Life After Brexit

[barney]

Can we all please show a little respect for each other without the constant tirade of insults just because some have different views than others

Hear hear. I had hoped now the deal was done we could get on with uniting to make it work.

I agree.
Arrogance is a most unattractive virtue.

[towny44]

Actually the agreement is clear on this. The UK wanted a CFTA agreement supplemented with separate agreements for fishing, security, judiciary, transport etc. each with separate governance. That however is not the structure of the agreement, it is a single institutional framework (apart from Information security and Civil Nuclear). So fishing (which is nothing more than totemic) will be negotiated as part of reform of the EU fisheries- which is why it has been (rightly) pushed out for 5.5 years (that is when the CFP is due for review) and may encompass other aspects of the wider agreement.

Do you know that for a fact Ken, or is that your speculative assessment on a quick glance at something on-line?

Read the agreement and then you will be able to draw proper conclusions.
I am sure there will be other review points along the way but the major one will be when the CFP comes up for review - which is in 5.5 years time (hence why the 5.5 years being mentioned by all the news channels). That could go very much in the UKs favour or may be more tough negotiations - we will not know for 5.5 years.

That is somewhat different to your implication that our agreement would have to be negotiated as part of the EU negotiations, rather than the current agreement being timed to coincide with the EUs next internal negotiation.

[Kendhni]

Do you know that for a fact Ken, or is that your speculative assessment on a quick glance at something on-line?

Read the agreement and then you will be able to draw proper conclusions.
I am sure there will be other review points along the way but the major one will be when the CFP comes up for review - which is in 5.5 years time (hence why the 5.5 years being mentioned by all the news channels). That could go very much in the UKs favour or may be more tough negotiations - we will not know for 5.5 years.

That is somewhat different to your implication that our agreement would have to be negotiated as part of the EU negotiations, rather than the current agreement being timed to coincide with the EUs next internal negotiation.

I can only guess that you misunderstood what I was saying (or my attempt at compacting several pages of civil service mumbo jumbo into a single sentence lost something in translation). Would it explain it better if I said, "a major review of this agreement and quotas will be carried out as part of the CFP review"?

[Bensham33]

As long as I can still get me cod and chips and a few fish fingers now and again I ain't bothered. What's important is we ain't in the EU any more and we have negotiated a tarriff free feel deal. End of.

These are the thoughts of one that is ignorant of the facts and has no intention of reading the 1200 page agreement.

[Manoverboard]

Can we all please show a little respect for each other without the constant tirade of insults just because some have different views than others

Hear hear. I had hoped now the deal was done we could get on with uniting to make it work.

I agree.
Arrogance is a most unattractive virtue.

Thank you,it's been going on for far too long ... all hot air, bully boy tactics and bluster where there's simply no need for it.

edited by Foxymod to take out personal reference

[Kendhni]

Read the agreement and then you will be able to draw proper conclusions.
I am sure there will be other review points along the way but the major one will be when the CFP comes up for review - which is in 5.5 years time (hence why the 5.5 years being mentioned by all the news channels). That could go very much in the UKs favour or may be more tough negotiations - we will not know for 5.5 years.

That is somewhat different to your implication that our agreement would have to be negotiated as part of the EU negotiations, rather than the current agreement being timed to coincide with the EUs next internal negotiation.

I can only guess that you misunderstood what I was saying (or my attempt at compacting several pages of civil service mumbo jumbo into a single sentence lost something in translation). Would it explain it better if I said, "a major review of this agreement and quotas will be carried out as part of the CFP review"?

Actually having re-read it I think I understand the point of confusion.
Gary had suggested that going forward that fishing could be negotiated "without it being part of an overall deal and used as a bargaining chip by the French." - that was the position the UK requested in the negotiations. However this separation of fishing from the CFTA does not appear to be how the deal is structured - (rightly or wrongly) there is a single institutional framework (give or take) which incorporates the CFTA, fishing and most other things. While fishing will be taken under consideration at the next CFP review then that requires the framework to be opened up which could effectively give other interested parties the ability to bring other things from the framework to the table.

However between now and then I am sure there will be a lot of tweaking and negotiations going on.

