Category Archives: Brexit

The threat of a sausage war will loom over the discussions as officials work to thrash out a solution to end trade disruptions in the region. Wrangling will likely focus on an EU ban on British chilled meats, such as sausages and burgers, being sold in Northern Ireland. A grace period from the EUs red tape is set to expire at the end of next month, meaning the sale of British bangers must be stopped in the areas supermarkets unless an agreement is found.

Ministers are privately planning whether to override the Brexit treaty and unilaterally extend the grace period to protect supplies.

Brussels chief Maros Sefcovic has previously threatened to react swiftly, firmly and resolutely if Britain unilaterally extends the grace period in the Northern Ireland Protocol.

Any such action would likely prompt further legal action that could ultimately lead to punitive tariffs on British exports and the suspension of parts of the post-Brexit trade agreement.

Mr Sefcovic, the EUs Brexit negotiator, has vowed to be flexible in finding solutions that protect Northern Irelands place within the UK.

But this is not a position shared by some member states and the EU Parliament, who are pushing for a hardline interpretation of the rules to avoid a hard border.

In order to keep the frontier open, Northern Ireland essentially has remained within the single market, with a number of checks on goods shipped from mainland Britain.

Brexit minister Lord Frost has argued that these have had a significant impact on the region, including a chilling effect to trade.

Unionists are furious and have argued the measures have driven a wedge between them and the rest of the UK.

Downing Street has tabled a series of proposals that would see the legal text of the protocol renegotiated to remove most of customs controls in the Irish Sea and strip the European Court of Justices powers to enforce the rules.

But Brussels has rejected any such any bid to rewrite the treaty and has instead pushed to use flexibilities within the agreement to relieve the burden on the people of Northern Ireland.

Sources on both sides have confirmed technical talks over the UKs Command Paper have been ongoing since its publication.

A British official told Express.co.uk: We received a constructive reply from the Commission in response to our request for a standstill on existing arrangements.

MUST READ:Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage slam Brussels

While not wanting to issue the EU with an ultimatum, the Brexit minister has previously stressed that all options remain on the table in regards to the Protocol.

This could include triggering the Article 16 clause to override the EU-ordered customs controls for Northern Ireland.

Mr Sefcovic is also expected to travel to London for further talks, which are likely to be frantic because of looming deadlines.

The grace period on chilled meats will expire on September 30, meaning sausages and mince produced in England could be banned in the province.

Separate waivers on the movement of medicines from Great Britain to Northern Ireland is due to expire in January.

Visit link:

Brexit trade war looming as crunch talks with EU risk boiling over -UK rejects hated rules - Daily Express

So much for Global Britain. The fiasco and tragedy of the retreat from Afghanistan have laid bare the folly of the Brexiters Faustian pact: choose the irresponsible but vote-winning Boris Johnson as your leader; say goodbye European Union, hello world; and, oh dear, it turns out not to be the triumph they promised.

The combination of the insanity of Brexit and the Johnson governments manifest incompetence is now seen to be adding geopolitical impotence to economic self-harm. What an achievement! Global Britain? Whatever you say, President Biden. Three bags full, sir.

I pointed out recently that, so far, the government has been able to hide behind the disruption caused by Covid, in order to distract attention from the mounting evidence of the Brexit folly: we have been experiencing what I call a Brexdemic.

It has been wryly amusing to hear BBC interviewers leaning over backwards not to offend the government: for example, by trying to goad fruit and vegetable farmers into saying their recruitment problems are surely not caused by Brexit. Luckily, whatever their political sympathies, industrialists and executives have been speaking out.

Thus, facing a looming crisis in the supply chain for such a staple part of the British diet as chicken, Richard Griffiths, representing British poulterers, told the BBC that this was the direct result of Brexit. There are severe problems in getting visas for European workers, and the supply chain is seriously ruptured by the way this affects the flow, and availability, of heavy goods vehicles.

Undergraduates wishing to embark on what, in pre-Brexit days, would have been a routine year studying in Spain find themselves up against such Brexit-induced bureaucracy that they joke it would be simpler to do their year on Zoom from the UK.

You will recall that, egged on by the ghastly Nigel Farage and co, the Brexit campaign made a meal of stirring up the nastiest atavistic prejudices against immigrants from what was then the rest of the EU immigrants who played a key role in the functioning of our economy. Well, here is Lord Bilimoria, president of the CBI, warning of a perfect storm facing industries such as food and drink, hospitality, logistics and construction because of the impossibility of hiring lower-skilled workers.

As Prof Anand Menon of Kings College London points out, the Brexiters promised it would be simple, ignoring or possibly being culpably ignorant of how closely many of our firms depend on integrated supply chains enabled by the single market.

Although he will no doubt in due course cash in on the absurd international celebrity lecture circuit, it may never in Robert Brownings words be glad confident morning again for Johnson as prime minister. He has served his dubious purpose, and his colleagues look as though they have rumbled him. He must surely reflect on Claudiuss lament in Hamlet: When sorrows come, they come not single spies, but in battalions.

Not only is Brexit catching up with him, he also now faces a standoff with Chancellor Sunak and the Treasury over public spending on everything from precautions against global heating to the level of pensions.

