Brexit Part X: The dark days before Christmas.

Baby it is cold outside. The shortest day is upon us. Many dark days still ahead before spring will be there. What will happen in the perfect storm will be anyone's guess.

Previous part can be found here.

seahawk wrote:

With a no deal scenario there is no reason to honour the WA.

I am not following the machinations closely but I was unaware that the WA contained a clause saying that its validity was sibject to a trade agreement being concluded between the EU and UK.

The notion that the UK can honour or dishonour its agreements as it chooses is an egregious invention of Brexit fanatics.

I understand that (for reasons unknown to me) Dec 22 has been promoted to shortest day of the year in the northern hemisphere.

A101 wrote:

Well up thread you suggested that if the UK breeches the WA/NIP it would give the ROI carte blanche “shrugging off its Belfast Agreements obligations” but you haven’t explained how breaching the WA/NIP also breeches the Belfast Agreement,

Breaching the WA/NIP doesn’t have to breach the Belfast Agreement for it to set a precedent of, well, breaching a legally binding treaty. If the UK doesn’t respect it’s agreements, why should anyone else?

A101 wrote:

and at the same time insinuating that if the UK breeches the WA/NIP it gives the ROI justification for Irish Nationalist to return to violence

Nah, RoI won’t support anything - certainly not a return to violence. That’s for the birds. And Brexiteers.

It just doesn’t need to do anything more than treat any post-Brexit violence as a strictly UK problem once the precedent of not respecting international agreements is set by the UK breaching the WA/NIP.

Again, one can’t pick and choose what agreements one is going to adhere to, and expect everyone else to abide by all of their agreements regardless. This is a fairly simple an innocuous principle. A truism, even.

A101 wrote:

And so far no one on here has said how the IMB breeched the Belfast Agreement but you take it as gospel that it does.

It doesn’t need to. Just needs to break international law by breaching a legally-binding treaty. I believe the UK Government admitted as much in Parliament. Did it not?

Anyway, to the extent that Brexit results in an uptick in violence in NI going forward, Brexiteers will need to own that. Brexit was not an Irish nationalist endeavour.

How did the various EU countries manage to close their borders to the UK? I thought the EU was in control of everything? How dare they be Soverign AND have control.

art wrote:

seahawk wrote:

With a no deal scenario there is no reason to honour the WA.

I am not following the machinations closely but I was unaware that the WA contained a clause saying that its validity was sibject to a trade agreement being concluded between the EU and UK.

The notion that the UK can honour or dishonour its agreements as it chooses is an egregious invention of Brexit fanatics.

British politics have long abandoned reason. If there is a no deal, it will be a obvious solution for Boris to tear-up the WA and celebrate the billions of pounds that the evil EU will not get from the UK. If reason would be the driving force, we would not even talk about Brexit or Fish for the matter.

But this is probably the best way to describe British tactics and honouring old British traditions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaZrAjkBhlM

gkirk wrote:

How did the various EU countries manage to close their borders to the UK? I thought the EU was in control of everything? How dare they be Soverign AND have control.

Right, it is amazing right.

seahawk wrote:

art wrote:

seahawk wrote:

With a no deal scenario there is no reason to honour the WA.

I am not following the machinations closely but I was unaware that the WA contained a clause saying that its validity was sibject to a trade agreement being concluded between the EU and UK.

The notion that the UK can honour or dishonour its agreements as it chooses is an egregious invention of Brexit fanatics.

British politics have long abandoned reason. If there is a no deal, it will be a obvious solution for Boris to tear-up the WA and celebrate the billions of pounds that the evil EU will not get from the UK. If reason would be the driving force, we would not even talk about Brexit or Fish for the matter.

But this is probably the best way to describe British tactics and honouring old British traditions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaZrAjkBhlM

Might be the obvious solution for johnson, but not for diplomacy. He can do whatever he likes, but every action will have a reaction. Not prepared to face the consequences? Don't do it.

gkirk wrote:

How did the various EU countries manage to close their borders to the UK? I thought the EU was in control of everything? How dare they be Soverign AND have control.

There is not a little irony in the fact that pro-lockdown and anti-lockdown sentiment have fallen largely along Remain-Leave lines. Lots of conservative/Tory unrest over the issue, and the Brexiteers are particularly critical of the lockdown strategy.

