Category Archives: Brexit

In the second of three special episodes of the Sky News Daily podcast, Dermot Murnaghan looks back at the key stories of 2021 with a panel of Sky News correspondents.

Subjects up for discussion in this edition include the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, migrant crisis and politics - featuring Beth Rigby, Alex Crawford, Dominic Waghorn, Adam Parsons and Ashna Hurynag.

Follow the Daily podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker

Daily podcast team:Annie Joyce - senior podcast producerSoila Apparicio - podcast producerRosie Gillott - podcast producerAishah Rahman - junior podcast producerAlys Bowen - interviews producerSimon Windsor - archiveNelly Stefanova - archiveRob Fellowes - archive

Special thanks to:Ben Fisher - head of studio outputKevin Donaldson - senior director and technical specialistFelix Forbes - output producerLynn Morrish - producerAndre Rosso - editorThomas Sue Yek - editorTaylor Stuart - designerSam Westwood - senior designerJim Lacey - floor managerCory Eyres - floor managerRichard Byrne - studio directorFiona Northam - technical directorRichard Bowles - lighting directorGus Alvarez - studio supervisorMatt Kime - camera supervisorRuss Houghton - camera supervisorRichie Vale - camera supervisorMichael Prior - camera supervisorLouisa Knight - sound supervisor

See the article here:

Year In Review Global security, migrant crisis and Brexit politics - Sky News

Some 165,400 requests have now been made for Withdrawal Agreement (WA) residency cards for Britons living in France.

The Interior Ministrydid not confirm rules for people applying by paper to prefectures since then but any Britons doing so in person would usually receive a rcpiss slip that can be shown as proof of application.

It is still possible for requests to be made if there are good reasons for missing the October 3 deadline.

Applications can also still be made by young people turning 18 and family members of WA Britons joining them in France.

Holding a WA residency card is an obligation from January 1 under French law, but one clause (article 27) states that rights to residency, work and social security continue without a card if a decision has yet to be made by a prefecture or if an appeal is under way. Even so, a group for Britons in France and an association helping foreigners spoke of concerns for the legal situation of those without a card on January 1.

A representative of the British Community Committee of France said she is not convinced that all prefectures will ensure every card applied for on the site will be in peoples hands by January 1.

She advised those affected to keep a file of evidence that they have done everything they can, such as a copy of their application, the email response from the prefecture, any follow-up emails sent or received or a recent utility bill for proof of ongoing residency. This will represent what customs call a trail of evidence, she said.

Where one half of a couple is waiting for delivery of a card, the other person can apply to La Poste for a proxy rightso they may accept the card for them if the postal worker calls with it while their partner is out.

The British Embassy advises those who have not had a prefecture meeting for photo and fingerprints, or have not got the card, to contact their prefecture by checking its website.

Alist of contacts is also available here, but may not be fully up to date.

Sending a lettre recommande avec avis de rception recorded delivery letter is another option. If you do not obtain a response, email the Interior Ministry contact-brexit@interieur.gouv.fr and inform the embassy. If you are offered a prefecture appointment, attend if possible, as rescheduling may be difficult.

If your application is refused, consider appealing.

Antoine Math, of Gisti, an association helping foreign people, said showing an application receipt should suffice legally for those still waiting.

However, he said bodies often have set lists of acceptable documents and it is unclear if they will be familiar with the email print-outs that are the only receipt given to those who applied on the WA cards website, as opposed to the paper rcpiss usually given to foreign carte de sjour applicants by prefectures.

He is concerned for Britons working and social security benefit rights if they have no card, as existing and potential employers might ask for them, as well as bodies such as the family benefit service Caf.

The risk is being cut off from family and housing benefits or income support, he said.

We may also imagine that there are people whove been here 30 years and are very integrated and havent been following the Brexit rules, and are going to find themselves next year undocumented immigrants, with the risk of being expelled from France, though were not there yet.

Mr Math said Britons, especially newcomers, are going to have to get used to dealing with prefectures, whose treatment of foreigners can be very variable around France.

