of the UK including live events and aviation that faced acute problems.

Fairbairn said: We are going to see significant redundancies. It is going to be tough.

Read more:

CBI chief fires parting shot over slow pace of Brexit negotiations - The Guardian

Denials predictably emerged from 10 Downing Street last week over the suggestion in the Observer that Boris Johnson was waiting for the result of the US election before possibly opting for a no-deal Brexit.

However I, for one, place a lot more credence on the judgment and reliability of Sir Ivan Rogers, our former ambassador to the European Union, than I do on anything coming from a Downing Street where Eyetest Cummings continues to rule the roost.

The Observer was reporting on the result of Rogerss soundings among our former EU partners, which showed their common view that Johnson was more likely to propel this benighted nation over the no-deal cliff if, in the end, the US electorate decided not to dump Trump. Hence the wait.

Johnson is all over the place on most things, a reality that is finally beginning to dawn on many of his erstwhile supporters. But Cummings is an even bigger gambler than his dodgy employer: a revolutionary who would have been perfectly at home in early 20th century Russia. I have no idea how he deals at poker, but people who know him I am delighted to say that, though a fellow Islingtonian, I have never, to my knowledge, encountered him say he is definitely a no-dealer on the big issue of the day.

Sorry, there are of course two big issues of the day: Covid and Brexit. And Cummings is so brazen that the man who broke his own lockdown rules on his infamous trip to Barnard Castle has been one of the most hawkish in urging strict tier terms as the plague threatens once again to get out of control.

Now, I did not get where I am today by forecasting election results, but God help us if Trump wins and Johnson and Cummings go for no-deal with the EU and a deal with Trump that takes us in the direction of becoming the 51st state. A Biden victory would restore some sense of decency and normality to international relations, although No 10 must be all too well aware that Biden, who is of Irish extraction, is none too happy with what they have been up to, threatening previous deals on the border and the Good Friday agreement.

As the horror stories about the reality of Brexit begin to sink in, even commentators in the Daily Telegraph have begun to get worried. A line from A Midsummer Nights Dream keeps recurring to me spoken by the late Alan Howard as Theseus/Oberon in Peter Brooks great production, to Puck: What hast thou done?

Polls now suggest that most of the British people disapprove of Brexit according to YouGov, by 50% to 38%. So why on earth do we go charging on, like Tennysons light brigade? While not wishing to overdo the parallels, one cannot help thinking of the way Lloyd George was needed to replace Asquith during the first world war, and Churchill to take over from Chamberlain in the second world war. Alas, the egregious Johnson already thinks he is Churchill. Seldom has a British prime minister been so misguided.

I have pointed out before that, even with a deal, leaving the single market at the end of the year will be extremely disruptive not only from 2 January (1 January being a bank holiday) but for years to come. But leaving without a deal? As Nick Bosanquet, professor of health policy at Imperial College, London, recently pointed out in the Financial Times, the conjuncture of port delays with the virus and long waits in laybys for thousands of lorry drivers, probably in bad weather, would be a classic situation for super-spreading of the virus, and that drivers would have to present recent test results in order to cross.

Bosanquet says the looming national emergency could be avoided only by seeking an agreement with the EU, preferably with a six-month extension of the transition period. I am all in favour of such an extension, preferably leading to an entire rethink of the wisdom of Brexit, and a tail-between-the-legs application to rejoin the EU.

One cannot help but note the understandable calls for the government to have a recovery plan from the economic horrors of the lockdown and its awful impact on employment. However, what people should realise is that, in going ahead with Brexit, the government has already decided on a plan. Unfortunately, it is to make the economic crisis even worse.

Going ahead with Brexit in a time of plague is the height of irresponsibility. It must never be forgotten that the infamous 2016 referendum was advisory, not binding, and fought on a false prospectus.

I know the argument that the people have spoken. But the people speak at every general election, and often change their minds. Moreover, it was only ever some of the people. As Abraham Lincoln reportedly said: You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

Here is the original post:

Support is waning for Johnsons plague-year Brexit - The Guardian

A business-led campaign to widen a thin Brexit deal struck between Britain and the European Union will begin immediately in the new year, it has emerged, amid concerns about the long-term effects on the UKs economy.

In an interview with the Observer, Carolyn Fairbairn, the outgoing director general of the CBI, said that securing a basic deal with the EU should be seen as a starting point for a deeper relationship. She warned of a serious effect on Britains large services sector, including financial and legal services, as well as engineering.

UK government officials remain locked in talks with their Brussels counterparts this weekend, just a fortnight before the deadline identified as the last point at which a deal can be agreed. The main stumbling blocks remain fishing rights and level playing field conditions related to state aid. However, even if a deal is signed off, there are grave concerns among British business bodies over the barriers to trade that it will erect.

Fairbairn said that any deal would be a significant improvement on a no-deal outcome, while the removal of tariffs would be existential for the car industry. However, she said her really big disappointment was the lack of help for British services in the potential deal, adding that the CBI would immediately fight to broaden the agreement.

Any deal we get now is likely to be focused on goods, and it should be treated as a starting point for a more comprehensive deal in the future, she said. At the CBI, we would be doing two things. First of all, we would be looking to help businesses make the most of where we are, to look for the opportunities and to manage that transition. And second, we will be working with the government and supporting the negotiations around building further chapters. [We would like] a services chapter. Well need more on aviation. Well need more on haulage. Data will be crucial. We hope that there will be a data agreement, but there will be more to do on the back of that. That will be the challenge of the next one to two years. And we will be on that case pretty well immediately. But we need that base case of a foundation deal first.

Some groups have raised serious concerns about the extent of new barriers to trade that will be erected even in the event of a deal. While tariffs will be removed, bureaucracy will increase and both government and industry are braced for issues at the border. A business taskforce to manage the transition has been forged between government and industry in an attempt to smooth the Brexit process in the new year.

Looking back on a tumultuous five years in the job, Fairbairn said it had been a mistake, and a lost opportunity for our country for businesses not to have had greater involvement in the shape of the deal.

Cash reserves and stockpiling have been run down as a result of the virus, with many businesses assuming the Brexit transition period would simply be extended. There is some wishful thinking, Fairbairn said. The single thing that would be getting businesses preparing best is a deal. Disruption of some sort is likely.

It comes as Boris Johnson is being warned that securing a deal with the EU is the best and easiest way to improve relations with a Joe Biden White House, should the Democratic candidate win this week. Biden has voiced concern that Johnsons Brexit tactics could affect Northern Irelands Good Friday Agreement.