[Gill W]

The question is, what do the fishermen think

http://nffo.org.uk/news/miniscule-margi ... hetic.html

[towny44]

Read the agreement and then you will be able to draw proper conclusions.
I am sure there will be other review points along the way but the major one will be when the CFP comes up for review - which is in 5.5 years time (hence why the 5.5 years being mentioned by all the news channels). That could go very much in the UKs favour or may be more tough negotiations - we will not know for 5.5 years.

That is somewhat different to your implication that our agreement would have to be negotiated as part of the EU negotiations, rather than the current agreement being timed to coincide with the EUs next internal negotiation.

I can only guess that you misunderstood what I was saying (or my attempt at compacting several pages of civil service mumbo jumbo into a single sentence lost something in translation). Would it explain it better if I said, "a major review of this agreement and quotas will be carried out as part of the CFP review"?

No! The CFP is an internal EU arrangement, the UK is no longer a member, therefore the EU will have to negotiate separately and hope to agree an arrangement that suits us.

[Manoverboard]

The question is, what do the fishermen think

http://nffo.org.uk/news/miniscule-margi ... hetic.html

Another, and maybe tougher, question would be " Does it actually matter what the fisherman think ".

Probably not on the negotiating table or we would have to have settled for a ' No Deal '.

[Bensham33]

As long as I can still get me cod and chips and a few fish fingers now and again I ain't bothered. What's important is we ain't in the EU any more and we have negotiated a tarriff free feel deal. End of.

These are the thoughts of one that is ignorant of the facts and has no intention of reading the 1200 page agreement.

Have you tried the large Young's Gastro cod fish fingers from Morri and Sons. Excellent

https://groceries.morrisons.com/product ... -518269011

No haven't tried them. They look get tasty. I usually get Birds Eye but I'll have a look for them.

[screwy]

That is somewhat different to your implication that our agreement would have to be negotiated as part of the EU negotiations, rather than the current agreement being timed to coincide with the EUs next internal negotiation.

I can only guess that you misunderstood what I was saying (or my attempt at compacting several pages of civil service mumbo jumbo into a single sentence lost something in translation). Would it explain it better if I said, "a major review of this agreement and quotas will be carried out as part of the CFP review"?

No! The CFP is an internal EU arrangement, the UK is no longer a member, therefore the EU will have to negotiate separately and hope to agree an arrangement that suits us.

My understanding is that the Uk is no longer a member of the CFP as of the 1st January. The Eu have to re negotiate with us in 2026, cap in hand.!
I am but a simple man who will not be reading the agreement.

[Happydays]

As long as I can still get me cod and chips and a few fish fingers now and again I ain't bothered. What's important is we ain't in the EU any more and we have negotiated a tarriff free feel deal. End of.

These are the thoughts of one that is ignorant of the facts and has no intention of reading the 1200 page agreement.

Have you tried the large Young's Gastro cod fish fingers from Morri and Sons. Excellent

https://groceries.morrisons.com/product ... -518269011

I haven't tried the fish fingers but often get the Gastro Tempura Battered lemon & herb fillets (especially when on offer) they are lovely and tasty

[Bensham33]

Is cod in parsley sauce still available.

[Kendhni]

That is somewhat different to your implication that our agreement would have to be negotiated as part of the EU negotiations, rather than the current agreement being timed to coincide with the EUs next internal negotiation.

I can only guess that you misunderstood what I was saying (or my attempt at compacting several pages of civil service mumbo jumbo into a single sentence lost something in translation). Would it explain it better if I said, "a major review of this agreement and quotas will be carried out as part of the CFP review"?

No! The CFP is an internal EU arrangement, the UK is no longer a member, therefore the EU will have to negotiate separately and hope to agree an arrangement that suits us.