Theres a lot of inequality, and before the British escaped that, but now theyll be treated the same as a Senegalese person thats to say, badly, with complicated procedures and dubious practices.

Britons can seek advice from Gisti, but it also advises contacting local associations helping foreigners.

He added: States have the right to leave the EU, but the problem is individuals taken hostage and suffering due to it.

But its also not normal that foreigners are not treated well compared to EU citizens.

Brexit: We recap the rules for five-year residency cards in France

Can I travel from France to Portugal with just Brexit residency card?

Read more here:

165,400 Britons in France have applied for Brexit residency cards - The Connexion

A senior EU official has said she does not expect the bloc to strike a migration deal with the UK because of disputes over the Brexit agreement.

Ylva Johansson, the European commissioner for home affairs, said EU member states had limited appetite for an agreement with the UK to manage asylum seekers and migrants, citing concerns over the post-Brexit trade deal and the Northern Ireland protocol.

Instead, she said, the focus should be on practical cooperation to curb attempts by people to cross the channel from France, such as police cooperation and intelligence sharing.

She was speaking before EU and UK negotiators clashed last week over the future of the Irish protocol, the agreement that keeps Northern Ireland in the EUs single market, which the UK government wants to rewrite. Her comments underscore how the dispute over the protocol is damaging wider EU-UK relations, underlining the task facing the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, who took over the Brexit brief on Sunday, following the shock resignation of David Frost.

The protocol dispute also means, for example, that British scientists remain locked out of the EUs 95.5 bn Horizon research funding programme.

Speaking to the Guardian and other European newspapers, Johansson said: We have quite some concerns with the implementation of the TCA [Trade and Cooperation Agreement] and the protocol on Northern Ireland right now, so I should guess that the appetite from member states to go into negotiations for a new agreement [on migration] is limited.

Last month 27 people drowned in the Channel trying to reach the UK from Calais, with record numbers attempting the perilous journey. The tragedy prompted an agreement between north-western European countries to toughen up action against people smugglers, although the Priti Patel, the home secretary, was disinvited from a meeting because of a Franco-British row about how to handle the issue.

Johansson stressed it was important to cooperate with the UK to tackle migrant smuggling networks operating in Germany, Belgium and France to take people to Dover. I think the most important thing is to find practical cooperation with the UK on these topics and we have to work together on this. I think that should come first before discussing any new formal mandate for negotiating a new agreement.

Her view contrasts with the French government, which is seeking a broader EU-UK agreement to deal with people heading to northern France seeking to reach British shores. Frances interior minister Grald Darmanin has said France will push for a EU-UK migration treaty when taking over the blocs rotating presidency on 1 January. We need to negotiate a treaty, since [the former EU negotiator] Mr [Michel] Barnier did not do so when he negotiated Brexit.

EU member states did not discuss the Channel at a meeting earlier this month on tackling irregular migration, instead focusing on the situation at the Poland-Belarus border, where people from the Middle East have been trapped in desperate conditions, having arrived in Minsk.

The EU commissioner spoke to the home secretary last week, in what EU officials described as a short and constructive call where the two agreed on the need to act in a determined fashion to address the growing phenomenon of migrants crossing the Channel, and that the priority should be to focus on practical, operational cooperation.

Home Office sources gave a similar account of the call, stressing the need for urgent, collaborative and practical action.

During Brexit negotiations, Brussels rejected a British proposal that would have allowed the government to return asylum seekers to the EU, a right the UK had as an EU member state. In August 2020 the Home Office said the UK will be able to negotiate its own bilateral returns arrangements from the end of that year.

The Home Office declined to say what progress had been made in bilateral returns agreements with EU states, with officials saying they did not provide a rolling commentary.

A Home Office spokesperson said: The tragic events that took place in the Channel last month served as a stark reminder of just how dangerous these small-boat crossings are.

We maintain that this is a global challenge and we have a shared, moral duty to address illegal migration collectively. We remain committed to working closely with our EU neighbours to find a joint solution to prevent further loss of life.

