Another new Brexit thread

[Grassland Blue]

Firstly I take issue with the largest vote in UK history. It wasn't and constant repetition by those of the Brexit persuasion won't make it so.

Parliament's first duty is the the well being and prosperity of the country. If they believe that leaving the EU to be a disastrous step for the country they should not take it and make their argument for their action. They will then face any potential fallout at the next GE.

If however they don't follow their conscience and allow Brexit to go ahead and their misgivings are well founded they will without doubt face the wrath of the electorate.

Potentially damned if they do and damned if they don't. They should follow what they believe.

Bang on.
But what do they believe?

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

I am a remainer, however, stay or leave, we are in a cleft stick as it stands.
A dog cannot serve two masters,so,
I would be in favour of being governed from Brussels and making our current government and its minions redundant.
They are a millstone round our necks, unfit to govern and could be a prime example to fall victim to their policies.

Well the narrative of Brussels / the EU is a s##t show and we need to get out has certainly taken a beating.

 

[BobKowalski]

Interesting development. Big win for pharma in the EU and US. What does this mean for our pharma industry? If it’s no deal we are outside the EU pharma regulatory system so do we develop our own regulatory system which means we would still need EU and US approval meaning double the cost? Do we negotiate to remain part of the EU system and what will the costs be for that negotiation which will be one of a hundred or so negotiations with the EU? Brexiteers want us to fall within the US sphere of influence but will the EU make it ‘harder’ for us if we do so and will the US do the same if we opt for the EU sphere?

Any thoughts?

 

[Len Rum]

Interesting development. Big win for pharma in the EU and US. What does this mean for our pharma industry? If it’s no deal we are outside the EU pharma regulatory system so do we develop our own regulatory system which means we would still need EU and US approval meaning double the cost? Do we negotiate to remain part of the EU system and what will the costs be for that negotiation which will be one of a hundred or so negotiations with the EU? Brexiteers want us to fall within the US sphere of influence but will the EU make it ‘harder’ for us if we do so and will the US do the same if we opt for the EU sphere?

Any thoughts?

#askboris

 

[BobKowalski]

LSE article on Brexit impact on Australia. A deal with EU is still the priority and also talks about Australia’s focus on Asia which are its biggest markets. They’re closer apparently and this makes a huge difference. Who knew.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/...tralias-trading-relations-with-the-uk-and-eu/

 

[BobKowalski]

And finally the EU is tooting it’s horn. WTO ranks the EU as top of the class in closing FTA’s.

Look forward to discussing my last three posts on Pharma, the Commonwealth and UK competence in trade deals with you all today. Thought if we chose specific topics it might produce more focused and detailed discussion.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Interesting development. Big win for pharma in the EU and US. What does this mean for our pharma industry? If it’s no deal we are outside the EU pharma regulatory system so do we develop our own regulatory system which means we would still need EU and US approval meaning double the cost? Do we negotiate to remain part of the EU system and what will the costs be for that negotiation which will be one of a hundred or so negotiations with the EU? Brexiteers want us to fall within the US sphere of influence but will the EU make it ‘harder’ for us if we do so and will the US do the same if we opt for the EU sphere?

Any thoughts?

It won't change much.

To get a composition to market regards approval in the country, and if regs are different (as they are now), then they will either make two different compositions, or not sell in one country.

I expect we will pick one to copy, probably the EU one, but it will come down to how much is made in the UK for the UK, and how much is made in the UK for sale in other countries.

 

[mcfc1632]

From fact checker:
Claim
Emmanuel Macron said the UK will only be allowed to stay in the EU if they fully adopt all EU rules and regulations including adopting the Euro within six months of stopping Brexit.

Conclusion
He hasn’t said this. If the UK remained in the EU we would have to continue following EU law, but not in areas where we have opt-outs. This means we wouldn’t have to join the Euro.

Why is it inevitable that we will be further integrated into the EU when history tells us we have opted out of those elements we don't like?

That has been answered several times - and it is indeed inevitable

The 'fast-track' group will push forward on integration and the 'left-behind' group will become increasingly marginalised and there will come a time when a 'Blairesque' PM, backed by a EUphile HoC will decide that we are losing out...…. There will be no inconvenient citizen involvement.

It is leave now or be fully integrated - might as well get on with embracing it - because we are not avoiding it if we Remain.

It may be an inconvenient fact - but it is the truth, IMO, of how things will work out - which is why the EU are relaxed about a 'two-speed' approach

 

[Ban-jani]

That has been answered several times - and it is indeed inevitable

The 'fast-track' group will push forward on integration and the 'left-behind' group will become increasingly marginalised and there will come a time when a 'Blairesque' PM, backed by a EUphile HoC will decide that we are losing out...…. There will be no inconvenient citizen involvement.

It is leave now or be fully integrated - might as well get on with embracing it - because we are not avoiding it if we Remain.

It may be an inconvenient fact - but it is the truth, IMO, of how things will work out - which is why the EU are relaxed about a 'two-speed' approach

What are you backing this up with though?

I’m not saying it won’t happen, it is the EU’s dream to have a fully integrated Union to rival the world’s superpowers but there’s absolutely no evidence we wouldn’t be able to retain our current position and opt out of that.

I personally think that if they can become fully integrated but by doing in in the correct way and with a left wing stance - it could be a good thing.

Although I appreciate many may not want that.

 

[BobKowalski]

It won't change much.

To get a composition to market regards approval in the country, and if regs are different (as they are now), then they will either make two different compositions, or not sell in one country.

