Category Archives: Brexit

Britains Prime Minister Boris Johnson gives a thumbs up after signing the Brexit trade deal in London, England, December 30, 2020.(Leon Neal/Reuters)

What comes next for the U.K. after leaving the European Union.

By a parliamentary landslide of 521 votes to 73, the U.K. House of Commons just voted to ratify the new Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) between the European Union and the United Kingdom that was agreed to on Christmas Eve and that will come into effect at midnight on December 31. All thats left to do is for the House of Lords to reluctantly endorse a verdict that is popular both electorally and constitutionally, and for the Royal Assent to be given. Thats expected either very late tonight or tomorrow morning. Then, at that same midnight, the transitional one-year period between the formal departure of Britain from the EU (i.e., Brexit) and its practical implementation will be complete. Four and a half years after the June 2016 Brexit referendum, Britain will finally regain its previous status as a self-governing independent democracy.

Its the end of one of the most hard-fought struggles that has ever roiled the British political system, and a great political victory for the prime minister, Boris Johnson, who 13 months ago was fighting and not visibly winning a seemingly interminable battle against the entrenched forces of Remainerdom in Parliament and in the wider political establishment. Its also a victory for the small but principled band of Brexiteers in the Tory European Reform Group (ERG) who were a minority of a Eurosceptic Tory minority when the campaign for a referendum on EU membership began seriously in the 2010 Parliament and who have achieved 90 percent of their aims. And though their names have not been on top peoples lips today, its a massive personal triumph for Nigel Farage and Dominic Cummings, too. It will be a scandal and a shame if Mr. Farage is not granted as a tribute the peerage he refused as a bribe, and if Mr. Cummings (who may not want early retirement in the Lords) does not get equivalent recognition.

And as far as any political change can be called irreversible in a democratic society, it looks irreversible or, to be more cautious, reversible only in the very long run. Thats the case because the balance of political opinion in and out of Parliament is in favor of Boriss TCA and even more in favor of not re-opening the Brexit debate. A YouGov poll showed public opinion supported the deal by 57 percent as against 9 percent rejecting it with 34 percent retreating into Dont Know territory. The Tory Party, which for most of the decade had been split between one-third that supported the Tory leadership in supporting EU membership and two-thirds wanting (if usually discreetly) to opt out, was today united. All but two Tory MPs voted for the TCA, and their abstentions may not have been for political reasons. (Both ERG members, they had supported Boriss deal.) For the next generation or two, the Tories will be the Brexit Party without qualifications, if only because they wont want to return to the deep divisions of the last four years. For almost that long, therefore, theyre likely to occupy the commanding heights of politics and opinion.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who is privately a Remainer, saw that risk clearly and took the bold decision to whip his party into the Yes lobby. Most Labour MPs went along with this prudence, which explains the size of the governments victory. But the awkward fact for him is that Labour Party opinion is still deeply divided on Brexit, with the majority leaning heavily towards Remain or, as it now is, Rejoin. In the vote today, 37 Labour MPs abstained, and one voted against. Thats roughly a five-to-one split in the parliamentary party. But the division among party activists is likely to be still more favorable to Rejoin. Even if Starmer succeeds in holding the new pro-Brexit line against the assaults of the Left, the activists will make the reversal of Brexit their main topic of agitation the role once played by nuclear pacifism and that will greatly complicate Starmers task of winning back Labours traditional blue-collar vote, which is the rationale of his post-Brexit policy. Its a problem similar to a Rubiks Cube.

The only parties united in voting against the deal, therefore, are the Liberal Democrats, the Democratic Unionists (DUP) from Ulster, and the Scottish Nationalists (SNP). The Lib-Dems opposed it because being European is their unique selling proposition. The DUP opposed it because they rightly argue Ulster unionism has been damaged by Boriss deal, imposing a border in the Irish Sea between Northern Ireland and mainland Britain, thus dividing the United Kingdom. The Scot Nats opposed it because they badly wanted a No Deal, which they believe would make it easier to win independence. On the whole, this alliance of the Outs will not worry Boris overmuch it positions him slap-bang in the solid center. In particular, his deal gravely weakens the SNPs argument for independence, and its decision to vote against the TCA thereby voting for the No Deal they claim to oppose has made them look ridiculous. Scottish independence is a real threat (though, paradoxically, one that would strengthen the Tory grip on England and Wales), but a significantly weaker one than it was before Christmas Eve. The Scot Nats would now have to make a case for a No Deal departure from the U.K. without having the safe-ish harbor of EU membership or any clear passage to it.