See more here:

EU has limited appetite for post-Brexit migration deal with UK - The Guardian

The UKs newly appointed chief post-Brexit negotiator, Liz Truss, said she would speak to her EU counterpart, Maro efovi, on Tuesday amid renewed calls to rip up the controversial Northern Ireland protocol.

The cabinet minister, who is also the foreign secretary, said she wanted to negotiate a comprehensive solution to the agreement, which requires post-Brexit checks on goods arriving in Northern Ireland from Great Britain.

Allies added that she wanted to hit the ground running, but offered no further details on how she will handle the technical discussions about customs arrangements, which could have wide political ramifications.

No EU-UK talks had been scheduled in the last days before Christmas, until the surprise weekend resignation of Lord Frost, who had been Boris Johnsons chief Brexit negotiator.

Ministers remain under pressure from Conservative hard Brexiters and Northern Irelands Democratic Unionists to resolve an issue they argue has led to the creation of a border down the Irish Sea and damaged the integrity of the United Kingdom.

Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, told the BBC that he had been led to believe by Frost that the talks were struggling to progress: He felt, I think, that we were fast approaching the time when the UK government needed to take unilateral action.

Article 16 of the protocol allows one side or the other to rip up part of the agreement such as customs checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the event of serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties. But it could expose whoever acts to retaliatory tariffs.

John Finucane, a Sinn Fin MP, said the British government should show a degree of responsibility and realism over the protocol, which allows Northern Ireland special access to the EU single market. He said the agreement provided enormous economic benefit to this jurisdiction.

Truss supported remain during the 2016 referendum campaign, but is popular with Tory activists at a time when Johnsons premiership is in crisis due to a string of revelations about lockdown-breaking gatherings at No 10.

One hard-Brexit source on the partys backbenches said they were supportive of Trusss appointment, but wanted her to focus on the detail and not just the showboating after she was pictured riding on a tank in Estonia last month, in a pose reminiscent of Margaret Thatcher.

Truss will combine the role with her position as foreign secretary, the first time the jobs have been united since the UK voted to leave the EU in 2016. One former Downing Street insider said both roles are so full-time and wondered whether she can effectively focus on both.

During the 2016 EU referendum campaign, Truss, speaking at a remain campaign event as environment secretary, said: I dont want my daughters to grow up in a world where they need a visa or permit to work in Europe, or where they are hampered from growing a business because of extortionate call costs and barriers to trade.

The minister co-authored a pamphlet with Labours Ed Miliband, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey and Green MP Caroline Lucas. They warned: If Britain leaves Europe, our environment will be starved of investment, bereft of protections and denied the leadership it needs. Brexiters criticised it as scaremongering.

Truss also agreed with Lord Frost, then president of the Scotch Whisky Association, in arguing that membership of the EU single market was critical to the successful exports of the spirit. Europe has a taste for Scotch and the industry will do better if we remain in the EU, she said.

Allies of Truss said that the minister had made clear that she had changed her mind and would vote leave if she had the chance again. Her stint as international trade secretary, before becoming foreign secretary, had demonstrated her credentials as a free marketeer and free trader, they added.

View original post here:

Liz Truss to hold Brexit talks with EU over NI protocol - The Guardian

Boris Johnsons post-Brexit trade deal with Australia will damage the UKs agriculture and food sectors by hundreds of millions of pounds, according to the governments own impact assessment.

British farming, forestry and fishing will suffer a 94m hit from the free trade agreement, a Department for International Trade (DIT) document has revealed.

The government also expects a 225m hit to the semi-processed food sector, conceding that it was another area expected to contract as a result of increased competition.

Labour said ministers had failed to stand up for British interests, while the Liberal Democrats claimed farmers and others were being sold down the river over the deal signed with Australia last week.

This impact assessment proves what so many feared buried in the small print is a 100m hit to our farming and fishing sectors that will hit rural communities hardest, said the Lib Dems environment spokesperson Tim Farron.

