Political relations between UK-EU

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
With everything people have to worry about these days, I don't want them to think that not being able to afford a banana is one of them.

Most bananas imported into the UK come from South & Central America and already had a tariff into the EU - the 9.5p tariff looks like the 2020 EU non qualified rate, so we've chosen to continue that. Why? God knows. So no change in price for most bananas. We can sign a zero tariff agreement with Ghana for Bananas if we want to to return it to pre Brexit status. Sounds like a good idea. We could do the same for Colombia, and get cheaper bananas which would be good for UK consumers and bad for Ghana. Pre Brexit we couldn't.

50,000 new jobs isn't border patrol type customs agents paid for by the treasury, it is mainly people in companies, paid for by the companies, to do the paperwork. So the tariffs don't pay for it. And I'd be surprised if it was more than £30K / head. But my point was that it was nothing to do with Ghanaian bananas.
So last week the tariff on bananas from Ghana was zero, now it's 9.5p a kilo, and you think it's a good thing that we can now favour somewhat richer countries over poorer countries in banana imports.

However, under the Banana Review Mechanism (a real thing!), if the EU changes tariffs on bananas from Colombia, then it is the UK's sovereign decision that we will copy the EU.

Maybe I'm a wee bit cynical about whether there's some Tory party financial interest, but you might wonder why we are not rolling over the EU's agreement with Ghana.

 
So last week the tariff on bananas from Ghana was zero, now it's 9.5p a kilo, and you think it's a good thing that we can now favour somewhat richer countries over poorer countries in banana imports.

However, under the Banana Review Mechanism (a real thing!), if the EU changes tariffs on bananas from Colombia, then it is the UK's sovereign decision that we will copy the EU.

Maybe I'm a wee bit cynical about whether there's some Tory party financial interest, but you might wonder why we are not rolling over the EU's agreement with Ghana.

I didn't say that, did I.
I said we should pay more for bananas to Ghanaian farmers.
And we can implement zero tariffs if we want. Or not. Which I think is good. I hope we agree an equivalent zero tariff deal. The government has perhaps had other priorities, it's Jan 5th, give them a few weeks.
As for financial interests, who knows. This paper indicates that at least there is a rational thought process going on, and corrects some of the data re the tariffs (my errors too).

https://epamonitoring.net/why-elimi...s-would-be-bad-news-for-acp-banana-exporters/

It won't matter to me anyway. I'm now sick of bananas.
 
I didn't say that, did I.
I said we should pay more for bananas to Ghanaian farmers.
And we can implement zero tariffs if we want. Or not. Which I think is good. I hope we agree an equivalent zero tariff deal. The government has perhaps had other priorities, it's Jan 5th, give them a few weeks.
As for financial interests, who knows. This paper indicates that at least there is a rational thought process going on, and corrects some of the data re the tariffs (my errors too).

https://epamonitoring.net/why-elimi...s-would-be-bad-news-for-acp-banana-exporters/

It won't matter to me anyway. I'm now sick of bananas.
The only rational thought process I can discern in that is the conclusion that a no-deal Brexit would cause soaring inflation (still relevant for those who think we might plan to walk away in four years), and the cynical calculation that the main aim was a con to demonstrate how Brexit means freedom to manipulate markets.

"It suggests eliminating MFN tariffs on bananas while providing a high profile demonstration (of) the ‘value’ of being freed from EU tariff constraints, would in fact deliver marginal benefits to UK consumers at considerable cost to banana exporters in Africa and the Caribbean."
 
Last edited:
The only rational thought process I can discern in that is the conclusion that a no-deal Brexit would cause soaring inflation (still relevant for those who think we might plan to walk away in four years), and the cynical calculation that the main aim was a con to demonstrate how Brexit means freedom to manipulate markets.