Not just from the Treasury: from the extreme right wing of MPs, such as Steve Baker, who boast that they were responsible for ensuring that he won the Tory leadership and then the election. I just love the fact that Baker, having made his contribution to making the country poorer with his championship of Brexit, is now campaigning against measures to mitigate the impact of climate change on the grounds that the cost of electric cars and new boilers would involve making the public poorer.

It is not good news that, even after the experience of George Osbornes post-2010 austerity programme, we have another chancellor, Rishi Sunak, who believes in austerity and is also, God help us, unlike Osborne, a Brexiter.

He believes in a policy of divide and rule. I recently heard him say, with regard to the debate over the level of pensions, that it was a case of setting the wishes of taxpayers against pensioners. Someone at the Treasury ought to tell him that pensions are taxable.

Sunak is also concerned about the cost of warding off the worst of global heating. He should read Climate Crisis Economics by Stuart PM Mackintosh, executive director of the Group of 30, the esteemed international economic thinktank.

In an echo of Ernest Hemingways famous exchange in The Sun Also Rises How did you go bankrupt? Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly Mackintosh concludes, in respect of global heating, that change happens slowly and then fast. The evidence is all around us.

Read more:

Global Britain badly needs a new driver at the wheel - The Guardian

UNEASE triggered by Brexit has increased the likelihood that more than half of European citizens living in the UK (58.6%) will want to leave, according to a new survey.

The study also showed a majority of Europeans living in the UK see themselves staying here permanently or long-term, but a sizeable proportion intend to leave in the near future or stay only in the short-term.

It was conducted by Professor Tanja Bueltmann, director of the School of Humanities at the University of Strathclyde, and colleague Dr Alexandra Bulat, to gauge the sense of identity, belonging and representation of EU citizens in the UK post-Brexit.

While the majority of almost 2500 respondents (73.3%) considered as settled in the UK, the survey said, Brexit constitutes a serious rupture, leaving 14.6% who intend to leave in the near future.

READ MORE:'We did not vote for this': Ian Blackford's plea to Scots amid Brexit disruption

Brexit triggered a new sense of unease and uncertainty among a majority of respondents, with 58.62% agreeing that it increased the likelihood of them leaving the UK, said the report.

Data highlight that this figure would likely be even higher were it not for practical barriers that many see in a move now, citing, amongst other things, their age and concern over pension rights as the reason they decided not to leave the UK.

The data also show Brexit has negatively impacted EU citizens sense of home, leaving them feeling less attached and more insecure about their status here. Despite that, 44.72%, still said they feel at home here.

The survey was designed for adult EU/EEA/Swiss nationals, or those with dual nationality, who acquired British nationality, normally live in the UK and arrived here before the end of December 2020.

A total of 60.4% have settled status, 15.5% have British citizenship and 10.4% have pre-settled status; 82.2% are resident in England; 11.8% in Scotland; 3.8% in Wales; and 1.36% in Northern Ireland. Most are from Germany, France and the Netherlands, but the research team said they had made some inroads into improving response rates from Eastern Europeans. The EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) had a total of 4.9 million applicants, 53% of whom were granted pre-settled status.

In Scotland 56% of applicants were granted such status, in Wales 58% and in Northern Ireland 61%, with 53% in England.

The survey said much of the uncertainty related to issues over rights and what could happen to the EUSS in future, with a clear scepticism that rights might not be preserved as promised.

These concerns are primarily a result of a lack of trust in the UK Government, it said.

Bueltmann told The National: If you look at the details on community involvement, for instance, there is some evidence now that some EU citizens have stepped back from volunteering as a result of their Brexit experiences, she said.

But that does not automatically mean that their sense of being at home here has completely vanished.

Many distinguish between issues relating to the UK as a whole and their local environment, for example.

Like in a previous survey, EU citizens in Scotland again recognise too the Scottish Governments strong support versus the failures in terms of the lack of such support from the UK Government. Similar points are noted for other devolved administrations.

Bueltmann said this is the first survey to clearly highlight nuances from EU citizens, depending on where they come from: This comes out, for instance, in how some, particularly among Eastern Europeans, have a more practical view on some issues, such as citizenship.

But these differences ... often relate to length of time in the UK ... someone who has been at home here for four decades or so may have stronger feelings about having to apply to stay than a more recent arrival.

See original here:

Brexit unease puts EU citizens off idea of staying in the UK - The National

Jonathan Portes delves into the data on the economic performance of the UK after its exit from the EUs single market and customs union on 1 January and assesses the real-world impact of these new trade barriers

The economics profession came in for opprobrium and derision after the 2016 EU Referendum, when the recession predicted by the Treasury and the International Monetary Fund failed to materialise.

While not all economists share the blame for then Chancellor George Osbornes scaremongering, it is fair to say that at least some of the criticism was justified.

Before the Coronavirus pandemic, the UKs economic performance was mediocre worsened in part by the vote to leave the EU, as uncertainty hit the pound, and reduced investment, which stagnated after the referendum. But it was not disastrous, as most businesses simply opted to wait to see what would happen, rather than rushing for the exit.