Sir Nigel Sheinwald, Britains former ambassador to the US who served in Washington between 2007 and 2012, said that a deal was the route through which Johnson could build relations with Biden. I do think that they need to calculate what the impact of no deal would be, not just on the future relationship over free trade agreements, but more generally, on Britains standing with a new Biden administration, he said. No deal looks a very lonely position if youve got a Biden administration in Washington.

The very strong view among Bidens team is that Brexit was a strategic mistake of some magnitude. Theyll be wondering how we fill that gap and will have concluded over the past four years that we havent really been able to identify a new British role in the world.

See original here:

UK industry chief says business needs more from 'thin' Brexit deal - The Guardian

Former Brexit Party MEP Ben Habib argued the UK has a challenging 2021 ahead. During an interview with Express.co.uk, Mr Habib argued Boris Johnson will likely agree a bad Brexit deal that aligns the UK with the EU. He added that this combined with the consequences of coronavirus would make the next year a challenging one for many.

Mr Habib said: "I think 2021 is looking very very challenging.

"This is because the Government has spent a massive amount of money on this pandemic.

"They have done this through keeping businesses closed, furlough schemes, bounce back loans and coronavirus support schemes."

Mr Habib noted that these moves made by the Government, however necessary, would be a key part of the challenge facing the UK in 2021.

DON'T MISS:Brexit betrayal: Boris Johnson accused of caving to EU bullying

He continued: "We are going to go into 2021 with Government finances stretched.

"If we sign ourselves into a close deal with the EU, fettering our ability to deregulate and therefore take the burdens off of businesses in a non-monetary manner, we will have a constrained economy.

"This will be a result of regulation and by the amount of debt we have taken on.

"I don't see the prospects of 2021 being bright for the UK.

"I suspect the people like me, people who saw the opportunities that a no deal Brexit would have afforded the UK, will now spend quite a significant proportion of the rest of their lives campaigning and promoting the unpicking of the deal that Boris Johnson is about to sign.

"This is so we can get Britain moving again properly."

Mr Habib also went into details of what areas he believed Boris Johnson disappoint Brexiteers with in his trade deal.

He highlighted the areas Boris Johnson would compromise would be in areas Leavers were most concerned about.

This included fishing rights for the EU, the influence of the European Court of Justice and the level playing field.

READ MORE:

Brexit fisheries row: EU's climbdown proves bloc will cave in talks[ANALYSIS]Ready for liftoff! Brexit Britain to LEAD European space industry[COMMENT]Don't blame Britain for holding up Gibraltar deal, MP tells Spain[OPINION]

He said: "I think what we are going to get by the time we get to January 1 is a deal.

"But it will be a deal that mirrors, to a very significant extent, the political declaration that the Prime Minister signed as part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

"In that political declaration, he did sign up to a level playing field, to fix fishing quotas, signed up to considering joining PESCO which is their equivalent of NATO, he has also signed up to cooperation on military into operability.

"He has also signed up to give the Court of Justice of the European Union, quite a large say in what happens in all those matters I just listed.

"I think, unfortunately, we are going to get a deal by January 1st that signs us up very closely to the EU."

See the rest here:

Brexit fury: Leaver rages at Brexit deal disaster and Covid creating 'challenging 2021' - Daily Express

Former foreign secretary David Miliband explained how the special relationship between the UK and US post-Brexit could change if Joe Biden becomes President. While speaking to Sophy Ridge on Sky News, he said Mr Biden and his team will want the UK to make significant progress with the EU on key issues before agreeing our own future relationship with the US. Due to the quickly approaching end of the transition period, this could ultimately pressure the UK into rushing through a trade deal with the EU to maintain a good working relationship with the US.

Ms Ridge said: "If Joe Biden does win the US election, as the polls suggest, would that actually be good news for the United Kingdom?

"Do you think Joe Biden values the special relationship?"

Mr Miliband replied: "I think Joe Biden values the UK but he is a serious person who will follow the power.

"What Joe Biden knows, when it comes to the coronavirus crisis, the climate change challenge and some of the major global issues he can see that in Paris, Berlin and Brussels you have got 27 countries working together.

DON'T MISS:Brexiteer rages at Brexit deal disaster creating 'challenging 2021'

"There is no question in my mind that in the Biden camp, Brexit has reduced the influence of the UK.

Mr Miliband noted that despite the feelings towards Brexit among Biden and his office, they would still seek to trade with the UK.

He said they would want a deal to be resolved between the UK and EU quickly in the meantime, however.

He continued: "Joe Biden will also be very realistic about the kind of issues we are still struggling with and his urgency for getting things done.

"I think that puts a special premium on the British Government to get the trade deal with the European Union.

"Not only this but to also sort out the ways in which we are going to cooperate on security terms, intelligence terms and foreign policy terms with the EU.

"This is something that has made such little progress and that really leaves us in a weaker position."

READ MORE:

Brexit fisheries row: EU's climbdown proves bloc will cave in talks[ANALYSIS]Ready for liftoff! Brexit Britain to LEAD European space industry[COMMENT]Don't blame Britain for holding up Gibraltar deal, MP tells Spain[OPINION]

Mr Miliband has also warned of the tentativeness of the relationship between the UK and US.

While speaking to Channel 4 he said: "The special relationship all depends on what the British Government does.

"If the British Government comes to the table with ideas, resources and alliances then we have got an important role to play.

"But if we come with none of those things, I am afraid Washington will look to places where they see real power being exercised."

Read this article:

Brexit outrage: Joe Biden US election win may FORCE UK to agree EU's trade deal terms - Daily Express

LONDON In the greater scheme of things, fishing is a tiny industry. Just 12,000 people in Britain fish from 6,000 vessels, contributing less than half of one percent of gross domestic product less than the upmarket London department store Harrods, according to one analysis. The same holds true for most continental European nations.

Yet, as negotiations between Britain and the European Union on a long-term trade deal grind along toward the Dec. 31 deadline, fisheries are proving to be one of the most politically treacherous sticking points. Heres why the issue is giving negotiators such fits.

Boats from continental Europe have fished off the British coast for centuries, and those communities say they face ruin if they were to be locked out of those waters.

But in Britain, European Union membership has meant sharing British waters with fleets from France or other nations and sometimes seeing bigger, more modern ships catching a larger proportion of the fish. In one zone off the English coast, 84 percent of the cod is allocated to France and just 9 percent to Britain, according to Barrie Deas, chief executive of the National Federation of Fishermens Organizations.