Maybe this is part of their five dimensional chess to get the hardest possible Brexit in case Boris goes too soft (as many perceive him to have done on lockdown).

art wrote:

I understand that (for reasons unknown to me) Dec 22 has been promoted to shortest day of the year in the northern hemisphere.

It's Dec 21 isn't it?

ElPistolero wrote:

A101 wrote:

Well up thread you suggested that if the UK breeches the WA/NIP it would give the ROI carte blanche “shrugging off its Belfast Agreements obligations” but you haven’t explained how breaching the WA/NIP also breeches the Belfast Agreement,

Breaching the WA/NIP doesn’t have to breach the Belfast Agreement for it to set a precedent of, well, breaching a legally binding treaty. If the UK doesn’t respect it’s agreements, why should anyone else?

A101 wrote:

and at the same time insinuating that if the UK breeches the WA/NIP it gives the ROI justification for Irish Nationalist to return to violence

Nah, RoI won’t support anything - certainly not a return to violence. That’s for the birds. And Brexiteers.

It just doesn’t need to do anything more than treat any post-Brexit violence as a strictly UK problem once the precedent of not respecting international agreements is set by the UK breaching the WA/NIP.

Again, one can’t pick and choose what agreements one is going to adhere to, and expect everyone else to abide by all of their agreements regardless. This is a fairly simple an innocuous principle. A truism, even.

A101 wrote:

And so far no one on here has said how the IMB breeched the Belfast Agreement but you take it as gospel that it does.

It doesn’t need to. Just needs to break international law by breaching a legally-binding treaty. I believe the UK Government admitted as much in Parliament. Did it not?

Anyway, to the extent that Brexit results in an uptick in violence in NI going forward, Brexiteers will need to own that. Brexit was not an Irish nationalist endeavour.

Sounds like you are clutching at straws to justify what you said earlier.

A101 wrote:

I haven’t suggested otherwise all I have suggested is that the EU as a block imports more into the UK than the UK exports to the EU, hence any trade barriers would actually hurt the EU more.

You really don't get it do you. The EU (a block of 27 nations large and small) makes up for a very large percentage of the UK's exports. The UK (four countries ruled by a single government) makes up for a relatively small percentage of the EU's exports.

A101 wrote:

Who said they are aiming for no-deal

People with eyes, ears and the powers of deduction?

A101 wrote:

Who said about trading less, diversify trade is the goal as you are not putting all you eggs in one basket.

Diversifying trade means accepting less money from exports than you otherwise would inorder to sell to different buyers to meet a political end.

A101 wrote:

So it’s just a coincidence that soon after the EU/US trade dispute and that the EU asked AU for leeway in the dispute that negotiations for a trade deal happened soon after the fact

The negotiations have been going on for decades.

A101 wrote:

The amount of bovine excitement on here is astonishing

Indeed.

A101 wrote:

Please do tell me how the “Brussels effect” has changed Australian domestic standards for beef production.

Don’t see any dynamic alignment of AU laws with EU laws on food standards

This was explained to you only a few posts above...

olle wrote:

A side effect is that special London house market has been driven by inflow of small international investors often from Asia. Will this "export" continue if London house market takes a hit?

IMO it will increase. The goal is to make the UK more of a tax haven than it already is and anyway, with all the money being moved out of the City and to the continent, I can't imagine the UK government taking much action to stop inflows from overseas. Putting dirty money into London real estate only becomes more attractive as other hotspots for such investment like Canada and New Zealand tighten up loop holes.

seahawk wrote:

It has "European" in the name, that is enough for Brexiteers to leave it.

I guess the tabloids have made it a dirty word.

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

If UK exports to EU are X billion, and EU to UK are 2 times X billion - then the UK still loses out since 2X billion is only a fraction of the EU total, while X billion is most of the UK total.

The UK is simply A MUCH SMALLER ENTITY THAN THE EU!

Your figures aren't accounting for the value of Sovereignty.

Arion640 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

No deal looking likely - EU needs to move on fishing.

sure, the EU might move on fish, and the UK needs to move on competition and jurisdiction. In addition to giving up the internal market bill. But sure the EU needs to move a little on fish

We have got a point about fishing waters though, no way can the EU be allowed to have control over our fishing waters if we are no longer in the EU, regardless of how much it contributes to our economy.