It is a lot more complex than that - there are also international agreements in place here (e.g. UN Law of the sea) that makes provision for the control of quotas and management of the fish stocks (amongst other things). Both the EU and UK recognise each others waters as sovereign however it is very much in both interests to provide access to each other during a transition period. I suspect that the CFP review was considered to be a good point whereby the bigger picture could be reviewed - but we cannot assume that that will be done in isolation (since fishing is not an isolated part of the agreement) - that is not to say that either deliberately, or due to negotiated changes, over the next 5+years that fishing won't be isolated. , or that the WTO actually plays a role as well. We just don't know, but we should not assume. What we do know is that we are obliged to discuss and manage fish stocks with our neighbours

[Kendhni]

The question is, what do the fishermen think

http://nffo.org.uk/news/miniscule-margi ... hetic.html

I think there is a bit of knee-jerking going on here.
This is really only phase 2 of an ongoing project (phase 1, leaving and taking back sovereignty completed last January; phase 2 puts in place the main CFTA). However this is still really only the start of the process. It was always expected that the 'full deal' will take years or decades to complete - if, in a changing world, it can ever be completed. Nobody is going to get everything they want on day 1.

The primary focus (and rightly so) seems to have been overall business continuity and keeping the supply chains moving. There will be some winners and some losers, but fishing has not 'lost', it just hasn't gained as much as it would like.

[screwy]

Is cod in parsley sauce still available.

Hate parsley sauce..

[oldbluefox]

The primary focus (and rightly so) seems to have been overall business continuity and keeping the supply chains moving. There will be some winners and some losers, but fishing has not 'lost', it just hasn't gained as much as it would like.

I'd go along with that. For me the main goal will be achieved on January 1st 2021. The other benefits will follow in the fullness of time.

[Kendhni]

The primary focus (and rightly so) seems to have been overall business continuity and keeping the supply chains moving. There will be some winners and some losers, but fishing has not 'lost', it just hasn't gained as much as it would like.

I'd go along with that. For me the main goal will be achieved on January 1st 2021. The other benefits will follow in the fullness of time.

I am really hoping you are right. As I said in an earlier post this government now has 3 years to deliver those benefits.

That timescale may actually work to the current governments favour, since the expected curve will be a wave of optimism (pushing the economy up and forward) followed by a rebalancing of the economy (maybe a recession) then a gradual rebuilding. That initial wave may help to offset the coronavirus impact, however that may also shorten the overall time. Ideally this government wants that wave to be as short as possible (so they then have time to rebuild and show progress) or be as long as possible (so that it has not subsided by the time of the next election).

The other plus for the government is that it is starting from a very low base. While the other markets around the world recovered after the March drop the UK has not recovered (Nick Train did a very interesting podcast on that). This years numbers (for me)
- US - up 38%
- Emerging markets - up 24%
- Japan - up 17%
- Europe ex UK - up 14%
- UK - down 6%
- overall portfolio - up 22% this year
I am hoping that this weeks trading will see my UK investments at least break even.

[Mervyn and Trish]

The primary focus (and rightly so) seems to have been overall business continuity and keeping the supply chains moving. There will be some winners and some losers, but fishing has not 'lost', it just hasn't gained as much as it would like.

I'd go along with that. For me the main goal will be achieved on January 1st 2021. The other benefits will follow in the fullness of time.

I am really hoping you are right. As I said in an earlier post this government now has 3 years to deliver those benefits.

As does the opposition, to get its ducks in a row. I speak only for England because that is where I live. The Lib Dems fought the last election on cancelling Brexit and were thrashed. Now they intend to vote against the deal on offer, a hopeless political gesture as there is no alternative. They're a dead duck. The various UKIP/Brexit type parties now have their single wish and no future role. Likewise the minority pro remain parties are now irrelevant. Which leaves us back to 2 party politics.

And in my view Labour still do not offer an alternative government. I had high hopes of Sir Hindsight getting the act in order and offering something when he promised he would not oppose for opposition's sake. But he's done nothing else. All he's done is criticise whatever the Tories do without offering any other coherent vision.

For the Tories to lose the next election it needs more than a failure to deliver Brexit benefits. It needs someone else to vote for. And I don't see that at present.

[Kendhni]

I'd go along with that. For me the main goal will be achieved on January 1st 2021. The other benefits will follow in the fullness of time.

I am really hoping you are right. As I said in an earlier post this government now has 3 years to deliver those benefits.