The British fishing industry contends that its interests were sacrificed for more profitable sectors when the country joined the European Economic Community, a forerunner to the European Union, in 1973. Now that Britain has left the bloc, they want their fish back.

Fishing has a hold on the public imagination in a way that more lucrative sectors say, insurance never will. It can become front page news as it was, periodically, when tensions escalated between Britain and Iceland in the cod wars that simmered from the late 1950s to the mid-1970s. At the time, boats were sometimes rammed, and British warships were even deployed to protect trawlers.

Recent weeks have brought a reminder of those days. A confrontation between British and French boats (in what one newspaper called the scallop wars) was a harbinger, perhaps, of what could happen next year should the trade talks fail. Frances famously assertive fishing crews also have the capacity to blockade Calais the main port linking Britain to continental Europe. That could cause a big disruption to trade.

The politics of navigating this are difficult, as well. The British prime minister, Boris Johnson, promised great things to the fishing fleet during the campaign leading up to the 2016 Brexit referendum. Now, he needs to deliver or risk accusations of betrayal. But the French president, Emmanuel Macron, faces an election in 2022, and giving in to the British is not the best way to win votes in France.

Quite a lot. The European Union argues that the current arrangements should continue, with more or less the existing quotas, and with continental trawlers allowed automatic access to most British waters. Britain says this is anathema for an independent coastal state and that the Europeans need to accept that Britain has left their club.

France, whose fishing fleet is particularly affected, has taken the hardest line on the European Union side, with other nations more willing to compromise to reach a wider trade deal.

Another contentious point is how future quotas will be decided. Britain wants annual negotiations of the type that the European Union undertakes with Norway over fish. The European Union argues that, because there more than 100 species to be haggled over (the main negotiations with Norway focus on half a dozen types of fish), such a system is impractical.

The fishing industry is one of the areas where Britain has the advantage in the Brexit trade negotiations, on paper at least. Without an agreement, Britain would regain control of its waters and could ban continental fleets from them.

But there is a downside. Britain exports much of what it catches and imports much of the fish it eats (mainly the cod and haddock that are staples of neighborhood fish and chips shops). Almost half of whats caught by Britains fleet is pelagic, meaning fish that live and feed in open water, rather than on the bottom of the ocean. These are species like mackerel or herring that few Britons touch, and that fetch a better price abroad (as does shellfish).

Although Britain is a net importer of fish, around four-fifths of what is landed by British vessels is exported, mainly to other European countries. Without an agreement, British fish exporters could face tariffs and find their products waiting and perhaps rotting at continental ports while inspectors carry out lengthy checks.

Whatever the rhetoric from Paris, the European Union knows that, without an agreement, continental fishing fleets could be locked out of British waters, so there is an incentive for the European Union to settle. Germany, the blocs biggest economy, is thought to be encouraging the French to compromise. The British seafood industry (including producers of farmed salmon) badly wants access to continental European markets.

The British government has hinted at a potential solution: a transition or glide path under which British fishing quotas would gradually expand at the expense of those of continental nations. That would give the European fleet time to adjust and the British time to expand fishing fleets and revitalize coastal communities to take advantage of new opportunities.

Both sides have an interest in striking a deal, but finding one means navigating choppy political waters.

Read the rest here:

The Issue That Might Sink the Brexit Trade Talks: Fishing - The New York Times

AS the most significant US election in over a century is now upon us, the world holds its breath to see who will emerge as the most powerful politician on earth.

A win for President Trump will doubtless witness four more years of populist government that makes Sauron, the Dark Lord from Tolkiens Lord of the Rings, look like a liberal. A win for Joe Biden may witness a return to more traditional and less divisive US internal and external policies. Crucially though, a victory for the Democrat will force the UK Prime Minister to reassess his relationship with the USA and possibly even his increasingly haphazard policy on Brexit.

Mr Johnson has signalled that a no- deal Brexit, what he euphemistically terms an Australian solution, now looks to be a formality. Scapegoating the EU and attempting to appear as an honest broker only damages Mr Johnsons national and international credibility further and rings urgent alarm bells regarding the months and years ahead.

READ MORE:Joe Biden winning US election is the last big hope for a world on fire

A No-Deal solution has been the clear objective of the Westminster government for some time. It is the route by which their ultimate goal of a laissez- faire market economy can be achieved. The onset of the global pandemic has been regarded by government advisers like Dominic Cummings as an inconvenience or even a useful deviation from his long-term strategy to inflict a libertarian capitalist regime on to the UK, irrespective of its social, political or economic effects on the mass of the population.

Mr Cummings is an admirer of the American president and his unpredictable ignoring of democratic rules and precedents.Like Nigel Farage, he recognises that a defeat for President Trump will damage his political ambitions, as Trumps unfettered populist blueprints would be consigned to the history books.

READ MORE:'Sean Connery stepped in to help me build in Scotland', Donald Trump claims

Mr Cummings thrives on conflict and division and will advise the Prime Minister to continue to stick to an agenda that openly flouts accepted practices. The flagrant breaking of international law witnessed in the controversial UK Internal Market Bill are irrefutable evidence of this. Not only do they openly declare war on devolved administrations but they also adopt a dangerous and cavalier attitude to the fragile peace on the island of Ireland.

The Westminster government would argue that the end justifies the means, irrespective of the effect this may have on others pure Trumpian philosophy in action.

A No-Deal Brexit is a vehicle for increased isolationist individualism, emasculating devolution and eroding the ethos and practices of the welfare state in Britain. It is a gateway to privatised healthcare, widespread dilution of workers rights and the advent of an Americanised social Darwinism wherein the poorest and most vulnerable are discarded as unproductive. The CBI and the TUC have jointly condemned any notion of a No-Deal for two years but have been summarily ignored or scorned by those in power.

READ MORE:Alex Salmond: Donald Trump claim Sean Connery helped win planning is 'silly'

With just two months left we are now on the cusp of leaving the EU without any deal and trading on World Trade Organisation terms, with tariffs and quotas reinstated which will, in the short and long term, prove disastrous for industries such as hospitality, farming, the car industry and fishing. Animal welfare, food and environmental standards will be jettisoned amidst a rogue government running a rogue economy. An estimated 85% of companies will not have necessary documentation in place by January 1, meaning massive border queues for up to nine months with an obvious impact on food and medical distribution in the UK. HMRC estimate that they will spend upwards of 15 billion more on paperwork as we witness a massive increase in bureaucracy.