That said, all three parties will be arguing for Rejoin (or something like it) for the rest of this Parliament. That argument will be presented as more serious than it really is because of a bug in the U.K. political system; namely, that the media, in particular the BBC and the heavyweight newspapers such as the Financial Times, The Economist, and the Times, are so passionately in favor of Remain/Rejoin that they are likely to misread whatever happens as a sign of its historical inevitability. For a whole raft of reasons, however, rejoining the EU will be next to impossible. I would explain why, but theres no need, since the brilliant Scottish blogger, Effie Deans, has done so with economy and wit here. Permit me to quote from it at length here:

What would Rejoin mean?

At the next election neither Labour nor the Lib Dems will campaign for Rejoin. Its one thing to argue for Remain, but that argument is now gone. Britain could not expect to go back to where we were in 2016, just to cause trouble again. All the opt outs and dragging our feet about European integration would have to be jettisoned. Wed have to be fully on board the EU project if we wanted to rejoin. Wed have to be good Europeans rather than troublemakers.

And after all weve gone through to get out, that would be an intolerable prospect.

See more here:

U.K. & Brexit: What Comes Next? | National Review

I just had a bit of a head scratching moment.

I knew that Norway wasn't EU, but EFTA/EEA. So, I was wondering what the difference was.

Lo and behold, Norway is free to make trade deals with other countries while being in the single market.

The current mess with the NI protocol (and everything else) could have been averted assuming the UK were admitted to EFTA (not a given, but not far-fetched).

It seems like the two biggest issues were 1) the freedom to strike trade deals with whomever and 2) ending freedom of movement.

I cannot recall a single Brexit supporter being able to give a single example of which EU laws they wanted to see abolished, so I count "Sovereignty" as simply anti-freedom of movement and some nonsense about bananas. Besides, any trade >DEAL< involves voluntarily giving up the sovereign ability to impose tariffs on something, so there's no difference between the single market and a deal with Australia beyond the degree of cooperation.

So, really, the UK could have had its international trade deals AND maintained full access to the single market if it was willing to accept FoM.

At the core, then, it was simply about keeping "THEM" out. How repugnant.

More here:

Brexit - reddit

1. UK urges EU to show 'common sense' in post-Brexit talks  The Associated Press
2. Brexit: EU Eyes Retaliatory Measures in Clash With UK on Northern Ireland  Bloomberg
3. UK says Brussels trying to exploit Biden visit to exert Brexit pressure  Financial Times
4. The EUs Brexit arsenal: How Brussels can hit the UK  POLITICO Europe
5. EU chief tells Boris Johnson of 'deep concern' over Brexit deal ahead of G7 meeting  The Independent
6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Here is the original post:

UK urges EU to show 'common sense' in post-Brexit talks - The Associated Press

John Seymour Chaloner, a 21-year-old major in the Westminster Dragoons, commandeered offices and recruited an ex-Wehrmacht radio operator called Rudolf Augstein to create an unfettered weekly news review.

Chaloner put up with the unvarnished reporting even when an early edition accused the British authorities of providing starvation rations to workers in the Ruhr. The story caused a storm in London but tolerance of criticism ultimately prevailed. What became Der Spiegelmagazine was launched under German control in 1947.

The Americans also moved crabwise toward reconciliation but with a lag, while the French resisted for longer. It was the British who pushed for the revival of German industry at key talks in January 1946. They were the most liberal and led the way, said Knowles.