I expect we will pick one to copy, probably the EU one, but it will come down to how much is made in the UK for the UK, and how much is made in the UK for sale in other countries.

Not an expert but we seem to export more than we import and relative to other EU nations we seem to be leaders in the field which is one of the reasons the EMA was based here and now transferred to Netherlands. Interested to see the industry take on this going forward. More details at the link.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/e...cognition-inspections-medicines-manufacturers

 

[BobKowalski]

Dublin signalling where they will be going in a ‘no deal’ Brexit. NI is seperated from GB and a sea border to be implemented.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...sland-in-case-of-no-deal-brexit-idUSKCN1U71DD

 

[Ban-jani]

Dublin signalling where they will be going in a ‘no deal’ Brexit. NI is seperated from GB and a sea border to be implemented.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...sland-in-case-of-no-deal-brexit-idUSKCN1U71DD

I really don’t think there’s much choice.

I’m hoping the DUP will bring down the government as a result of this and we can go to a General Election.

 

[BobKowalski]

Dublin have now decided that if London can trash talk so can they :)

“As a country and economy they are not as important as they used to be.” @LeoVaradkar on the UK. While @PatKennyNT asks, “Is the sun finally setting on the British empire?”

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

And finally the EU is tooting it’s horn. WTO ranks the EU as top of the class in closing FTA’s.

Look forward to discussing my last three posts on Pharma, the Commonwealth and UK competence in trade deals with you all today. Thought if we chose specific topics it might produce more focused and detailed discussion.

I have a family member who works for one of the many small Pharma businesses in the UK. The typical structure is 40% of the cost is basic science but the other 60%+ is all legals and administrative development costs as drugs move through the process toward approval.

The danger is the biggest player in launching new pharma operations is China. For every Chemistry PhD position or job in a lab with a Pharma company (big or small) in the UK there are 50 in China, they are not there yet in terms of quality of science but give it 10/20 years and China will be doing 90% of the basic chemistry. The administrative/legal work will go to where the approvals are granted. So if we are no longer doing the ground level science work - and we are not doing any of the process/administrative work. What is the future for UK Pharma?

 

[BobKowalski]

I really don’t think there’s much choice.

I’m hoping the DUP will bring down the government as a result of this and we can go to a General Election.

It was always a choice between a land border and a sea border. We just don’t like the choices. A sea border was always the most likely and will mark the first step on the road to Irish reunification.

 

[mcfc1632]

I found this wikipage is a useful summary of the current EU proposals for accelerating integration of the core Eurozone countries.

And of course this document considers that the aims of this approach are to:

"........salvage the "widening and deepening of the European Union" in the face of political opposition."

i.e. achieve the strategic aims through an insidious approach that avoids the need for the types of tensions that resulted from the Maastricht treaty of the UK referendum.

TBF to the EU leaders - they are not shy in setting out their aims - it is easy to derive their remorseless aims and intent.

All this stuff Remainers keep posting about Opt-outs is just denial IMO - the truth is starkly obvious unless you want to deny it.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Not an expert but we seem to export more than we import and relative to other EU nations we seem to be leaders in the field which is one of the reasons the EMA was based here and now transferred to Netherlands. Interested to see the industry take on this going forward. More details at the link.

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/e...cognition-inspections-medicines-manufacturers

I'm on a periphery of the business.
The UK has really good research and many of the sites UK companies which have then merged with international ones, so a lot of production is still here. GSK for example were/are GlaxoSmithKline, which was a merger of GlaxoWellcome and SmithKline Beecham, which were mergers of Glaxo and the Wellcome Foundation (both UK) or SmithKline Beckman (US) and Beecham (UK).
So production is going to be pretty good, and certainly there aren't many huge French/German drugs companies that spring to mind.

As I said, I expect we'll copy EU or US regs where appropriate, possibly based on the specific drug in question.

 

[mcfc1632]

I'm trying to find evidence as to why it is inevitable that the UK will be further integrated into the EU if we remain. That being this mornings certainty. I cant find any so have asked our BM chums to help.

I would suggest that it only requires a read of the EU leaders strategy documents and an exercise of analysis with an objective viewpoint

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I have a family member who works for one of the many small Pharma businesses in the UK. The typical structure is 40% of the cost is basic science but the other 60%+ is all legals and administrative development costs as drugs move through the process toward approval.

The danger is the biggest player in launching new pharma operations is China. For every Chemistry PhD position or job in a lab with a Pharma company (big or small) in the UK there are 50 in China, they are not there yet in terms of quality of science but give it 10/20 years and China will be doing 90% of the basic chemistry. The administrative/legal work will go to where the approvals are granted. So if we are no longer doing the ground level science work - and we are not doing any of the process/administrative work. What is the future for UK Pharma?

It's too expensive for most small outfits to produce a drug. $500 million per successful drug is a reasonable ballpark (and may be too low), as it takes into account the ones that fail.

China is much the same threat to any industry, I'd think. I think it may be the 20+ years before they top the research quality here, but that depends how much IP they steal!

 

[BobKowalski]

As I said, I expect we'll copy EU or US regs where appropriate, possibly based on the specific drug in question.

Is that cost effective? Insofar as I understand it we would have to gain approval either by the FDA or EU or both if we sat outside the regulatory jurisdiction of either area. Would it not make sense to enter into an agreement with either jurisdiction so that both markets can be accessed without unnecessary cost or would not production relocate to either jurisdiction to access both markets? That would leave open the question of access to the UK market I guess.