To make matters worse, if that were possible, it is predicted by most reputable economists that Scotland will suffer more than the rest of the UK under a No-Deal Brexit. Our GDP will decline by around 5% over the first five years of a process that Jacob Rees-Mogg said would take 50 years to settle. As we anticipate a dramatic fall in the pound, increased prices, panic buying and stockpiling it is a puzzle to me why the latest polls put support for an independent Scotland at only 58%.

A No-Deal Brexit will represent the culmination of Cummingss grand plan for a right-wing libertarian state that could lose its main ally and ideological sugar daddy in the coming days. Regardless of how he and Boris Johnson steer the Westminster ship of government, it appears to be irreparably wounded in Scottish eyes by the continuation of a self-harming, disastrous No-Deal Brexit in the midst of a ruinous pandemic.

As Nicholas II and Rasputin are remembered for their part in the end of the Russian monarchy, so Messrs Johnson and Cummings will be remembered for being the harbingers of an independent Scotland.

Owen KellyStirling

Link:

US election outcome will determine what kind of Brexit we get - The National

The former Brexit Party MEP argued that he was not confident Brexiteers would be satisfied with Boris Johnson's Brexit trade deal with the EU. During an interview with Express.co.uk, Mr Habib insisted Boris would get a deal but it would not have the benefits associated with walking away without an agreement. It would also be a deal that would very closely align the UK with the EU.

He claimed these areas of alignment would fall under many issues Brexiteers were concerned about such as fishing, the role of the European Court of Justice, and the level playing field.

Mr Habib said: "I think there is no prospect of, what I would call, a proper no deal exit on December 31.

"Because of that I am convinced that Boris Johnson will be working very hard to do a deal with the EU.

"This is because he doesn't want pernicious effects of the Northern Ireland protocol to be starkly revealed.

DON'T MISS:Boris Johnson warned EU will abandon economic strength for DOMINATION

"The details would be revealed in the event of not having a future trading relationship with the entire United Kingdom."

Mr Habib admitted that he did think the UK would get a deal by the end of the transition period but it would not be one that satisfies true Brexiteers.

He continued: "I think what we are going to get by the time we get to January 1 is a deal.

"But it will be a deal that mirrors, to a very significant extent, the political declaration that the Prime Minister signed as part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

"In that political declaration, he did sign up to a level playing field, to fix fishing quotas, signed up to considering joining PESCO which is their equivalent of NATO, he has also signed up to cooperation on military into operability.

"He has also signed up to give the Court of Justice of the European Union, quite a large say in what happens in all those matters I just listed.

"I think, unfortunately, we are going to get a deal by January 1st that signs us up very closely to the EU."

Mr Habib also warned the EU would be willing to give up economic growth and benefit to have the UK politically aligned.

READ MORE:

Brexit fisheries row: EU's climbdown proves bloc will cave in talks[ANALYSIS]Ready for liftoff! Brexit Britain to LEAD European space industry[COMMENT]Don't blame Britain for holding up Gibraltar deal, MP tells Spain[OPINION]

"The EU is not concerned about any loss of trade with the UK due to a poor, or no deal.

"They are in this negotiating for a political aim which is to make sure that a number of things happen.

"One of those things being the UK pays a hefty price for Brexit and that the UK is tethered to the EU as much as possible going forward.

"In tandem with those two aims the EU wants to make sure the EU project isn't undermined by the United Kingdom leaving the European Union."

Excerpt from:

Brexit betrayal: Boris Johnson accused of caving to EU bullying in last moments of talks - Daily Express

New research published by The National Federation of Young Farmers Clubs (NFYFC) reveals how young people are pessimistic about future opportunities to live and work in rural areas and believe the pandemic will continue to affect their prospects in the long-term. What needs to be done to support young people, now and in the years ahead, to ensure they can have a stake in the countryside? Jessica Sellick investigates.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) states that a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless, under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier. In England, TheChildren Act 1989, makes a number of orders relating to the welfare of children,defininga child (under Section 105) as a person under the age of 18. Prior to that, back in 1933 theChildren and Young Persons Actimposed criminal liability for the abandonment, neglect or ill-treatment of any child under 16 years of age by anyone over 16 years of age.

In practice, there is no one understanding of children and/or young people shared by all agencies and bodies; and no set time or age in which a child necessarily moves to becoming a young adult and through to adulthood.

Inmedicine, for example, the terms children and young people are used from birth until their 18thbirthday with the word children used to refer to younger children who do not have the maturity and understanding to make important decisions for themselves and young people to refer to older or more experienced children who are more likely to be able to make these decisions for themselves. There is no specific age at which childrens services within the health system end, although generally children requiring continuing treatment transition to adult services between the ages of 16 and 18 years, depending on the service area, local factors and the individual.

In education, a child canleave schoolon the last Friday of June if they will be aged 16 years by the end of the summer holidays but they must stay in full-time education, start an apprenticeship or traineeship, or spend 20 hours a week or more working or volunteering while in part-time education or training.

From aged 14 years a child can obtain a part timejobinvolving light work with some restrictions set over the number of hours and when the work can take place. A young adult can leave home without parental consent at the age of 18 years although there are provisions contained within the Childrens Act for exceptional circumstances relating to residence coming to an end before or at aged 16 years.

If a child has been looked after by the Local Authority they are provided with a needs assessment and a pathway plan forleaving carethat can finish when they are aged 21 years. For those children that go on to higher education, the Local Authority has a duty to assist them past the age of 21, to the extent that his or her welfare and educational and training needs requires it.

A 17-year old can obtain a licence todrivea car, small goods vehicle and an agricultural tractor on the road but not a medium or heavy goods vehicle (where they need to be 18 years old) or large passenger vehicle (where they need to reach 21 years of age).

These definitions are important on the one hand illustrating how we make special protection and provision to children (sometimes while they are under or until they reach 16 years of age, 18 years of age, or beyond 18 years under some circumstances); on the other hand children and young people are often regarded as adults able to make and be responsible for their own decisions (e.g. driving, employment). Crucially, some of these definitions determine what support a child/young person is entitled to receive and from whom and when.