It would be a stretch to describe Armin Laschet as a committed Anglophile. The Christian Democrat candidate is a deal-maker at heart who likes to keep the lines open to everybody, including Vladimir Putin. He hails from Achen (Charlemagne's lair) and will always put the Franco-German relationship first when push comes to shove, said Holger Schmieding from Berenberg Bank.

Yet Mr Laschet gave a striking answer when asked in the first presidential TV debate which country should be the primordial partner for the European Union. We must do everything we can to keep the British very, very close alongside us, he said.

You could say this is an implicit recognition that the EU mishandled Brexit negotiations, more or less forcing the UK into a hard Brexit by insisting on dynamic legal alignment and sweeping oversight for the European Court as a sine qua non for basic free trade.

His chief wrath is instead directed at states that remain in the EU, eagerly spend hand-outs from Brussels (ie, from German taxpayers), while ignoring the rules of the EU game when it suits them. The British may have been prickly but they did not abuse the system in such a way.

When Green candidate Annalena Baerbock was asked the same question on foreign policy, her Pavlovian non-sequitur response was to agitate for more Europe, which captures a fundamental difference in ideology. She is a reflexive supranationalist. There is little place for the democratic nation state in her philosophy.

Read this article:

Brexit Britain may soon have a new best friend in Germany - Telegraph.co.uk

There are serious concerns that new trading barriers thrown up by Brexit could see some UK food manufacturers and their staff relocate to the EU.

The concerns were raised in a recent report by the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Committee which highlighted the impact of strict new trading rules on exporters of fresh seafood and meat to the EU.

But does setting up an EU base offer a solution to food manufactures that are struggling with Brexit red tape and costs? Or do the drawbacks outweigh the potential benefits, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses?

The pros of being in the EU

Theres no doubt that having a physical presence in the EU means far less paperwork to deal with and fewer costs for UK exporters.

There are no customs formalities and declarations in the Eurozone to hamper cross-border trade and you dont have to prove where your goods originate from to enjoy tariff-free trade. That means fewer delays at ports and less risk of food products spoiling in the back of stationary lorries.

Another big benefit of being in Europe is not having to register for VAT in different countries one is usuallyenough and there are no complicated sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks to slow things down.

Being closer to your EU customers also means being able to provide a more efficient service. They dont have to worry about onerous customs procedures if they import from you, or customs duty and import VAT.

The cons moving to the EU

But moving operations to the EU is not a viable solution for every business and the set-up costs associated with relocation are likely to be considerable. Then there are the costs and disruption associated with moving employees out of the UK, or hiring new staff from within Europe.

Relocation also means getting your head around complicated foreign rules and regulations for setting up in the EU. These can differ from country to country which can make things confusing.

If setting up a base in the EU isnt feasible for you, there are other ways to reduce costs when exporting from the UK. Try consolidating goods in one weekly shipment, for example, rather than export items daily to reduce costs and minimise delays.

Its always a good idea to work with well-established freight agents and carriers who know the ropes and can deal with customs procedures efficiently.

Having direct access to millions of EU consumers and businesses, and the promise of hassle-free trade, makes relocation an attractive option. But this shouldnt blind you to the potential drawbacks of setting up operations in Europe.

The rest is here:

Brexit red tape: Should I move my food businesses to the EU? - FoodManufacture.co.uk

GBP/USD eases from the intraday top, up 0.06% on a day around 1.4165, heading into Wednesdays London open. In doing so, the quote rises for the third day in the last four, except the previous days drop, amid broad US dollar weakness. It should, however, be noted that cautious sentiment ahead of todays key Brexit talks over the Northern Ireland (NI) border issues probe the optimists.

US dollar index (DXY) reverses the previous days gains around 90.05, down 0.07% as Treasury yields consolidate recent losses around the monthly low. Also testing the greenback bulls could be the mixed concerns over China and US President Joe Bidens infrastructure spending. Worries over the Feds next move and Thursdays key US CPI, not to forget the ECB, also favor USD sellers amid a sluggish session.