But, somewhat paradoxically, analysing the impact of economic changes is easier over the long than the short-term it is easier to forecast the climate than the weather.

Forecasting the short-term impact of the Brexit vote was, by definition, about assessing the impact of a political shock on essentially psychological variables consumer and business confidence, and expectations about future policy. Neither economics nor anyone else has a great track record on this.In retrospect, the fact that predictions were way off should not have been a great surprise.

But, over the longer term, Brexit is primarily about changes to the trading relationship between the UK and the EU. And here, economics and economists, can do better. There are a lot of issues in economics that are controversial, but the principle that increasing trade barriers between two trading partners will reduce trade, and that in general that will reduce economic welfare on both sides, really isnt.

While putting precise numbers on those impacts is hard, and requires complex economic modelling,it really would be surprising and a genuine challenge to conventional economics if Brexit didnt do some damage to the UK economy. While there was no shortage of politicians who argued that somehow new trade barriers would not make much difference, or that trade with our closest and largest single trading partner could easily be substituted with trade with the rest of the world, no credible economic analysis endorsed such claims.

So, with six months of data on the economic performance of the UK after its exit from the EU single market and customs union on 1 January, what can we say about the real-world impact of these new trade barriers?

The initial impacts were very much as trade experts and common sense would have predicted: trade with the EU, especially imports, rose sharply immediately before the turn of the year, as businesses stockpiled goods in anticipation of Brexit-related disruption; then fell even more sharply, before slowly recovering.

Most of these transitional impacts should have worked through by now.Perhaps surprisingly, UK exports of goods to the EU have now recovered roughly to their pre-Coronavirus levels. But imports from the EU are down substantially, by about 10% compared to two years ago, partly offset by an increase in imports from the rest of the world.

The most surprising and arguably worrying statistics relate to the UKs exports to the rest of the world. Far from Brexit providing a boost, these are also down by about 10%. And this is not an effect of the Coronavirus EU exports to the rest of the world have increased, not decreased.

Overall, therefore, the UKs trade performance has been extremely weak.

How much of this is due to Brexit is unclear. The data is noisy and unreliable and will almost certainly be revised. And we know even less about services trade, which makes up about 40% of UK exports to the EU, although a much smaller share of imports.

There hasnt been much disruption to financial services, but that doesnt mean that Brexit doesnt matter. Firms knew that it was coming, and the picture remains a slow and gradual transfer of some business to continental Europe. In other business services including law, accountancy, and creative sectors trade is more dependent on the physical movement of persons, meaning that the impact may be larger but has so far been obscured by Coronavirus-related restrictions.

Perhaps more importantly, it is still very early days. The models described above look at effects over the long-term say 10 or 15 years rather than six months. Over time, as companies restructure their supply chains or decide where to invest, the impact is likely to grow. But, so far at least, there is no reason for economists to change their minds about Brexit and trade.

On wages, the economic consensus was reasonably clear. Just as new trade barriers reduce trade and make us somewhat worse-off, so do barriers to the movement of people. So ending free movement will hit growth. But migration, like trade, also has distributional impacts workers who compete with migrants might in theory benefit from reductions in immigration.

However, the evidence also suggested that any such impacts would be small. A study by Bank of England economists (often cited by anti-immigration activists) found that wages in the most affected sectors might have been pushed down by about 1% over a decade of high immigration an impact the studys authors described as infinitesimal, compared to the other drivers of pay.

More importantly, simply looking at the direct impact misses the point. If lower immigration reduces overall growth and productivity, and hence tax revenues, then the average worker will certainly lose out, and even those workers who gain directly can end up losing indirectly. My own pre-Brexit analysis suggested that these indirect effects would indeed dominate.

So do reports of staff shortages and so far largely anecdotal higher wages in those sectors where migrants make up a large share of the labour force somehow prove us wrong and show that the end of free movement is indeed a boon for workers?

Hardly.The past 18 months have seen huge shocks to the UK labour market. First, the forced closure of large sectors of the economy, leading to the furlough or letting-go of millions of workers many of whom were from the EU and quite understandably decided to return to their home countries, temporarily or permanently; and then the reopening of those sectors, while huge uncertainty remained, as well as stringent travel restrictions in both directions.It would frankly have been astonishing if this hadnt resulted in major disruption to both the supply and demand of workers in the affected sectors, and hence labour shortages.

This has little do with Brexit, at least directly, with the possible exception of agriculture and the transport sector although here other factors are also at work. It was the pandemic that caused the exodus and most of those who left will, despite Brexit and the end of free movement, have the right to return here should they so wish under the settled status scheme.

More importantly, it tells us little about the medium to long-term impacts on wages, direct or indirect, of the end of free movement.For precisely the same reasons, Brexit opponents should not overdo the doom and gloom about empty shelves or food shortages: these are by no means all down to Brexit, and in any case are likely to be transitory.

Indeed, if we look at the actual data, rather than anecdote, we dont see much to suggest a wage explosion. It is possible that anti-immigration nativists such as Paul Embery who claimed in 2018 that wages in hospitality were soaring (they werent) and that this showed the malign impacts of migration (it didnt) will be right this time. But claims that wages are soaring arent supported by hard data yet.Despite the recovery, real wages in the accommodation and food services sector are still below their pre-pandemic levels.