Age is also important as it is one of the predictors of differences in attitudes and behaviours. Generations are one means researchers use to group age cohorts; with each cohort typically spanning people born over a 15-20-year time period. The Pew Research Center, for example,definesyounger cohorts asMillennials(anyone born between 1981 and 1996 and aged 24-39 years in 2020) andpost millennialsorGeneration Z(people born between 1997 and 2012, currently aged 8-23 years in 2020). Generational cohorts provide a means for researchers to explore how different formative experiences (e.g. pandemics, recessions) interact with the life cycle and shape their view of the world over the longer-term. For example, theCentre for Longitudinal Studiesat University College London has been undertaking aNational Child Development Studysince 1958, with cohort members followed up ten times since the study began, with the next sweep due to take place in 2020 2021 when the participants will be in their early sixties. The Centre is using participants from this study and four other studies to carry out a national longitudinal study onCOVID-19. Similarly,Generation Scotland, based at the University of Edinburgh, is carrying out aRuralCovidLifesurvey to better understand how COVID-19 measures are affecting the health and wellbeing of people in rural Scottish communities the survey complements a longitudinal health and wellbeing study involving 7,000 families since 2006.

Engaging and empowering young people through research is important for it reveals important insights about their influences, aspirations and outcomes as they move through childhood and adulthood. It also provides an evidence base to guide policy makers providing them with valuable data on a range of issues, their causes, and the effectiveness of different interventions.

What do post millennial young people think about growing up in the countryside? In June 2020, the National Federation of Young Farmers Clubs (NFYFC) launched a survey, Your Post-Brexit Rural Future. Funded by Defra and led by the NFYFC and Rose Regeneration, the survey provided young people living and working in rural areas, next generation farmers and land managers with an opportunity to share theirviewson living and working in the countryside, now and into the future. Input to the survey questions was kindly provided byEnglish Rural,AHDB, and the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT). 528 young people responded to the survey, offering their views on housing, services, farming, skills, COVID-19 and the future.

To build on the survey findings Rose Regeneration carried out 40 follow-up telephone interviews with young farmers. During the lockdown period March-June 2020, young farmers highlighted the impact of COVID-19 on their farm businesses; with some indicating how they had struggled to recruit and/or retain workers, received no income or reduced income from farm diversification activities (e.g. closure of caf/restaurant, holiday lets, wedding venue), had been unable to undertake agricultural training, had been pushed to meet changing supermarket and consumer demands, and had to respond to more people walking in the countryside and not closing gates or keeping to designated footpaths. Young farmers also discussed the closure of some auction marts and the cancellation of agricultural shows which provide important outlets for them to meet each other and connect directly with the public.

Young farmers provided some examples of how they have adapted to COVID-19 and mitigated some of its effects. These included: creating farming bubbles by keeping the same staff together on shifts to work as a protective measure to help reduce the potential risk of transmission and providing personal protective equipment (PPE) and ensuring social distancing. Other on-farm examples included ensuring vehicles are not shared by staff and ensuring vehicle cleaning before and after each journey; increasing online and/or direct sales to consumers (e.g. farm shop, box schemes, roadside sales); piloting new diversification ideas (e.g. pick-your-own, mazes); and purchasing equipment and supplies online rather than visiting premises. Some farm businesses had furloughed staff involved in non-agricultural activities (e.g. hospitality, weddings/events). Young farmers were considering their options in recovering from COVID-19 which varied from looking to increase online sales through to pop up visitor facilities and attractions (e.g. caf, food stand, outdoor/countryside classroom), farm stays [converting agricultural buildings into visitor accommodation] and accessing online training opportunities.

During the lockdown period March-June 2020 Young Farmer Clubs used social media and provided support online/virtually so they could carry on with regular activities that could not happen face-to-face (e.g. meetings, event planning, competitions, rallies); raise awareness and run campaigns (e.g. mental health support, buy local-buy British); and deliver new social activities (e.g. stock judging, bale sculptures, virtual farm tours).

The financial implications of COVID-19 on clubs were emphasised during many of the telephone discussions. These concerns covered three main areas: (1) the impact of a second peak/wave on the next financial year if social distancing measures are still in place or reintroduced; (2) members particularly newer members may not renew their membership if clubs are unable to offer regular face-to-face activities; and (3) Clubs may be unable to generate a surplus and donate money to local or national charities. While many young farmers described how they had benefitted from accessing their club through digital platforms; other members miss face-to-face activities and have struggled to engage with the virtual offer. In some instances, club Chairs made telephone calls to members and/or socially distanced visits. Since lockdown restrictions were eased from July 2020 in some areas, clubs have been trying to balancing online/virtual with restarting some face-to-face activities (in line with Government guidelines).

During COVID-19 Government identified farmers, farm workers and people in the food supply chain as key workers. Young farmers suggested this had led the public to recognise the work they do in supplying the nations food:farmers are key workers, but I dont think a lot of recognition was given to farmers before COVID-19.The majority of interviewees perceived COVID-19 as a short-term problem with farming facing other threats/issues that have been neglected during the pandemic. These issues can be grouped into three themes: (i) Brexit and the transition to a new Agricultural System; (ii) broadband and mobile connectivity; and (iii) climate change and the environment. Young people are thinking about the future and the implications of this bigger picture on their farm business, skills and future work:young farmers are resilient, and innovative, and thats why well make the best of the situation.

Overall, the findings of the research suggest:

1. Young people want to have a stake in the countryside:they care about the community where they live and many take an active part in local organisations and activities (e.g. church, parish council, school, pub). Often growing up and spending many hours working on a farm means they already have a wealth of skills and experiences at a young age compared to their peers not growing up on a farm.

2. Young people are a vital part of the social fabric of rural communities:this has become even more apparent during COVID-19 with many young farmers delivering medicines or groceries and phoning or visiting vulnerable residents for example.

3But they are pessimistic about the future:while many young people want to continue to live and work in the countryside, this research suggests they will only be able to do so if they remain on their family farm. Similarly, many young farmers believe that if they are to have a future in farming, they will need an off-farm income to supplement and sustain them.

4. COVID-19 restrictions have had a big impact on young farmers and clubs:not being able to meet face-to-face and socialise has had a significant effect on the health and wellbeing of young farmers. Clubs are taking stock in looking at how they deliver activities virtually and in person and the support they need to do this.

5. Young people are seeking information and advice and some want morethey are more likely to talk about their mental health than their parents or grandparents. They want more information on housing and activities available for young people. Given the need to undertake further training and skills development [particularly higher-level courses/qualifications] accessing this information will also become increasingly important.

6. Policy and decision makers need to ensure the voices of young farmers are heard:as future farming schemes are developed and introduced, listening and responding to feedback from young farmers will continue to be important. Defra also has a strategic role as rural champion across Government and can ensure some of the themes emerging from the research (e.g. housing, youth services and activities) are picked up by other relevant Government departments.