The MP added: Boris Johnson has sold farmers down the river to make a quick buck in a misguided trade deal with Australia. Now the reality of whats on the table is clear, its vital that parliament is given a vote on the deal.

The government predicts a reduction in gross value added (GVA) of around 0.7% (94m) to primary agriculture and 2.65 per cent (225m) to semi-processed foods compared with 2019.

The economic blow to Britains agri-food businesses will be driven by increased import competition in the beef and sheep meat from Australia, the document stated.

The DIT report also found that Britains agriculture and semi-processed foods sectors could see a further reduction in GVA over the long-run as a result of the free trade agreement.

Labour MP Nick Thomas-Symonds, shadow international trade secretary, told The Independent that the shocking figures demonstrated clear ministers were failing to stand up for UK interests in negotiations.

He added: Ministers seem to be prioritising a press release announcing a completed deal over supporting jobs and livelihoods here in the UK. The British people deserve better from this incompetent, failing government.

The impact assessment on the deal refers to Australia as a large, competitive producer of agricultural products pointing to the potential for the deal to result in lower output for some agricultural sectors [in the UK] as a result.

Meanwhile, an independent study on the Australia and soon-to-be-finalised New Zealand trade deals found that the losers from these deals are much more concentrated in parts of the agricultural sector.

The Resolution Foundation think tank said the government appears to be showing a willingness to accept some losses in less productive and competitive domestic industries even in highly politically sensitive industries such as agriculture in order to deliver its Global Britain agenda.

The UKs manufacturing sectors, such as motor vehicles and machinery and equipment industry, are expected to gain the most from the Australia deal, according to the impact assessment.

The trade department insisted that the latest free trade agreement will deliver a boost to the economy overall.

A spokesperson for the DIT said: The deal is expected to increase trade with Australia by 53 per cent, boost the economy by 2.3bn and add 900m to household wages each year in the long-run. It will also play an important role in levelling up the UK, delivering benefits for towns, cities and rural areas throughout the country.

The department added: Maintaining our high standards is a red line in all our trade negotiations. That is why this deal contains safeguards to support the most sensitive parts of the UK farming community, including a gradual removal of tariffs over 10 years and a safety net that allows tariffs or restrictions to be reimposed if the industry faces serious harm.

Read more:

Brexit: Australia deal will cause 94m blow to UK farming, fishing and forestry, government admits - The Independent

Glance at the headlines and you might be forgiven for wondering if the UK has moved on a year. A debate has been raging about how tough the restrictions must be to combat the latest wave of COVID, while the UKs withdrawal from the EU is far from over. Brexit minister Lord Frost has just resigned, and January 1 will once again see a set of Brexit changes coming into effect that look likely to exacerbate the economic damage from the pandemic. So what are the January changes and why have we heard so little about them?

Full customs controls will take effect on January 1. One aspect of the changes is new rules that need to be followed to enable trade between the UK and EU to remain tariff free, per the Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

During 2021, exporters have been permitted to provide proof of the origin of goods after they have been exported, so long as they made a customs declaration at the border. But from January 1, when UK exporters cant prove the origin of a product at customs, the EU customer will have to pay the full import tariff (and vice versa). For example, a French importer bringing agricultural goods from the UK would incur an average non-preferential tariff of around 11%.

Importers have been affected by Brexit much less than exporters until now, having not even had to make customs declarations. This was part of an arrangement called the staged customs controls, but from January 1, they will have to make customs declarations too.

This means that on top of all the supply-chain problems that manufacturers have been enduring in recent months, theyll now face the double whammy of full customs controls for the first time. If businesses do not fulfil the new requirements, then goods wont be able to leave the port.

Neither is the transition period complete on January 1. During the rest of 2022, we expect to see a range of other safety and security measures introduced. For example, physical checks on live animals will begin on July 1. This too will put more pressure on border controls, and further slow down the movement of trade from one side to the other.

The basis for all these changes is outlined in the UK governments policy paper The Border Operating Model. An updated version was published in November, with further revisions issued as recently as December 16. These changes reflect the new timetable for implementing import controls, which was only set out in September. Youve probably heard of just-in-time manufacturing, but this is the policymaking equivalent. It has left businesses with considerable uncertainty.