The most obvious impact of shortages and bottlenecks, in the labour market and elsewhere, is on inflation, with prices up more than 1.5% just in the last three months, and some disruption to retailers supply chains.

This is, of course, a cost to all workers (and the rest of the population), including the lowest paid, and directly reduces real incomes. So even if there has been some upward pressure on wages in cash terms, its far from obvious, as yet, that the net impact on living standards is positive. As with trade, there isnt, as yet any obvious reason for economists to change their minds.

And what about the other benefits of Brexit trade deals with third countries, deregulation, and so on? Here we can be pretty definitive nothing that has happened so far amounts to more than a rounding error; nor is there any reason to believe that, in the short-term at least, this is likely to change.

It is possible that the UK will diverge radically from the economic model of the past four decades, with big impacts positive or negative on UK economic performance. But, as Anand Menon and I pointed out, if anything, both the pandemic and Brexit seem to have made the UK more, not less, European.

So all sides are likely to be disappointed. Barring unforeseen events, Brexit will not lead to a crisis nor precipitous economic decline; but the economic downsides remain more tangible and durable than any likely benefits. As I wrote just before the changes took effect, a slow puncture not a car crash.

Jonathan Portes is Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the School of Politics & Economics at Kings College London

Byline Times is funded by its subscribers. Receive our monthly print edition and help to support fearless, independent journalism.

New to Byline Times? Find out more about us

A new type of newspaper independent, fearless, outside the system. Fund a better media.

Dont miss a story

Our leading investigations include Brexit, Empire & the culture war, Russian interference, Coronavirus, cronyism and far right radicalisation. We also introduce new voices of colour in Our Lives Matter.

Read this article:

Brexit and the Economy: The Story So Far Byline Times - Byline Times

Britain has left the European Union, taking Remain-supporting cities like Liverpool with it. And after years of fierce debate, deliberation and negotiations, the dust appears to be settling at last.

Following modest support for Leave from the western-facing port city prior to the 2016 vote, an argument has since emerged that Liverpool will thrive post-Brexit simply due to its geography.

On a visit to Liverpool in February last year, Woody Johnson, the then-US ambassador to the UK, said so himself.

READ MORE: Man 'kicking himself' for not telling friend, 41, to get vaccine

With just months having passed since 'Brexit Day' on January 1, there have been widespread reports of lorry driver shortages, supermarkets running low on produce and hospitality firms struggling to find staff. Its important to note that the Covid pandemic has also been a factor in some or all of these issues.

So what impact has there been in Liverpool so far - a city region known for its hospitality, manufacturing and maritime sector, among others?

BusinessLive spoke to prominent business leaders to determine the early indications of the impact Brexit will have on Liverpool in the long term.

Is it a damaged port city - or one looking to prosper in a post-EU Britain after early signs of hope?

BusinessLive is your home for business news from around the North West- and you can stay in touch with all the latest news from Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, Cheshire, Lancashire and Cumbria through our email alerts.

You can sign up to receive daily morning news bulletins from every region we cover and to weekly email bulletins covering key economic sectors from manufacturing to technology and enterprise. And we'll send out breaking news alerts for any stories we think you can't miss.

Visit our email preference centre to sign up to all the latest news from BusinessLive.

For all the latest stories, views, polls and more, follow our BusinessLive North West LinkedIn page here.

Elena Enciso, international trade manager at the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, the voice of the citys businesses, said the post-Brexit period had so far caused confusion for many members - with the two biggest problems being additional costs and increased documentation.

Despite tariff-free trade agreed in the historic deal signed on Christmas Eve last year, British firms access to the EU market still faces significant barriers due to aspects such as non-tariff barrier costs.

Describing a nightmare of paperwork and many firms being overwhelmed, Ms Enciso said: It's not like just going to do trade with Japan or Australia is going to solve the problem.

"Continuing trading with Europe is still very important as for many companies, it is still their main trading partner.

"So customs declarations and papers are going to stay, and they incur additional costs.

Increased documentation is also a problem - particularly for the food sector - with health certificates, agricultural licences, catch certificates for those that export fish. Its a nightmare of paperwork and its overwhelming for many SMEs.

I would say we are learning by doing. These are still unchartered territories for many of the businesses.

The guidance is so overwhelming that to keep up to date, you need to be reading new regulations all the time and not everybody has the time to do that because they have a business to run.

Ms Enciso said it was difficult to determine the impact of Brexit on businesses due to its combination with Covid - with the pandemic accelerating crisis for many.

But she said firms in the region had been forced to invest vital cash by opening new sites in the EU - or taking on extra staff with relevant skills and customs experience.

She said aside from the new UK Global Import Tariff, which makes imports cheaper and easier, and the fact it has given organisations like hers more relevance due to the extra guidance so many now need, determining any positive Brexit impacts for Liverpool is a struggle.

What everybody needs to understand is that we have left the most ambitious form of trade cooperation with Europe, which is the single market, she said.