On the other hand, the lowest covid-led death toll in England and Wales help UK PM Boris Johnson to stay firm on his June 21 deadline for unlock even as the market chatters back a fortnight extension. Further, strong comments from Bank of Englands (BOE) Chief Economist Andy Haldane, relating to the housing market, firm up the calls of tapering and back the GBP/USD bulls in turn.

However, Brexit deadlock over the NI protocol and a less likely solution during todays meeting between the European Union (EU) Maro efovi, European Commission Vice Presidentand UKs David Frost probe the sterling buyers.

As per the latest updates from the BBC, The UK's Brexit minister Lord Frost has urged the EU to show common sense during talks over post-Brexit rules in Northern Ireland. On the same line, Reuters said, EU President Ursula von der Leyenhas expressed her deep concern on the implementation of post Brexit arrangements in a phone call toBoris Johnson.

On Tuesday, EUs efovi warned the UK while saying, per Reuters, Brussels will start a trade war with Britain if Boris Johnson overrides the Brexit treaty so that Northern Irish shops can keep selling British sausages.

Given the contrasting outlook of the ex-neighbors, todays Brexit talks are likely not to overcome the deadlock on the key issues, which in turn may weigh on the GBP/USD prices going forward. Its worth mentioning that US President Joe Biden is up for meddling into the key Brexit subject resolution, which in turn gives another reason for todays negotiations to fall.

Although an ascending trend line from April 12, near 1.4110 defends GBP/USD bulls, 1.4210 guards the quotes short-term upside. Its worth noting that 1.4190 and 21-day SMA near 1.4145 act as extra filters amid a likely sideways grind.

Here is the original post:

GBP/USD edges higher towards 1.4200, crunch Brexit talks before G7 eyed - FXStreet

Like Homer Simpson shuffling surreptitiously backwards into a hedge, some would have us believe that Brexit is gradually fading into the background. Not, its true, for the businesses dealing with the fallout, or for the people of Northern Ireland. But Covid has shifted the dial politically. Governments are currently defined by their response to the pandemic here, across the EU and elsewhere.

This is not, perhaps, the most promising backdrop to the launch of the diaries from the EUs chief negotiator Michel Barnier, covering the four long years that he spent grinding away at the problem. But La grande illusion: Journal secret du Brexit (2016-2020) was published by Gallimard in French in May, with an English translation due in the autumn. So who and what is this book for?

Historians, I guess, in the years to come. They will find the key steps of the process set

Youve hit your limit of three articles in the last 30 days. To get seven more, simply enter your email address below.

Youll also receive our free e-book Prospects Top Thinkers 2020 and our newsletter with the best new writing on politics, economics, literature and the arts.

Prospect may process your personal information for our legitimate business purposes, to provide you with newsletters, subscription offers and other relevant information.

Click here to learn more about these purposes and how we use your data. You will be able to opt-out of further contact on the next page and in all our communications.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Already a subscriber? Log in here

Visit link:

Michel Barnier's diaries show how he overachieved on Brexit - Prospect Magazine

The editorial headline (May 31) can be construed in two ways one is DUP voted for Brexit and not for Dublin or DUP voted for Brexit, Dublin did not. I presume your interpretation is the latter. Both are factually correct. Your narrative of events is in parts correct but there is no evidence that the 450,000 donation towards the Metro advertisement in any way affected the size of the pro-Brexit vote. Metro is a free newspaper principally circulating in the London area, which returned a remain vote. To argue that the advertisement may well have influenced the final result.... is highly unlikely. If every reader of the newspaper (1.25 million) had suddenly switched to leave that wouldnt have altered the final figure of a 1.3 million leave majority to change the result. If you consider the distribution map of Metro in relation to the distribution map of Remainers there is huge overlap. In other words, Metro is mainly read by Remainers.

You argue that the DUP voted against the proposal (Mrs Mays backstop). In fact, the DUPs 10 votes were never going to change the result of the five votes against the government between January 15 2019 and October 11 2019 voting varied from 45 against to 230 against. The DUP never had any influence on the result of the negotiations. The idea that they could have obtained a soft Brexit based on Mrs Mays backstop by voting differently is no more than nationalist fantasy.