"It suggests eliminating MFN tariffs on bananas while providing a high profile demonstration (of) the ‘value’ of being freed from EU tariff constraints, would in fact deliver marginal benefits to UK consumers at considerable cost to banana exporters in Africa and the Caribbean."
Last post from me on this, you can have the last say (I've spent the day playing peek a boo with a toddler so I know how it goes and I bet everyone else is bored shitless).
I thought :
"While Secretary of State Fox has indicated the impact the removal of MFN tariffs would have on preferential treatment accorded developing countries, would be a factor in the governments post-Brexit tariff formulation policy, the absence of banana production in the UK could make it an attractive product for full tariff liberalisation, particularly since bananas are the most consumed fruit in the UK."

was quite rational. I discerned it.
 
Showing you know nothing of Scottish politicians, voters and politics again.
Start with she is popular with voters that elect her in real elections in a working democracy as a starting point.
Oh really, the problem you have with your beloved Nicky is that she's the
leader of a nationalist party, with nationalist aims, obviously, but that unpalatable fact has to be sold by pretending that they're not.
But I have no problem with the Scots voting for her, or anyone, as you say,
they were real elections, conducted in a working democracy.
Just like Nigel Farage was elected as an MEP.
 
Obsessing over pedantic definitions is an helpful distraction from inconvenient truths

In other news - a distinct disadvantage of Brexit to me personally is that UK citizens are now restricted to old-fashioned duty-free allowances:

GB-EU travellers to benefit from duty-free allowances after Brexit deal (dfnionline.com)

For years I have been like a 'mule' for both people in the UK and Cyprus taking suitcases full of goodies - it might affect how much people look forward to seeing me
At least your 'disadvantage' isn't life threatening.
 
Oh really, the problem you have with your beloved Nicky is that she's the
leader of a nationalist party, with nationalist aims, obviously, but that unpalatable fact has to be sold by pretending that they're not.
But I have no problem with the Scots voting for her, or anyone, as you say,
they were real elections, conducted in a working democracy.
Just like Nigel Farage was elected as an MEP.
Yes but he never led a party to election wins with a range of domestic policies, he never ran a government and increased his majority as Sturgeon will.
Is she any more nationalist than Jonhson is leaving the UK to rejoin the EU in a vote more nationalist than taking the UK out of the EU. Either way she can only deliver independece by winning a majority in May.
All besides the point anyway, comparing Sturgeon to either Farage or Putin is too ridiculous to carry on bothering debating.
 
Yes but he never led a party to election wins with a range of domestic policies, he never ran a government and increased his majority as Sturgeon will.
Is she any more nationalist than Jonhson is leaving the UK to rejoin the EU in a vote more nationalist than taking the UK out of the EU. Either way she can only deliver independece by winning a majority in May.
All besides the point anyway, comparing Sturgeon to either Farage or Putin is too ridiculous to carry on bothering debating.
Fine, my original point is that she represents a Nationalist party, and anyone
who's a nationalist is anathema to many on here. The comparison with the two individuals mentioned may not be welcomed, but nationalists is what they are.
Personally, I've no problem with that, I have issues with them as individuals,
but not their political positions.
 
The British Ports Association’s Richard Ballantyne told Bloomberg Radio: ‘It’s probably the calm before the storm. It’s always quite quiet after the new year.’
It's likely to be more quiet than usual due to the stockpiling done in anticipation of No Deal and all the concerns about the additional red tape. The real test will be when the warehouses are down to their usual levels.
 
The British Ports Association’s Richard Ballantyne told Bloomberg Radio: ‘It’s probably the calm before the storm. It’s always quite quiet after the new year.’
Agreed indeed

But, I do not recall there being any caveats to the 'predictions of doom' - such as the apocalypse will likely not materialise until February, because....

But anyway, I am all for looking to the future and I am sure, you and all other posters on here will join me in just being absolutely delighted that there are - to date - no signs of the 'disaster' that was predicted - afterall, we all want what is best for the UK

Let's all be cautious though and keep monitoring things with fingers crossed
 
Anywho...back to fishing

We’ve been telling the same story for more than two years, well before Kirkella was christened at Greenwich in 2019. But there is little sign the UK government has listened. Without individual bilateral deals on quotas with Greenland, the Faroes and especially Norway, there is no long-term viable distant-waters fishing industry in the UK from January 1’

 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top