Nothing is ever going to be as good as having a single market in 28 countries. We now have to navigate 27 VAT systems.

Liverpool businesses will get on with it, they are resilient, and they will find ways. But theyre accepting that the profits may diminish a little bit.

Some of them are so keen, they're absorbing the extra costs of their customers so they don't scare them.

They are finding a way to continue, but accepting that theres going to be a cost for it.

Paul Cherpeau, CEO of the chamber, said there was an element of regret from the Liverpool business community about leaving the EU.

He said: The economic benefits do not outweigh the economic costs of that decision.

That's not a political statement, it is simply a fact as it stands at the moment.

He said the chamber has launched a campaign with local authorities to focus on how businesses have adapted - and the extent to which they have had to invest in new ways of working, and how they intend to flourish internationally moving forward.

He added: There is a lot of bullishness as you would expect, and a lot of determination to get through this and prosper going forward.

I think we can look forward to a successful period in the medium to longer term.

"What we're dealing with now is a mix of adjusting costs but also systematic challenges that need addressing, and businesses don't have a huge amount of agency - lets face it.

If those elements can push together reasonably successfully, coupled with an expansion of businesses that are looking to trade overseas for the first time and don't have all the baggage of adjusting to the new circumstances, then we will be okay.

He said a new export strategy is currently being developed alongside the combined authority in a bid to create a clear strategic approach to what is a huge challenge.

He added: Our businesses are going to need substantial amounts of support, whether they are continuing to adapt to the environment they're trading in, or whether they are looking to develop those new market opportunities, either outside of the EU, or even one of those 27 countries that we now need to deal with.

Tom Houghton is the North West Business Editor for BusinessLive and Reach plc titles.

You can follow Tom on Twitter here, or contact him on Facebook.

Email him on tom.houghton@reachplc.com.

Keep up to date with the latest breaking news in the North West here.

Sign up to our fantastic daily email updates for the region here.

Follow @livechobusiness and @businesslive on Twitter

Mr Cherpeau said despite Liverpools geographical advantage, its not a case of assuming that the city will benefit just because its port faces west - and towards the USA.

He said: Ultimately, it's about the relationships that are built between businesses, that includes business development activity of those in local ports.

It's about thinking about business to business transactions and how they are developed.

So it's not just a simple flick of the switch, and businesses saying, we'll go from Liverpool as opposed to an Eastern-facing port.

So there is a geographical benefit, but there's a huge amount of work that has to go into building and maintaining relationships between businesses, across different geographies across different borders. We can't underplay that.

We need a substantial investment approach to make sure that relationships can be built, trust can be built, and those material tangible benefits geographically can also be met.

One part of the citys industry certainly seeing a post-Brexit rise in activity is port logistics. Thats been shown in recent weeks not least by Peel Ports Group - the owner of the Port of Liverpool - continuing to invest heavily in operations in the city.

Last week, its 400m Liverpool2 project continued at pace, welcoming four huge new cranes and an additional 15 acres of yard capacity as part of the schemes next phase.

Once completed, Peel Ports said Liverpool2 will provide global shipping companies reliable access to major import and export centres at the heart of the UK, to further increase capabilities and support increased demand.

For Chris Shirling-Rooke, CEO of Mersey Maritime, theres a lot of optimism that Brexit will boost a global Liverpool.

He said: You're seeing more shipping lines coming to Liverpool, a lot of new investment, because with Brexit, were only talking about Europe, but we have the whole rest of the world to go at.

You see all of these new free trade agreements being announced by the Government - well, the odds are that the ships are going to come to Liverpool. Theyre not going to go to east coast ports. They will come to Liverpool, which is one of the most modern in the world.

Maritime, by its very nature, looks outwards, we don't look inwards. We trade globally and Liverpool is a global port.

I think the Government has switched onto this for the first time in generations - we put 45bn a year in tax into the exchequer, for example.

He added: There's a huge focus on global trade, there's a huge focus on shipbuilding and there's a massive focus on decarbonisation.

These are all opportunities that we have in this region - shipyards, ports, professional services, engineers, offshore - to really make the most out of these opportunities.

The fact is, psychologically, that we are looking globally. I can tell you anecdotally that we have a number of German and Dutch businesses now moving into the North West because actually, theyre seeing the opportunities of transatlantic trade more here than in the EU.

This is a global gateway, not specifically for Europe. Paperwork is paperwork. Businesses are finding a way around it and understanding it - its like everything you do in business.

Playing down the significance of Brexit on the regions maritime sector - particularly in comparison to the Covid nightmare, Mr Shirling-Rooke added: We just need to get on with Brexit - just crack on. it's almost gone past us, if that makes sense.

Brexit is one of 100 things, maybe even 1,000 things that have affected maritime over the last 300 or 400 years.

We've had the war of independence, we've had emancipation, we've had pandemics, global wars, loads of stuff.

95% of all of our food, fuel and supplies comes by ship. So actually, we have the history and the knowledge to ride this out, and see it through.

It's just another issue, an opportunity to take.

Mr Shirling-Rooke was also asked about the Liverpool City Region becoming one of eight locations in England to be granted freeport status by the Chancellor at his Spring Budget earlier this year - and how that will differ from being a port within the EU.