Your reference to a broad nationalist consensus over the risks associated with a hard Irish border is simply a threat of nationalist violence put forward by Bertie Ahern, Simon Coveney and Leo Varadkar, among others, and again does not bear close examination.

The word hard as applied to the border is inappropriate. It refers to the days when the border had to be protected militarily against attacks mounted from the Republics side and the very real instances of terrorists using it as a safe haven. Those days have long gone and have nothing to do with Brexit.

De-militarisation followed the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement over 20 years ago. There has not been a hard border since then.

There are no known instances of republicans attacking Irish customs posts. All the attacks were against the British customs posts.

The only customs post needed would be EU ones on the southern side of the border as a protection of their Single Market.

Given the Irish peoples unconditional love affair with Europe and the EU, how likely is it that Irishmen would attack other Irishmen whose job was to operate checks designed solely to protect the EU Single Market? Even more so, how likely is it that they would receive any support from Irish people?

It is worth making the point that the DUP has achieved something no other party in Northern Ireland, southern Ireland, UK, US or western Europe has done they have shared power for many years with a political party which supported the use of violence for political ends.

MIKE MAYBINBelfast BT10

Another wasted opportunity

The just published Fair Start report on educational underachievement is yet another wasted opportunity to tackle our failing education system where in 2019 56.5 per cent of Protestant pupils and 46.8 per cent of Catholic pupils on free school meals failed to gain five good GCSE A* C including English and maths and 30 per cent of our adults have either very basic or no formal qualifications. We also have the lowest proportion of adults in the UK with higher education or degree level qualifications. But how could it be any different when education minister Peter Weir excluded academic selection from the terms of reference of the reporting panel. It reminds me of the Fawlty Towers sketch where Basil is expecting German guests and the mantra to all staff is dont mention the war.

The minister described the report as one of the most important reports I have overseen and yet not one of their eight key proposals makes reference to the huge impact that a socially integrated education system can make to the life chances of all children and more particularly children from disadvantaged backgrounds. We have known now for more than 60 years since the Coleman Report (Equality of Educational Opportunity) that who you go to school with matters a lot, almost as much as your family background. Being born poor imposes a disadvantage but attending a school with large number of low income classmates presents a second independent challenge.

As Mark Langhammer of the Natioal Education Union has pointed out, the report misses the elephant in the room. Northern Irelands education system isnt just the most socially segregated in the UK, it is the most socially segregated education system in the developed world, and its this social apartheid in the post-primary sector where more advantaged children go to one type of school and those less advantaged go to another that has led to the high concentrations of poverty in too many of our secondary schools and the long tail of underachievement that is the end result. These are not just cold statistics, they are stories of wasted lives and children never being able to fulfill their real potential just because they are unlucky enough to be born into poverty and disadvantage.

When Peter Weir first became education minister in 2016 he couldnt understand why our primary school pupils were doing so well in international tests and our post-primary students were no better than mediocre. The then president of the Ulster Teachers Union, Avril Hall Callaghan, had this to say: There is no mystery. The main thing that separates children in primary and secondary education here is academic selection. Therein lies the solution to the ministers conundrum. It is a scandal that this legislature insists for the most disingenuous of reasons to continue with the apalling apartheid of academic selection.

JIM CURRANDownpatrick, Co Down

Pluralism is possible

June 4 marked the 32nd anniversary of the deaths of hundreds of pro-democracy students in Tiananmen Square in Beijing. The decision on military intervention was taken by the Communist Party Politburo Standing Committee, it is said, by majority vote, approved by a margin of just one member.

As happens so often in politics, the leaders choose the question, a vote is held and on most occasions, the question is the answer. Thus it was with Napoleon in his three referendums; Hitler had four such plebiscites; David Camerons third was the Brexit referendum, while Boris Johnson had his get Brexit done majority vote in the Commons. Such top-down politics often has little to do with the will of the people or the will of parliament, more with the will of the ruler.

