Political relations between UK-EU

[dave_blue12]

You pay to avoid the non tariff barriers. If you are happy with trade barriers and restrictions to trade then you don’t pay and accept suboptimal market conditions.

The other factor is that we do pay. It’s just different. Instead of the Govt paying to remove these barriers, individual businesses pay in terms of increased costs, administration and even loss of markets in some sectors and the Govt also pays for costs in customs ie personal, infrastructure, red tape etc.

Right now this country will pay more, to trade less and at greater cost. There is not one single economic argument that can be made for the route we have taken. Not one, which is why we will struggle to maintain this position.

You can make a non economic argument, but you have no economic rationale that makes sense. Which is why, Norway and Switzerland pay to be part of the Single Market. It’s cheaper and more efficient.

The extreme Brexiteers won't understand any of this unless it actually touches their lives, ruins their business and prospects for the future, or that of their offspring. It is conceivable that a retired person with little extended family could sail through life believing there are no negative consequences to Brexit.

Some of us are more connected to the world. Only last week I spoke to a business owner who had seen 60% of his business become non viable as he is no longer able to trade profitably with the EU. He thinks he can survive by downsizing his company and shedding jobs. Just one business in a sea of struggling businesses.

 

[mcfc1632]

When the inevitable massive job losses and a big spike in prices occurs because of your assessments, I’ll come on here and congratulate you on your perception. In 5 years none of the scenarios painted by you and yours, have occurred. “No chance of a free trade deal.” “Without the backing of the EU, trade deals will never be struck and the process takes years” “Boris the bastard won’t sign up to the European procurement scheme.” “Idiot Mackems vote to lose their jobs.”
I’ll list another half dozen of the results of your failed Mystic Meg training course if you like.

PMSL at the may their posts portray such frustration that people will not simply accept their doom mongering as fact and be afraid - very afraid

Yet we have the best part of 5 years of witnessing them being repeatedly wrong

They seem to just be seeking to reassure and support each other whilst hoping for some signs of the apocalypse to appear

 

[Vic]

Who has defended the EU over vaccines? You’re about the third person to suggest this but no one can come up with a post in the last three days that does anything but criticise the EU’s handling of their crisis.

There is however a theme amongst the Brexit fans to use the EU’s incompetence in this particular issue as absolute justification that they were right all along about Brexit.

The reality is that the EU fucked up badly on vaccines but it is really nothing to do with Brexit.

It is in one sense. But for Brexit we would have had been in the EU and either leading on the drive for equitable transnational distribution of vaccines, or doing our own national thing and leaving the rest of the EU to the present plan or prompting Germany, France and Italy to compete with us for priority access.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

PMSL at the may their posts portray such frustration that people will not simply accept their doom mongering as fact and be afraid - very afraid

Yet we have the best part of 5 years of witnessing them being repeatedly wrong

They seem to just be seeking to reassure and support each other whilst hoping for some signs of the apocalypse to appear

Well, as one demonstrated, it's down to disdain and dislike of their country, and an insane visceral hatred of a Conservative govt, any missteps, problems
and inevitable mistakes, common with every one in history, are screamed at
like an unfaithful husband. I've seen it before, many times, but the British public is the great leveller, they see the choices, realise all are not perfect,
then choose who they believe to be the best to vote for.
Many who chose in the last election are now thanking god they chose who they did, and many more of those that didn't, are now glad they lost.

 

[Vic]

I don't see that Warranty. Clause 5.1 (e) is the member states warranting to AZ that they aren't under any conflicting obligations, not AZ saying that. Pretty fundamental misunderstanding.

Clause 5.4 of the contract says what happens if there is a difficulty with supply. They can manufacture outside the EU / UK, or at another AZ site if they notify the EU first. And if it can't make the doses in the EU / UK then the EU can propose CMO partners for them to work with. Standard stuff.