As does the opposition, to get its ducks in a row. I speak only for England because that is where I live. The Lib Dems fought the last election on cancelling Brexit and were thrashed. Now they intend to vote against the deal on offer, a hopeless political gesture as there is no alternative. They're a dead duck. The various UKIP/Brexit type parties now have their single wish and no future role. Likewise the minority pro remain parties are now irrelevant. Which leaves us back to 2 party politics.

That is a very good point. I would mostly agree with you with one slight adjustment, I would say 2.5 party politics. I don't think the libdems should be counted out just yet, they may not win but they may again get to hold the balance of power in Westminister. There have been a lot of votes 'loaned' to other parties, we won't know the true scale of this until we get another general election.

The SNP could also fit into the equation.

And in my view Labour still do not offer an alternative government. I had high hopes of Sir Hindsight getting the act in order and offering something when he promised he would not oppose for opposition's sake. But he's done nothing else. All he's done is criticise whatever the Tories do without offering any other coherent vision.

That is the format of politics we have. I have always said that I don't like the opposition/combative model for politics and would much prefer to see a collaborative approach (generally speaking there is more that the parties agree on than they disagree on). I don't think that any party is offering much in the form of long term coherent vision - a bit too much of making it up as they go along at the minute ... hopefully once all the dust settles this will change over the next year or so.

For the Tories to lose the next election it needs more than a failure to deliver Brexit benefits. It needs someone else to vote for. And I don't see that at present.

Three years is a long time in politics and the electorate continually proves how fickle it can be. I agree though that, while I think that Starmer has come a long way from his first few weeks in the job, he still has a long way to go.

[Manoverboard]

I thought the Liberals lost their votes because they were error prone, they backed the wrong horse basically.

Labour surely loaned their votes to the Tory candidates but will get them back again if Boris 'n' Co fail to address their North / South divide concerns.

[Gill W]

I don’t get why Starmer is still being slated on here - he’s said Labour will be voting FOR the deal

[Manoverboard]

Starmer is getting more of a slating from his own elected MPs than on here ... just saying
.

[barney]

I thought the Liberals lost their votes because they were error prone, they backed the wrong horse basically.

Labour surely loaned their votes to the Tory candidates but will get them back again if Boris 'n' Co fail to address their North / South divide concerns.

The Libdems were virtually wiped out because they massively misjudged the mood of the majority.
A perfect example of living in an echo chamber.

As one of the few left voting people on this forum, I’d add that Labour, under Corbyn, also badly misjudged the majority.
The myth that Labour voters were anti Brexit was well and truly blown out of the water.
Corbyn was anti Eu for his entire political career and should have stayed true to his own beliefs.

There’s a world of difference between the Urban middle class academic Labour activist and the average Joe worker they were formed to represent.
The last election showed that Labour were actually out of step with their own traditional voter.
Some like Gloria DelPiero and Lisa Nandy could see what was happening.

Starmer does have a chance at the next election but a few things need to happen.
Given his history, the words Brexit or EU should never pass his lips.
Then, Johnson has to retain control of the Tory party.
Starmer can easily handle him but my feelings are that Johnson will be gone by then and Sunak will be a tougher nut.

Labour will need the biggest swing in history to gain a majority but given the incompetence of Johnson and some of his ministers, it is possible.

I’m constantly amazed at how some find the Nationalism in Scotland acceptable.
They are so anti English it’s borderline racism.
This week they are anti Brexit.
Next week it will be anti something else.

Had there been no Brexit, their policy would still be to break up the union. Leaving the Eu is a convenient smokescreen.
Personally, I’d be delighted if they were allowed a second and final referendum.
I’d like to see the U.K. government make no effort to entice them to remain but simply point out the consequences of leaving the union.
Then their citizens can express their democratic right and decide either way.
We are only joined by a quirk of nature that QE1 didn’t leave an heir. It’s not written in stone.
I’d also be happy to see the same happen in NI.
If they prefer the Republic and Eu, good luck to them.
England will get along just fine as an independent country, trading and making alliances all over the world.

[towny44]

I don’t get why Starmer is still being slated on here - he’s said Labour will be voting FOR the deal

Yes he has Gill but he has been consistent in deriding any Brexit deal that does not include staying in the single market and customs union, which to any leaver is an absolute non starter.