Its time we reformed the 2,500-year-old binary vote. After all, when choosing our representatives, we would not want a North Korean type of election, Candidate X, yes-or-no? Both in parliaments and in referendums, however, decision-making is binary: Option X, yes-or-no? or at best, Option X or option Y? But just as multi-candidate elections are possible under a range of voting procedures, so too decisions can be taken in multi-option and even preferential ballots.

PETER EMERSONDirector, de Borda Institute, Belfast BT14

The rest is here:

The DUP never had any influence on the result of the Brexit negotiations - The Irish News

Problems are mounting for thousands of Britons in Spain and the rest of Europe who chose not to apply for residency after Brexit

It has been a gloomy week on the sunlit uplands of sovereign Britain and also in the parts of Europe where UK ex-pats (because people are only called migrants when they dont look like us) have settled and are nowfacing huge headaches.

The pain to the brain is mainly felt in Spain, home to 285,000 of the 485,000 Brits in the EU. Those who have failed to register their residency must now pay an extra 5% income tax - 24% to 19% - compared to EU nationals and have been told they must obey the 90 in 180 rule. That means, like ordinary tourists, they can only stay in the country for 90 days within every 180-day period.

Ex-pats who stay under the radar and chance it face potential deportation or a ban from the country should they outstay their welcome, said tax lawyer Leon Fernando Del Canto. There is zero leeway.

Reports also continue of Britons who thought they were safe - like Jay Elliott, 66, and Lily Higgins, 71, who hadbeen in the country for five years apiece - being accused of faulty paperwork and warned that in the event of an unsuccessful appeal, they will have to pack up and leave for good.

Brits in the Canary Islands have been turned away from vaccine centres - incorrectly, say the Spanish government - for not having a public health card, with John McKenzie, 42, who has diabetes and a heart condition, claiming to have been denied a jab four times in his local health centre in El Sauzal, Tenerife.

Elsewhere in Europe, over 100,000 ex-pats face becoming undocumented migrants on July 1 after failing to apply for settled status in the 13 EU countries that did not grant automatic residency to British citizens who were already living there when the UK waved its two-fingered goodbye to the bloc. Some 25,000 are thought to be in France, but the list also includes Belgium, Denmark, Malta and the Netherlands.

Those who dont manage to complete the application process in time are likely to lose access to services including healthcare, a devastating prospect since many of them are in the later stages of life.

Of course, those 100,000 might just be tempted to come home temporarily for surgery, or just return to Britain for good. Some 8,000 have already done that in the last year.

Now, what was that about Brexit stopping health tourism and mass migration to the UK?

What do you think? Have your say on this and more by emailing letters@theneweuropean.co.uk

The rest is here:

Brexit: British 'expats' in Spain facing deportation over residency - The New European

An extensive checklist of issues to deal with post-Brexit means a potentially very big expense bill for those clients looking to retire to an EU country, effectively making such a move "the preserve of the rich" according to international advisory firm Blevins Franks.

Delays in the systems and securing the right documentation may mean having to apply multiple times, while further costs mount up if the documents have to be translated and an immigration specialist is employed.

Clients also have to demonstrate that they have sufficient income to support their family without being a burden on the state. In Spain, for example, they must prove a minimum annual income of 27,115 plus 6,778 for each additional family member.

One of the EU Golden Visa applications if not done properly could cost 40,000 in lost fees."

Jason Porter, director of Blevins Franks and head of the company's European Emigration Advisory Service, said: "All of this means that this is the preserve of the above-average wealthy.

"Get the residency application wrong and in most cases it is void and the application fee is lost. Not only will they have to start the process again from scratch, but they will have to come up with more cash for a new application."

He added: "Golden Visas allow Britons to gain residency rights in many EU countries in exchange for investing a substantial sum in local property or investing some other way in the economy.

"They certainly would not want to try to obtain a Golden Visa on their own as they average 5,000-6,000 each and an application that has to be resubmitted would cost 500 every time.

"One of the EU Golden Visa applications if not done properly could cost 40,000 in lost fees," said Porter.

Follow this link:

Retiring to the EU post-Brexit could cost 40,000 in lost fees - International Investment