The British government argues that this is simply a pragmatic new timetable, but it raises concerns about different levels of compliance in either direction. For example, delaying the implementation of checks coming into the UK may lead to goods crossing the border that do not meet appropriate health and safety standards, while these checks are taking place for UK goods exported to the EU.

Even before all these extra new Brexit rules come into effect in January, UK ports in 2021 look set to have experienced the lowest volumes of trade since 1983. It does not help that Felixstowe, the largest British port, appears to be one of the least efficient ports both in the UK and compared to rivals in Europe and Asia. This is the case whether you measure efficiency as minutes per container move, or the average number of hours that ships spent at the port.

The UK government is trying to tackle these kinds of challenges with its 200 million Port Infrastructure Fund, but this too has been controversial. The Port of Dover took the government to court when it only received around 10% of the funding it requested to build additional passport checkpoints.

The governments funds were squeezed by the fact that the total bids it received from ports amounted to more than double what it had made available, such that no ports got all the funding that they were asking for. As if that were not bad enough, the government then reduced the total size of the pot by 34%. If British ports are not able to upgrade themselves properly and are then put under extra pressure because of the changes being introduced in January, it all implies that delays in shipments are likely to be an ongoing issue.

In other words, not only are businesses facing a major adjustment in the way that they deal with customs clearance, but goods are likely to end up waiting longer in UK ports further increasing costs on businesses because time is money. It increases the prospect that supply chains will divert away from UK businesses towards other partners instead.

UK businesses have already had to cope with declining trade as a result of Brexit. And dont forget that all this is happening against a backdrop of transitioning to Liz Truss becoming the new Brexit minister, while remaining as foreign secretary. For a government that was elected on the motto of getting Brexit done, it is perhaps not so surprising that so little has been said about the upcoming changes.

See the rest here:

Brexit: what the UK/EU customs changes mean for businesses from January 1 - The Conversation UK

Hitting out the bloc, the former Brexit Minister said the "ways in which EU laws are applied in Northern Ireland" are "undemocratic". But, in the piece for the Financial Times, he said: "What Brussels has put on the table does not do enough to ease the burdens or cover the full range of problems faced by people in Northern Ireland."

He added that a Protocol "that was meant to support the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement is now undermining it", something which is putting Northern Ireland's Institutions at "serious risk".

This comes just three days after Lord Frost handed in his resignation from his role as Brexit Minister, citing "concerns about the current direction of travel" of the UK Government.

In his letter of resignation, Lord Frost said it was the introduction of plan B coronavirus measures, including the implementation of Covid passes, that prompted his decision.

He also said he had become disillusioned by tax rises and the cost of net zero policies.

Before he resigned, Lord Frost had been locked in talks with his counterpart in Brussels, Maros Sefcovic, since October in an attempt to resolve the Northern Ireland Protocol.

But the Brexit negotiator claimed the UK has "not made enough progress on the Northern Ireland protocol".

For the FT, Lord Frost wrote: "Unfortunately we have not managed to make as much progress as I would have wished.

"With the exception of medicines, where we will look carefully and positively at the EUs proposals now we have them, what Brussels has put on the table does not do enough to ease the burdens or cover the full range of problems faced by people in Northern Ireland."

READ MORE:Lord Frost backs Boris Johnson despite quitting his Brexit role

"They may turn out to be the only way of dealing with the problems.

"But it is still better to find a negotiated way through if we can."

Following his resignation, it was announced Liz Truss would take over his brief as Brexit Minister.

After her first call with Mr Sefcovic earlier today, Ms Truss reiterated many of Lord Frost's points in a statement, saying: "The UK position has not changed.

"We need goods to flow freely between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, end the role of the ECJ as the final arbiter of disputes between us, and resolve other issues.

"We must pick up the pace on talks in the New Year. Our preference remains to reach an agreed solution.

"If this does not happen, we are prepared to trigger Article 16 safeguards to deal with the very real problems faced in Northern Ireland and to protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement in all its dimensions."