He said: Each one will have their own separate governance. Regionally, I think it's a brilliant idea, but I think the name is terrible because people will think about what freeports used to be - but these are completely new things. These are more like Global Trade Zones.

He explained that imports will be allowed to enter with simplified customs documentation and without paying tariffs.

The freeport will be designed to specifically encourage businesses that import, process and then re-export goods

Mr Shirling-Rooke, who is also assistant chairman of Maritime UK, added: We'll be able to attract businesses to move there to create jobs, we'll be able to make financial benefits and for firms to move into one of the poorest regions in the UK and create jobs. That is no bad thing.

The plan is hoped to create up to 14,000 new jobs for the city region as well as 850m in total gross added value, and he added: I am optimistic. Anything that we can do to level up our region has got to be good.

The big fear I had with the freeport project was that we might not get one and that would put us at a massive disadvantage.

But it happened, our application was very, very strong, and very warmly received. And I think governance is really good.

So is it better for the city region to be a conventional port within the EU - or a freeport outside?

Mr Shirling-Rooke said he absolutely thinks having a freeport here will benefit the region more than the EU status quo.

He said: There's not a doubt in my mind about that, but I think it's linked with other things.

It's linked with the Government levelling-up agenda, its linked with post Covid recovery, and the decarbonisation opportunity that we have here is huge, as maritime is a big polluter.

Now, if we can find some of the solutions in this region - and we have some of the best maritime universities in the world and some of the best shipping lines in the world, some of the best engineers in the world - that would be fantastic.

You throw in freeports and well, and that becomes quite an interesting cake that we're going to bake.

Steve Crane, managing director of shipping and logistics specialist Brunswick International, said leaving the EU has been phenomenal for his and other similar firms working around the Port of Liverpool.

In May, the firm, which specialises in customs clearance at UK ports, opened a new 2m premises in Hunts Cross , reporting that business within the EU had increased five-fold since Brexit.

He said his firm took on staff ahead of Januarys Brexit date, anticipating an influx in demand.

He said: Work levels have gone up hundreds of percent because of Brexit.

The customs department used to look after deep sea movements from America and China. But now with Brexit, we are clearing vast amounts of trailers and shipments per day from the EU. That's just the way it's changed, and with that comes more staff requirements.

Mr Crane said that with even more documentation related to food import licences set to be required from January onwards, things are getting busier and busier.

He added: The workload is just continuous for us. It just doesn't seem to be getting any less, and with this comes all the work as well, in shipping, warehousing and transport.

For our industry, it's phenomenal, and we and others are creating jobs to match the demand.

All of the companies in the sector Ive spoken to have seen something similar. Many are actually refusing work because theyve got too much of it and they havent got enough staff availability.

Tom is North West Business Editor for the ECHO, Business Live and Reach plc titles.

Here are more of his stories.

You can follow Tom on Twitter here, or contact him on Facebook.

Email him on tom.houghton@reachplc.com

Did you film a great video? Send your footage via WhatsApp: 07831256877

Keep up to date with the latest breaking news from the Liverpool ECHO here

Like the ECHO Facebook page and follow @livechonews and @livechobusiness Twitter

Mr Crane said he has seen Brexit as a success for the UK, adding: I wanted to leave for political reasons and for selfish reasons because I knew what it would do for the business.

I still think that we have now proven the point that we are a really strong country.

We are standing alone on our own two feet.

Original post:

Post-Brexit Liverpool: A city full of regret or one set to thrive in 'global Britain'? - Liverpool Echo

Loyalist activist Jamie Bryson has called out "Irish nationalists" for seeking to bring Northern Ireland into the economic orbit of Dublin and the EU after Brexit. He argued that the objective of Irish nationalists is to bring about an economically united Ireland through the implementation of the Brexit protocol. Mr Bryson believes that the construction of new customs rules between Northern Ireland and Great Britain was to serve the "real objective" of pushing unionists towards Irish unification.

Mr Bryson told Express.co.uk: "The real objective here from Irish nationalism was to colonise almost Northern Ireland within an economic united Ireland.

"And of course once you form economic union it is but a small step to political union.

"That is the strategy and that is the objective," he added.

"And that is why the nationalist parties are clinging so strongly to the protocol."

Mr Bryson has argued that the EU and "Irish nationalists" share a common objective - pulling Northern Ireland out of the UK.

Mr Bryson told Express.co.uk: "The EU's objective is to create an overarching economic and political union.

"I mean that is what the EU is all about.

"So they want to grab as much territory as they can and to subjugate it under their empire as it were.

"The European Union want to grab Northern Ireland because they want an empire as it were with open borders and economic, and political union."

"So it is a territorial land grab of Northern Ireland," stressed the Editor of the Unionist Voice.

Brussels has been blasted over moves to "wrestle" Northern Irish trade away from Great Britain

Earlier this week Sir John Redwood MP to GB News:"I think there is a deliberate attempt by the EU to wrestle trade from GB to Northern Ireland to turn it into EU to Northern Ireland trade."