Page 40 of the contract is an estimated delivery schedule. says "Final delivery subject to agreement of delivery schedule and regulatory approval" Again, perfectly reasonable.

The only reason that AZ got the Oxford vaccine is because they gave the UK guarantees. The original partner was going to be Merck (who have a long relationship with Oxford).
There were 2 issues with Merck as a partner,
1) Access for poorer countries to get the vaccine cheap - this was a worry for the academics at the uni
2) Guarantees over supply of the vaccine for the UK - because Merck were going to make it in the US and there were fears the orange one would stop exports (the EU did, so a fair call) A certain Mr Hancock, much maligned, refused to give permission for the Merck deal, so we ended up with AZ. And presumably Mr Hancock got the guarantees he wanted.

And "best reasonable efforts" is a standard contract term. Lawyers know what it means, it is different to "best efforts". It is the sort of thing that you spend ages arguing about, non-lawyers go "what are you on about, why does it matter", but it matters a lot. Taking supply ordered by the UK 3 months earlier and manufactured in UK plants isn't "reasonable".

Er - there is no clause 5.1(e). Or 5.4.

But mcfc1632 thinks it's a great analysis (most is cut and paste from the Sky? article about how AZ got the contract rather than Merck).

 

[Vic]

The UK Government has donated to COVAX in order to acquire and purchase additional vaccines in the future (which is an indicator that they think we may need an injection every year.) The Eu have not.... they have just donated.

You should also bear in mind that the UK Government intends to cut aid to the same countries by 70%

UK diplomats told to cut up to 70% from overseas aid budget

Officials have just weeks to slash costs, prompting fears that speed of cuts could cost lives

www.theguardian.com

So we're putting in half a billion pounds to Covax to provide vaccines to the developing world out of £4bn cuts in aid to the developing world.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

It is in one sense. But for Brexit we would have had been in the EU and either leading on the drive for equitable transnational distribution of vaccines, or doing our own national thing and leaving the rest of the EU to the present plan or prompting Germany, France and Italy to compete with us for priority access.

One of your most amusing yet Vic. Mutti had the same idea, but stuck with
the EU procuration dogma, Macron was pushing for his own vaccine, but like
a 5 year old Renault Clio, they never managed to get it down the road.
So it was down to hoping Ursula's record didn't screw up again, which was always going to be a big ask.

 

[Ban-jani]

Our credit rating as a country hasn’t slumped because of Covid. It’s slumped because the ratings agencies (Moody’s, Fitch and S&P) all think our economy does not have the same potential to recover as quickly as similar countries due to us hobbling ourselves thanks to Brexit.

There’s not much we can do about it except keep negotiating with the EU to recover some of what we’ve thrown away, particularly in the services sector. It’s not going to be easy.

I read somewhere recently that our borrowing is currently fine and the economy should be on track to recover well, as well as outperforming France and Spain’s recovery. Can’t remember where though but I am sure I read it just before Christmas.

 

[mcfc1632]

No, the only major European country that is protectionist is the UK as evidenced when it raised trade and cultural barriers with Europe and within its own sovereign territory.

You have to love the irony.

This was your response to @BlueAnorak commenting on the EU acting in a protectionist manner

Your comment is of course only your biased opinion

BA's opinion is supported by many - including the German press:

"The EU Commission is doing the best advertisement for Brexit in the dispute over the delay in the delivery of the AstraZeneca vaccine: it is acting slowly, bureaucratically and protectionistly. And if something goes wrong, the others are to blame. This is how many Britons see the EU, and so the prejudices were confirmed earlier this week. "Now I understand Brexit better," an AstraZeneca employee said on television."

AstraZeneca: Die beste Werbung für den Brexit | ZEIT ONLINE

 

[Vic]

I read somewhere recently that our borrowing is currently fine and the economy should be on track to recover well, as well as outperforming France and Spain’s recovery. Can’t remember where though but I am sure I read it just before Christmas.

In a card from Santa at the North Pole?