Here is the original post:

'Undemocratic EU will not ease burden of hated Brexit deal , says Frost - Daily Express

The former chancellor George Osbornes family wallpaper business has said that Brexit added 400,000 to its costs, as the companys sales slid more than 16% during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Osborne & Little, which is controlled by Osbornes father, Sir Peter Osborne, said the UKs exit from the EU had an immediate adverse effect on profits from January 2021, with unforeseen costs such as increased shipping payments and taxes on EU goods imported to the UK before being exported back to Europe.

The company also said it had experienced supply delays that had affected trading despite strong demand from shoppers who wanted to revamp interiors as they spent more time at home during the coronavirus lockdowns.

Accounts filed at Companies House said the London-based company, where George Osborne sits as a board director, set up a new distributor in Germany in March this year to help improve the flow of goods and reduce costs.

The complaints about higher costs come despite Osborne & Little calculating in 2016, at the time of the UKs vote on Brexit, that there would be limited impact in the short-term from leaving the EU, but that if sterling remained weak, it would bring a material benefit to the business.

Sales fell to 24.3m in the year to 31 March, with the UK and Europe down 18% and its biggest market, the US, down almost 15%.

Despite the Brexit problems, Osborne & Little moved to a pre-tax profit of 558,000 from a pre-tax loss of 542,000 a year before as it cut costs elsewhere, including reducing staff numbers.

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

The numbers were also boosted by operating income from 510,000 in furlough payments and 128,000 in coronavirus business interruption loan scheme from the government during the year. The group borrowed 3.5m in total from the CBIL scheme and also received a 615,000 paycheck loan from the US government.

The accounts said Covid had a huge impact on the UK but that sales rose 30% in the seven months to 31 October, compared with the same period in the previous year, with a similar increase in profits. The company said collections designed by the decorator Nina Campbell had performed exceptionally well.

The continuing effect that Brexit is having on the UK economy was highlighted last week in the food and drink sector, with exports slumping 16% over the first nine months of 2021, a fall that was largely attributed to a 24% decline in sales to EU countries.

Read the original here:

George Osbornes family firm reports jump in costs in wake of Brexit - The Guardian

The Government's approach is preventing it from capitalising on post-Brexit trade opportunities, such as a trade deal with the United States according to a Professor of Economics at the University of Sussex. Speaking to Express.co.uk., Professor Michael Gasiorek, a specialist in international trade, said that the UK hasn't "done itself any favours on the international stage" since Brexit.

Prof Gasiorek said: "We are a smaller player on the world stage than we were before.

That does not mean that countries dont want to do deals with the UK but it does mean that the UK has a diminished influence into that economic environment.

I don't think the current government has done itself any favours on the international stage in terms of the way it behaves."

Speaking about the issues in Northern Ireland he said: "They do need resolving, and the UK is I think being fairly inflexible in the way it wants to resolve those.

And that's not playing out well on the international stage, in particular with the United States."

Prof Gasiorek added: "At the early stages, before Biden came into power, certainly the Johnson Government and Liz Truss were touting a US-UK free trade agreement as being top priority.

"But that's shifted very very low down the agenda, not on the UK's side but because America has made it quite clear that they're not interested at this point."

In her role as Foreign Secretary - and previously Secretary of State for International Trade - Liz Truss has played a pivotal role in the UK's trade deal negotiations.

READ MORE:Boris warned trade deals OFF as Tory credibility in pieces

But even though the likelihood of a trade deal with the United States is, in his opinion, unlikely, he said the UK should still be striving for cooperation.

He said: Currently I think there is no immediate prospect of a free trade deal in the next few years with America.

"And that's because America is focused elsewhere.

"That doesnt mean we shouldnt cooperate with America, for example on the issue of steel tariffs, or for example with regard to climate exchange.

So it could try and resolve that, but I believe our Secretary of State for Trade approached this issue by threatening the Americans.