Read more:

EU and Dublin looking to 'colonise' Northern Ireland within Brexit trade deal - Daily Express

Patrick Minford, Brexit-backing Professor from Cardiff University, noted the importance of a well-ordered vaccine drive away from the EU. He said: The bounce back is largely due to the vaccination success and yes, this was connected to being outside the EU so the Government could move fast, without worrying about EU state aid rules, and using our own medical regulator.

Outside of the EU and with it the European Medicines Agency, the UK was able to push ahead with approving doses of the COVID-19 vaccine.

By the time 40 percent of Britons had been jabbed, the number of those who had received their first vaccination in the EU was stuck at around 12 percent.

Just last week official figures found the UK had recorded a 4.8 percent growth in GDP in the second financial quarter.

According to the Office for National Statistics, this was a much more profound bounce back than those experienced in France, Germany and Spain.

But the Iron Ladys ex-adviser also explained in a recent academic report that the UK could be looking forward to even more economic growth in the future.

Prof Minford said: This updates the forecast for the latest numbers and shows we are on course for 8 percent growth in 2021 and another eight percent in 2022.

In the Liverpool Investment Letter, the former Economists for Brexit member expressed a desire for the UK to pursue a bold tax cutting strategy for growth and levelling up.

The fellow at the Centre for Brexit Policy toldExpress.co.uk: The Letter also highlights the need for a positive programme of tax cuts, reformed regulation and spending to support and boost growth.

This extra growth will more than pay off the short term rise in debt."

In the report, the Cardiff-based academic went further by claiming: These growth-supporting policies involve supply-side tax cuts and spending rises whose short-term effect is of course to increase the deficit.

READ MORE:Alba pledges legal action to force IndyRef2

But in the long run they bring the debt ratio down, so in effect paying for themselves.

The letter recommended: For the long term good of our country fiscal policy should now focus on boosting growth, particularly in the Northern regions outside the relatively prosperous South.

What we have found, the 78-year-old claimed, is that a bold package of tax cuts and targeted spending on infrastructure will boost growth across the country, but particularly in the North, reducing the North-South gap, and will also pay for itself through its long-term effect on the public finances.

The study estimates growth in the North could double that of the South if these low-tax policies are enacted by the British Government.

However, Prof Minfords report also issued a rallying cry for fellow proponents of supply-side economic policies.

DON'T MISS:Alex Salmond ripped apart over Alba plans to debate monarchy future[LATEST]SNP to push forward with IndyRef2 as Scotland reaches COVID safety'[INSIGHT]US issues warning to Sturgeon over Scottish independence vote[REVEAL]

To embark on this strategy, he claimed, the main need is to close our ears to the voices of gloom that urge the need to raise taxes and cut spending to reduce the Covid debt that way lies only a downward spiral of falling growth and a rising debt ratio a doom loop of stagnation, austerity and worsening finances.

When considering the economic benefits Britain could yield from signing its own free trade agreements outside of the EU's customs union, the 78-year-old toldExpress.co.uk: After the Australia deal, deals with the US and the Pacific Trade agreement countries can deliver big gains to UK GDP, of seven percent or more over the long term.

The UK has already rolled over EU trading arrangements with more than 60 nations.

Britain also signed its first bespoke post-Brexit trading accord in October 2020 when Tokyo agreed to sign a far-reaching Anglo-Japanese deal that went far beyond what had been offered to the Brussels bloc.

Here is the original post:

Brexit bounce back! Escaping EU to launch vaccination drive 'connected' to economic boost - Daily Express

The original Not Tonight, released in 2018, drew a pretty grim pixel art picture of the European world, making for a distinctly anti-Brexit exploration of systemic racism. Now publisher No More Robots and developer Panic Barn are squaring their sights on American shores with Not Tonight 2.

Not Tonight 2 is set in a not-entirely-alternate universe where American society has all but Mad Max'd its way into the toilet. Lady Liberty is underwater in the New York harbor, Miami has traded nightlife glitz for gulags, and churches have taken a few hints from Las Vegas on how to draw in a flock.

As for how you'll be spending time in this nightmare, your friend Eduardo has been nabbed by the cops and is awaiting deportation in a Miami gulag, and it's up to three of his friends (all young adults of non-white races) to trek across the country and get his documents or risk losing their pal forever.

Much like the original game, you'll pay your way across the country by working in nightclubs, chicken factories, churches, and good old fashioned cult compounds. It's a mix of Papers, Please's ID checking with visual novel and RPG mechanics, complete with various minigames meant to express just how screwed up the country has become. An overworld map has you moving from city to city, diner to diner, so I'm really curious how the game will grapple with the different kinds of discrimination a place like the south employs vs. the neoliberal NIMBY vibes of San Francisco. Not Tonight 2 is being written by three POC authors, so there's hope the story will prove meaningful, or at least darkly entertaining.

In our review, Phil Iwaniuk noted that Not Tonight was a bit overly blunt about the big-picture racism on display in a post-Brexit world, but excelled at all the little moments that illustrate the casual discrimination that perpetuates things, including a bar owner who loves his immigrant employees because they're "the good ones." Not Tonight is currently 50% off Steam if you want to give it a go.

