Political relations between UK-EU
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 29,431
So state aid for lots of sectors until the problems are removed. Fair enough but removing the problems means removing the non tariff barriers and aligning with N,Ireland. Solutions this government aren’t prepared to accept.
So state aid until we get a new government, can the country afford it on top of all the covid aid ?
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Of what? Fish? No idea never bothered to check if it existed before or anywhere else in the world.
But discards aren’t really the point here nor why I picked up on your post ...so to back up; you asserted that you thought it was a barrier to fisherman claiming the compensation when you wrote “So if your boat is not going out because it's likely the catch will have to be thrown away”
Whilst I understand the foley you are highlighting I was merely saying it wasn’t a new concept for fishermen and that making them prove losses wasn’t unreasonable. Perhaps the government could have used last 3 years average catch profit for each boat (we have evidence) and forced boats to remain docked? That’s probably not a good solution either. Anyway if you have other ways for this to happen I’m all ears but let’s not go down rabbit holes here.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
It would be interesting to see how state aid compares with EU “grants” for same industries.
I suppose the simple answer to your question is so long as, annually, the aid required is less than we were paying to the EU it’s a win for the UK taxpayer.
That said it would of course be a lot better if we can just sort the problems out :)
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Due to said barriers I presume? Remove them and bobs your uncle
Ifwecouldjust.......
Well-Known Member
Then theres no point in being a member ...... if you honestly think they're going to do that you need help.
Ifwecouldjust.......
Well-Known Member
However this is another myth .... State Aid is allowed under Eu rules as long as it is for economic development and not to give an industry a competitive advantage. (See Italys bail out of its steel industry and the Netherlands development of rail infrastructure)
You were lied to
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
I am afraid thats classic Leave bullshit...... " just remove them and Bobs your uncle" - same as "UK supermarkets need to sell more UK shellfish to fix the problem" or "German car makers will sort this out" - simple sloganeering with not a thought as to the how why and where you make any of it happen nor the ramifications.
As a Remainer I wanted to stay - I wouldn't even begin to advocate Rejoin at this moment in time because what we had was the best we could have hoped for and thats now gone for good.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
In the fairytale land of Brexit, we’re trading with the world. It’s a fantasy | Nick Cohen
The Tories – and much of the media – would have us believe we’re living in Shangri-la
www.theguardian.com
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Let’s break this down to the brass tacks.
Countries/trading blocs have two mechanisms available to them
The first is tariffs. This is designed to ensure goods coming in are more expensive than domestically produced so consumers buy your domestic product. There are some general rules about tariffs such as they can’t be worse than WTO terms. The UK will have tariffs in place.
The second is standards. These are to ensure that the goods coming in are of equivalence (so sub standard products cannot be made cheaper). Whilst vital these can be very subjective in nature such as saying a component made in India is inferior to one made in Spain due to less rigerous national rules (it would ignore standards demanded in the supply contract for example - this inhibits growth in developing economies but that’s a different conversation). Additionally they can be used to allow for the creation of rules that make it uneconomical for an exporter to comply with, but again you’d only want to do that if you had sufficient domestic product. These rules will also govern things like origin of parts and the such (again to prevent cheaper components being used). The UK will also have standards in place.
Beyond product safety. The primary loser in all of this is the consumer.
So against those two levers we have shellfish issue. Putting aside that the UK claim they were told it would be ok for a moment let us look at the mechanics. The EU have standards in place that quite probably favoured UK shell fishers for many years (ie prevented cheaper imports from elsewhere in the globe) that we now are to comply with. This will increase our costs which will be passed on to the EU purchaser making our shellfish as expensive as anyone else’s. The only benefit for UK shellfish would be geography. So the benefits to being a member when it comes to trading with other EU states are clear, they are on the inside of the protection ring as the UK was, in this example however it doesn’t inhibit our ability to export once we comply with the rules.
So when you say
We clearly can. Unless your recommending chucking the baby out with the bath water due to some issues with shellfish that will get resolved?