This came after International Trade Secretary Anne Marie Trevelyan travelled to Washington in December to urge her counterparts to lift US tariffs on steel and aluminium that former President Donald Trump imposed in 2018.

The International Trade Secretary threatened the US with retaliatory tariffs on US goods, saying: We have been clear all along that resolving this dispute is the right thing to do.

It will benefit workers and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic, and would remove the need for the U.K. to levy retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods.

However, just last week, the UK signed a free trade agreement with Australia, which the government estimates would unlock 10.4bn of additional trade.

A spokesperson for the Department for International Trade said: We have already secured over 760 billion worth of trade deals with 70 countries plus the EU and 2022 will be a five-star year for UK trade as we launch new negotiations with India, Mexico, Canada and the Gulf, as well as securing CPTPP accession.

We are strengthening our trade and investment ties with the US and have made good progress by ending the ban on British lamb, drawing a line under the Boeing-Airbus tariffs dispute, and co-operating even closer on vital areas such as technology."

Read more from the original source:

'Done UK no favours!' Boris and Truss told tactics 'not playing out well' on global stage - Daily Express

The ports would be plunged into chaos. Stranded lorries would turn Kent into a giant car park. The supermarkets would run out of food, the factories would run out of parts, and our export industries would be blown apart.

Only a year ago this week, the economy was on a knife edge as we waited to see if a trade deal with the European Union could be agreed at the last moment, and the dreaded cliff-edge avoided. Chaos was looming as the clock ticked relentlessly closer to midnight.

As we know, a deal was finally agreed, on Christmas Eve to be precise. Twelve months on, how is that working out?

In fact, it turns out to have been a lot of fuss about not very much.

The shape of the UKs trading relationship with the EU has already started to emerge.

We sell, and buy, far less from the rest of Europe than we did as a member, and some industries have suffered significantly from that; the balance of payments is steadily improving; critical industries such as financial and legal services are holding up well; and the UK is trading more with the world outside Europe.

There have been winners and losers, as you would expect, but average it out, and for all the hullabaloo the trade deal didn't make much difference to anything.

It was certainly a tense run-up to Christmas. After four years of bitter and divisive negotiations, and with the transition period that kept us effectively in the EUs trading bloc for a year after we left about to expire, the UK looked poised to tumble out without a deal.

Businesses were stockpiling goods to deal with disruption to supplies, haulage companies were preparing for massive delays, and customs officials on both sides of the Channel were readying themselves for coping with the paperwork and checks demanded by switching to World Trade Organization rules overnight.

No one had any real idea what would happen. In the end, a last minute compromise was hammered out.

Trade would continue mostly without tariffs or quotas, but services were excluded, Northern Ireland was put under a special regime, and more checks would be put in place.

A year on from those nervous few days we are starting to have a pretty good idea of what our trading relationship with the EU will look like - and four key trends have emerged.

First, despite the deal, trade with the EU has fallen sharply, and it is likely to carry on going down. Supporters of our departure shouldnt try to deny that, and they only make themselves look foolish when they do.

The monthly trade data moves around, and was distorted earlier in the year by stockpiling ahead of our departure, but the Office for National Statistics estimated in July that compared with a 2018 baseline monthly exports to the EU were 1.7 billion per month below where they would have been, and imports were 3 billion lower.

The important point is this. Trade across the English Channel has become significantly harder, and, surprise, surprise, there is now less of it. That is likely to continue, until trade settles down at a significantly lower level.

Next, the balance of payments deficit is coming down. The UK has been running a persistent and alarming deficit on the balance of payments for years, partly because of eroding competitiveness, but partly because of the deficit with the EU.

That is gradually improving, with the deficit down to a relatively trivial 2.3pc of GDP by this year (which, given how wonky the statistics are, might actually mean there is a surplus).

It is important to remember that the UK ran a huge trade deficit with the EU. According to the German statistical office, for example, its exports to the UK are now down by 11.5pc year-on-year, while its imports are down by 2.9pc.

Read more from the original source:

A year on from the Brexit trade deal, the doom-mongers got it so wrong - The Telegraph