These findings were discussed at a special panel debate held duringNational Young Farmers Week 2020. This current research and discussion builds on asurveycarried out by the NFYFC in 2016 which sought to gather the ideas of young farmers for a future British Agricultural Policy. Thefindingscovered six areas: negotiating a better deal for young farmers; future farm business culture; employment skills and training; farming regulations; building farm businesses; and farming subsidies. When asked which do you feel it is most important for UK Government negotiators & legislators to focus on, and which do you feel it is most important for farmings industry bodies to focus on?, 79% of the 184 respondents stated that the UK Government should focus on controlling the costs of production and 78% stated that farming industry bodies should focus on consumer confidence. The survey found the two biggest barriers for young farmers wanting to start in or to remain in farming were around access to land and access to credit.

Amid COVID-19 and Brexit these are uncertain times for children and young people wanting to live, grow up, learn, work and spend time in the countryside. On the one hand, there can be particular challenges for young farmers, particularly relating to the time they may have to wait before they have the chance to farm in their own right (e.g. access to land, finance, succession planning), juggling paid work on the farms of others or off-farm, and balancing the demands of studying or training with paid work. On the other hand, their involvedness in farming, sometimes from a very early age, and their passion, means they already have a wealth of skills, knowledge and maturity not always seen in other cohorts of young people in the general population. With many longitudinal studies underway, what might research with young farmers tell us about the effectiveness of policy and industry interventions designed to support the industry post Brexit, and how to make a success of farming as a career? Watch this space.

Jessica is a researcher/project manager at Rose Regeneration and a senior research fellow at The National Centre for Rural Health and Care (NCRHC). Her current work includes supporting health commissioners and providers to measure their response to COVID-19 and with future planning; working with 8 farm support groups across England on a Defra funded resilience programme; and helping 3 places to develop proposals for a Town Deal. Jessica also sits on the board of a Housing Association that supports older and vulnerable people.

She can be contacted by email jessica.sellick@roseregeneration.co.uk, Website -http://roseregeneration.co.uk/ https://www.ncrhc.org/, Blog -http://ruralwords.co.uk, Twitter -@RoseRegen

See the original post here:

What are the implications of COVID-19 and Brexit for the post-millennial generation? - Rural Services Network

The Brexit transition period will not be extended, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer ashe told businesses that it is now down to Boris Johnson to deliver on his promise.

Sir Keir struck a strongly more pro-business tone than his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn as he spoke at the CBI conference.

Sir Keir, who backed Remain in the referendum, said: There is no prospect of an extension.

There was never going to be a vote in parliament on it.

There was no way of it being forced and that is why I say to the prime minister, You promised a deal, get on with it.

The outstanding issues are capable of being resolved. They need to be resolved in the national interest.

The prime minister went to the country last December with one central commitment and that was that he had got a Brexit deal already oven ready and now he needs to deliver on it because the impact on businesses, communities and the whole country will be profound if he fails to make good on that commitment.

The UK is set to leave the Brexit transition period on December 31, but talks on a future trade agreement have proved highly problematic.

Sir Keir said that Labour wanted to work with business.

He said: A Labour government led by me will be pro-business. Working with businesses and recognising businesses for what they are.

Sir Keir said that Covid called for a rethink about the economy and said he would do that with business.

Asked about nationalisation, Sir Keir said: If you look at rail, there are real problems with the franchises that have been running in the last few years.

We are now in a changed situation and the vast majority of the public want to see rail in some sort of common ownership and I support that.

He added: I dont think its a one size fits all, but I do think there are clear examples of where criminal justice would be one of them where simply privatising has not worked.

See the original post here:

Keir Starmer warns there is no prospect of a Brexit extension - The New European

NewsPoliticsBrexit will be a crisis entirely of the UK Governments making, a key ally of Nicola Sturgeon has said, as he dismissed Westminster claims that they had been working collaboratively with Scottish ministers.

Monday, 2nd November 2020, 7:00 am

Constitution Secretary Mike Russell insisted ministers in London had simply ignored the Scottish Government and other devolved administrations throughout the whole Brexit process.

He hit out in a letter to Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove, who wrote to him recently claiming there was now intensified engagement between Westminster and Holyrood as the UK prepares for the Brexit transition period ending in December.

Mr Gove also complained that Scottish ministers have not given the UK Government access to crucial data on Brexit preparedness.

But Mr Russell insisted that the UK Government had recklessly decided to end the transition period at great cost to Scotland and indeed the UK as a whole.

He added: This action I am afraid typifies the UK Governments whole approach to Brexit total disregard for the wishes and interests of the people of Scotland, contempt for devolution and a drive towards an ever more extreme and damaging Brexit which is going to end with either the worst possible outcome no trade deal or at best a low deal which will cost jobs and hit the economy hard at the worst possible time.

Responding to the Cabinet Office minister, Mr Russell said: I fully understand why you would wish to assert that you have been working collaboratively with the devolved governments, but the facts show that the decisions on Brexit have been taken by the UK Government alone.

This is a crisis entirely of the UK Governments making and people in Scotland are well aware of where the responsibility for the consequences lie.

The Scottish Constitution Secretary said while Mr Gove had referenced the number of meetings held between the UK Government and the devolved administrations, ministers at Holyrood were concerned about the quality and timing of engagement.

His comments come after he told MPs in September that there was now no trust between the Scottish Government and Westminster, complaining that dialogue between the two administrations had become significantly worse since Boris Johnson became Prime Minister.

A UK Government spokesperson said: As the letter from Michael Russell itself acknowledges, officials in the devolved administration in Scotland and UK Government are working closely together on preparations for the end of the Transition Period with dozens of meetings over the last few weeks alone.

The Joint Ministerial Committee on EU negotiations, which brings together UK and devolved administration ministers, has already met six times this year and we look forward to further constructive discussions. We will not always agree on policy but we are committed to working together.

Read the original post:

Brexit will be crisis of UK Government making, Michael Gove is told - The Scotsman

LONDON Britain was at sea, lost in a fog of self-doubt. It had dithered only to retreat. And in its pursuit of Brexit, it exuded a conspicuous infirmity of purpose.

When Boris Johnson, now prime minister, resigned as foreign secretary in 2018, he was brutal in his critique of the government he had quit and of its leader, Theresa May.