Not Tonight 2 is due out sometime this year.

More here:

Not Tonight 2 leaves Brexit behind for racism and greed in the US - PC Gamer

More than two-thirds of the UK public feel left in the dark about the impact that post-Brexit trade deals struck by the Government will have.

The International Trade Secretary, Liz Truss, has been tasked with establishing bespoke deals.

But while a host of rollover deals with countries have been secured, mirroring the terms that had initially been in place when a member of the European bloc, and fresh agreements with Japan and Australia have been signed, a survey has found that Britons feel the Government has not been open about what the bilateral treaties entail.

A survey of more than 3,000 UK adults found that 67 per cent felt the public receives too little information from ministers about trade deals, with only seven per cent recording they knew that the UK had a deal with Japan.

A quarter of consumers who took part in the poll conducted on behalf of consumer choice group Which? said they felt the Government was not at all open about the impact new trade deals will have.

Critics have voiced concern that the free trade deal agreed with Australia in June will see British farmers undercut by food coming from Australia that does not meet the same high standards in the UK.

Out of those surveyed, almost nine in 10 felt all food imported should align with current UK domestic food standards.

Sue Davies, head of consumer rights and food policy at Which?, said: The Government must take this opportunity to communicate transparently and openly with the public about trade negotiations and push for a consumer chapter to be included in future deals.

See the original post:

Public 'in the dark' over UK Brexit trade deals, according to survey - Border Counties Advertizer

Voters who hold authoritarian values were more likely to vote Leave in the 2016 Brexit referendum. Cameron Ballard-Rosa,Mashail A. Malik,Stephanie J. Rickard and Kenneth Scheve show that these values are in turn related to long-term economic shocks associated with globalisation, by using data on the varied effect of changes in Chinese imports on the labour market across Britain.

Fifty-two percent of voters chose Leave in the UKs 2016 referendum on EU membership. Who voted Leave and why? One of the strongest predictors of voting for Brexit was a bundle of characteristics often referred to as authoritarian values. Authoritarian values can be understood as an individual preference for order and conformity and belief that these value outcomes should be achieved by force if necessary.

Authoritarian values played a key role in the Brexit vote, as illustrated in Figure 1, which presents a smoothed locally weighted average drawn from a nationally representative sample of adults in the United Kingdom of the proportion of respondents voting Leave against a measure of authoritarian values. As can be seen in the figure, there is a remarkably strong association between individuals with greater authoritarian tendencies and the likelihood of voting in favour of Brexit: while individuals with the lowest observed authoritarian values have under a 20% likelihood of voting for Brexit, respondents with the highest authoritarian values have over a 90% likelihood of doing so.

Where do authoritarian values come from? Why do some people have stronger authoritarian values than others? We argue that contemporaneous economic threats increase the likelihood that people adopt authoritarian values. Economic shocks that have a sustained long-term negative effect on local communities can engender value change. We focus on one potential source of economic threat: the impact of Chinese imports on local labour market outcomes in the United Kingdom.

UK imports from China have increased dramatically over the past several decades. The growth in Chinese imports occurred primarily because of Chinas internal reforms and their admission to the World Trade Organization. However, the impact of growing Chinese imports fell unevenly across the UK. Figure 2 maps a measure of Chinese imports per worker by local labour markets (measured using the ONS Travel to Work Areas) across Great Britain. Local economies in the north west of England were hit harder by Chinese imports than areas in the south east. Areas hit hardest by the Chinese imports experienced decreases in manufacturing employment and average wages.

Using an original 2017 survey representative of the British population and a measure of Chinese imports to capture localised economic shocks, we estimate the effect of economic threat on authoritarian values. We find that individuals living in regions where the local labour market was more substantially affected by imports from China have significantly more authoritarian values. Our estimates are robust to the inclusion of a wide variety of demographic variables and controls for immigration patterns.

Our findings help to explain why individuals more exposed to globalisation (as measured by Chinese imports) were more likely to vote Leave in the UKs 2016 referendum on EU membership a previously reported observation. We demonstrate that the China trade shock engendered the adoption of more authoritarian values. These values in turn help account for the opinions and behaviours of Leave voters who in seeking order and conformity desired to reduce immigration and take back control of policymaking. Understanding where authoritarian values come from sheds new light on the Brexit vote, a decision that fundamentally reshaped the UKs relationship with the EU and indeed the world.

Cultural values can be a consequence of economic change. Thinking of cultural and economic explanations as disjoint accounts invites misinterpretation of the role that these forces play in explaining pivotal events like Brexit.

___________________

Note: the above draws on the authors published work in Comparative Political Studies.

About the Authors

Cameron Ballard-Rosa is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Mashail Malik is a Postdoctoral Fellow in Political Science at Harvard University.

Stephanie Rickard is Professor of Political Science at the London School of Economics.

Kenneth Scheve is Dean Acheson Professor of Political Science & Global Affairs at Yale University.

Photo by Christian Lue on Unsplash.

Original post:

Local economic shocks from globalisation are linked to an increase in authoritarian values and the Brexit vote - British Politics and Policy at LSE