Now, more than a year after her ouster, trade talks with the European Union are deadlocked, the mood is poisonous, and there are only weeks left to salvage a deal as Britain prepares to leave the blocs economic zone in January.But Mr. Johnson has already achieved what some analysts say is his one overriding objective: to avoid any comparisons of his negotiating style to that of his predecessor, Mrs. May.

While critics lampooned her as weak and risk averse, Mr. Johnson has gone to the other extreme, most recently by threatening to walk away from parts of a Brexit withdrawal agreement that he struck with the European Union only last year.

That prompted outrage, threats of legal action and speculation that the trade negotiations could collapse. But many analysts say this is just another move from Mr. Johnsons hardball Brexit playbook.

He absolutely had to have a bust-up to prove he wasnt Theresa May, said Anand Menon, a professor of European politics at Kings College, London, referring to the governments threat to override parts of an agreement that was designed to prevent the creation of a hard border between Ireland, an E.U. member, and Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom.

Mr. Menon puts at 50:50 the odds of Britains leaving the European Unions economic zone in January with no trade deal at all.

But in stating this month that this would still be a good outcome, Mr. Johnson made a blunt point that, unlike Mrs. May, he has a solid majority in Parliament and the power to take an economic risk by leaving the bloc without a trade agreement.

There is a clarity about what Boris Johnson is doing that was lacking under Theresa May, Professor Menon said, so to that extent he can still bask in the glow of doing better than she did.

Whether that will translate into a deal will be tested in the coming weeks as the Brexit negotiations reach a climax with just a little cautious optimism in the air.

The backdrop to those talks is one of acute mistrust, worsened when Mr. Johnson threatened to walk back part of the withdrawal agreement that he struck last year. But the main theory in Brussels is that this was designed to raise the stakes in the negotiations, gain diplomatic attention and accelerate engagement at the highest political level.

These discussions are stuck on the issues of fisheries quotas and, most seriously, on Britains reluctance to agree on a set of antitrust rules with the European Union that would limit Londons ability to subsidize its own companies (and therefore, Brussels fears, dump cheap goods in continental Europe).

Historically, British governments and particularly ones under the Conservative Party, which Mr. Johnson now leads have tended to spend less cash this way than many of their continental counterparts, making this an odd issue on which to torpedo an agreement.

The blockage seems to come from Mr. Johnsons powerful adviser, Dominic Cummings, who sees no need for Britain to tie itself to any European rules and wants the freedom to subsidize the high-tech industries of the future, said Charles Grant, the director of the Center for European Reform, a research institute.

The combative Mr. Cummings appears content to do without any trade deal with the European Union and, in line with its hardball approach, the British government has gone into battle over an issue that few Britons care about. But there are differing shades of opinion and priorities in Downing Street.

Ultimately I think Boris Johnson wants a deal, Mr. Grant said.

True, Britain is now asking for a much more basic agreement than Mrs. May sought, and the economic gains of striking one are correspondingly lower. But the economy is more important now because the coronavirus has left British businesses reeling and in a weaker position to cope with the fallout of a no deal exit.

In any event, some Brexit watchers think they have seen similar tactics from Mr. Johnson before.

Last year, he talked tough but then retreated and signed the withdrawal agreement from which he is now threatening to reject. He has also been threatening to walk out of the current trade talks since early summer if progress was insufficient. Yet even as seemingly little or nothing of substance was accomplished until recently, his negotiating team remained at the table.

Mr. Johnsons pugilistic negotiating style should therefore not come as a surprise. Even while serving in Mrs. Mays cabinet, he let it be known that he favored a more muscular and unpredictable approach, that he wanted to try to seize the initiative in a set of talks where, in terms of economic scale, Britain is by far the smaller player.

His well-known appetite for making the big play was reflected in private musings, which were quickly leaked, about what President Trump would do to negotiate a Brexit deal. Thered be all sorts of breakdowns, all sorts of chaos, Mr. Johnson said. Everyone would think hed gone mad. But actually you might get somewhere. Its a very, very good thought.

This strategy, along with a desire to banish the memory of Mrs. Mays premiership, explains much of what has since occurred in the fractious discussions between London and Brussels, and the consequent brinkmanship.

For many supporters of Brexit, Mrs. Mays government was nothing short of a humiliation, with Parliament paralyzed, Britain missing deadlines for leaving the European Union and their project ridiculed. Some also felt that their warnings had been ignored because, while Mrs. May insisted that having no Brexit deal would be better than getting a bad one, few felt that she meant it.

Any negotiator knows that you can only obtain a good outcome if you are willing to walk away from a bad one, Peter Lilley, a former minister who supports Brexit, wrote in 2017.

When Dominic Raab, who is now foreign secretary, resigned as Brexit secretary the following year, he repeated the argument, insisting: To be taken seriously, we must be willing to walk away.

Mr. Johnson, having threatened to do exactly that and having distanced himself so thoroughly from his predecessor has given himself the political space with Brexit supporters to compromise should he opt to do so.

Ultimately, if Boris Johnson wants a deal, he can overcome any opposition in the Conservative Party it will take what it is given, said Mr. Grant, who worked as a journalist in Brussels at the same time as Mr. Johnson in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Its theater and it might work, Mr. Grant said of Mr. Johnsons aggressive style although he added that as with any high wire act, it can always go wrong, particularly with this political performer.

Boris Johnson doesnt necessarily have a strategy for delivering what he wants, Mr. Grant said. He lives from week to week.

Continue reading here:

For U.K.s Boris Johnson, Hardball Tactics Seem the Only Way to a Brexit Deal - The New York Times

Ministerial resignations, internal party squabbles, a global pandemic, and a major national scandalno government would choose to face these obstacles at the beginning of its first term in office. Yet this summer, that was the unfortunate fate of Irelands new coalition administrationthe first ever to bring the rival parties of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael together, along with the Green Party. For a time, it seemed as though one of the most remarkable and unconventional political alliances in Irish history would also be one of its most short-lived. They had a very rocky start, to say the least, said Mary C. Murphy, a senior lecturer in government and politics at University College Cork. Its all been quite unprecedented.

Now, however, the return of an external threatBrexitmay save the alliance from an untimely end. On Sept. 9, the British government abruptly sent Brexit talks into crisis by introducing new legislation that seeks to overturn key provisions of Britains withdrawal agreement with Brussels, including a pledge to establish what is effectively a customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain. By the British governments own admission, its move breaks international law, and it could jeopardize any Brexit deal.

Since the legislation was announced, Irelands taoiseach, or prime minister, Micheal Martin, has been able to shrug off his profile as the leader of a disaster-prone administration and emerge as Irelands national champion. In publicly criticizing U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson and calling on Britain to drop the legislation, Martin has given the Irish something to rally around. Brexit enables the taoiseach to be the taoiseach, the Irish Times political editor Pat Leahy told me. It gives the government a platform to act like a government.

Yet damage caused by Brexit may also be fatal for Irelands government in the long term, particularly if the United Kingdom finally leaves the European Union without a trade deal. Meanwhile, underlying shifts in Irish politicsforegrounded by responses to recent scandalscontinue to haunt the two main governing parties. We are at the cusp of the old system crumbling, said David Farrell, the head of University College Dublins School of Politics and International Relations. What happens next is what we are all trying to figure out now.

Before its potential demise, though, the old system has certainly thrown Ireland a curveball. Perhaps youd have to be Irish to understand just how remarkable the coming together of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael to form a coalition government was, Murphy said. The two parties had fought against each other during the bloody Irish Civil War of 1922 to 1923 and remained bitterly opposed for decades afterward. And while both follow roughly similar center-right policies, this history has always precluded them from merging. Instead, theyve alternated as the party in power for nearly a century.

It was also extraordinary that they managed to pull the Green Party on board as the third coalition member. The Green Party advocates environmental legislation anathema to many rural Fianna Fail and Fine Gael members, and it nearly didnt join the coalition due to party infighting.

This unlikely coalition was made possible by a major change in Irish politics: the electoral triumph in Februarys general elections of Sinn Fein, the left-wing nationalist party thats the former political wing of the paramilitary Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA). Outvoting all three current coalition members to emerge as the largest party in Irish politics, Sinn Feins unexpected triumph highlighted a growing shift away from the platforms of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. Rather than old Civil War-era loyalties, Sinn Fein gave economic issues center stagethough it didnt have enough seats to form a majority.

Sinn Fein played a good hand by highlighting problems in housing and health in particular, Farrell said. Irelands hangover from the global economic crisis is still going, with people facing long hospital queues and financial losses. Sinn Fein capitalized on all that.

The election left neither Fianna Fail nor Fine Gael with enough seats to form a government, separately or in coalition, and the two parties were unwilling to join up with Sinn Fein. So after four months of searching for a workable coalition that would have enough seats to form a majority, the Green Party was pulled on board.

After taking office on June 27, the new government rapidly ran into trouble. Within a few weeks, Martin had sacked his first cabinet appointee, Agriculture Minister Barry Cowen, following an embarrassing drunk driving incident. Several leading members of the Green Party then quit over their partys decision to join the coalition, while others voted against government bills in the parliament.

Meanwhile, the COVID-19 crisis continued, and the government faced the difficult task of bringing the country out of a successful lockdown, which had been managed by former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar of Fine Gael, whose government had remained in office after the election in February, until the new coalition was formed in June. As the lockdown ended and the number of infections rose while confusing new rules and restrictions were instated, Martins stewardship of the crisis contrasted poorly with Varadkars. Arguments between Martin and the more cautious Varadkar, who is now the deputy taoiseach, also began to attract publicity.

Then came whats known as Golfgate. On Aug. 19, members of the parliaments Golf Society had a gathering that broke the governments own lockdown rules on the number of people allowed to meet. In attendance were senators, party officials from Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, a Supreme Court judge, and Irelands representative on the European Commission, Phil Hogan. It was symbolically immensely damaging, said Tom McDonnell, the co-director of the Nevin Economic Research Institute in Dublin. Many people have died, been isolated, endured so much. Yet then they see the people who make the rules attending parties.

Hogan eventually resigned, along with Dara Calleary, the coalitions second agriculture minister and Fianna Fail deputy leader, and Jerry Buttimer, the deputy speaker for the parliaments upper house. There was a sense that if they allowed those that were there to get away with it, the government wouldnt last long, McDonnell said.

A cull of senior politicians on this scale was unprecedented in modern Irish historybut so was the publics response. Its difficult to remember a past parallel where there was such immediate outrage, said Leahy, the Irish Times editor. It simply wasnt possible for those involved to ride it out. The lower house of the parliament was recalled early from its summer break to debate the scandal, and all across Irish mediasocial and otherwisethere was an enormous display of anger. In a September opinion poll, only 10 percent of participants said they would give their first preference vote to Fianna Fail, Martins partyfive points below the previous poll in May.

The severity of the public reaction, and the damage the scandal caused the establishment parties of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael, shows just how much Irish politics has been changing in recent years. The strength of the publics response also reveals that the current coalition is now on a knife edge.

Surviving will not be easy, though, given the major challenges the coalition now faces. We will be dealing with a double economic shock come winter, McDonnell said, when well have the impact of both COVID-19 and Brexit.

The pandemic has already resulted in nearly 2,000 deaths in Ireland and may cause an 8.5 percent contraction of the Irish economy this year. Brexit, meanwhile, may also lead to major economic disruption, especially if Britain leaves with no deal. Irish beef, for example, may face a 50 percent hike in tariffs when exported to the United Kingdomthe industrys largest export market.

No deal would also raise major concerns about the Northern Ireland peace process. The foundation stone of this, the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, allowed for an open border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the U.K., and the Republic of Ireland, removing a source of tension between Irish nationalists and British unionists dating back to the 1920s. If the United Kingdom leaves the EU without a deal, the border may become a hard frontier again. This would be anathema to Irish nationalist groupsthe more radical of which, such as the New IRA, have declared their intention to attack any new border posts.

A bad Brexit would almost certainly strain the new coalition even further. While the taoiseach has affirmed that there will be no return of a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, its unclear how that could be ensured. The coalition, for instance, might have to conduct customs checks on vehicles traveling from Northern Ireland into the EU single market of the Republic of Ireland. Theres no right answer to that one, said Murphy, the lecturer at University College Cork, but it will expose political division across the party system.

It was, after all, the question of what to do about that border that first pitted Fianna Fail and Fine Gael against each other nearly a century ago. [The government] will have to choose, Leahy said, between border checks and the single market, between the North and the EU. For Fianna Fail in particular, whose ancestors fought a bitter war against the imposition of the border, taking steps to implement border checks may be too much for many old party stalwarts to swallow. Sinn Fein would likely benefit from this, pulling members away from Fianna Fail. And the ones who remain may find themselves wondering if it is not finally time to bury the Civil War hatchet and merge with their old rivals, Fine Gael.

Read the original here:

Brexit May Save the Irish Government From an Untimely Collapse - Foreign Policy