I'm sure that the Brexiteers will be just as strongly opinionated about Sovereignty over fishing waters when it comes to Scottish Independence.

seahawk wrote:

BMW ready to move car production to Germany and China

https://www.bmwblog.com/2020/12/17/bmw- ... st-brexit/

And notice, they need long term stability, or they will need to move the production. So far the rumoured compromise does not offer this long term stability.

Interesting, I thought that they were already mainly built at Magna Steyr in Graz.

A101 wrote:

Meanwhile the over-fishing in EU waters is set to continue in the face of scientific advice, all the while blaming it on Brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ing-quotas

So is the UK hitting its targets on fishing sustainability?

Tugger wrote:

olle wrote:

How is UK sovereign rule in compliance with the fact that NI will stay in SM, a SM that UK now has no veto or say over in combination with a defacto border in the Irish sea?

If I was the UK, I would not have NI remain in the single market. Hard Brexit is just that. Hard borders in Ireland etc. I get that it breaks other accords too but that is the part of the price. Horrible things, but that is why there is negotiations right now. In for shilling, in for a pound.

Tugg

Why? Most people in NI want to be in the EU and the SM. And most importantly, it keeps the peace and upholds the GFA. Brexiteers don't actually care about NI and polling a year or so ago suggested that - if push came to shove - most brexiteers would even be happy to lose NI in exchange for Brexit. Extremist Brexiteers only want NI as property - they want it to remind them of the greatness of the British Empire. Same with Gibraltar.

Moderate Unionists do care about NI and keeping in as closely aligned to Great Britain....but Boris kicked most of them out of the party last year, so they're not really politically relevant anymore.

sabenapilot wrote:

What is needed is a break up of the few media companies which now effectively control as good as ALL the news and thus set the public debate in Britain.

Freedom of the press is largely pointless if the press is only interested in furthering the interests of their owner.

A101 wrote:

Tugger wrote:

Technically the UK doesn't have to put up any border or controls between NI and Ireland. It is the EU that will do it is as they are the ones most strongly pushing for no access to their market. If the UK does put something up I would guessing it will put up only the softest they need to.

Tugg

Yep hence an electronic border

An electronic border is a fairytail. As has been discussed here......repeatedly.

sabenapilot wrote:

Not to spoil the fun of discussing things that could have been, but both the WA as well as the NIP are firmly accepted by the British government...
The border will thus be down the Irish Sea so NI can remain in the SM.
BoJo signed it away, something no British PM would ever do, dixit his predecessor.
Still can't believe it myself, but yes, he did indeed.

This is the one and only benefit of Boris - deep down he has no principles so he's perfectly fine with getting rid of certain "sacred cows" if he thinks it will benefit him. To be honest, I really don't see the issue with the customs border in the Irish Sea. Yes I'm clearly not a Unionist but it's by far the most practical and painless solution to this particular part of the brexit problem. Long term it essentially means that NI will be getting most goods from ROI which probably means that higher food standards, safety standards and better labour practices will be involved in their production as compared to goods imported from no-deal Britain. Yes it means that NI is part of the SM which it doesn't have any influence over but I don't see how that's worse than Scotland who has representation but not influence in Westminster. It will be beneficial to NI to remain within the SM and anyway, the people of NI voted for it.

gkirk wrote:

How did the various EU countries manage to close their borders to the UK? I thought the EU was in control of everything? How dare they be Soverign AND have control.

On the plus side, I'm sure that Brexiteers will be pleased at the early loss of Freedom Of Movement!

A101 wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

A101 wrote:

Well up thread you suggested that if the UK breeches the WA/NIP it would give the ROI carte blanche “shrugging off its Belfast Agreements obligations” but you haven’t explained how breaching the WA/NIP also breeches the Belfast Agreement,

Breaching the WA/NIP doesn’t have to breach the Belfast Agreement for it to set a precedent of, well, breaching a legally binding treaty. If the UK doesn’t respect it’s agreements, why should anyone else?

A101 wrote:

and at the same time insinuating that if the UK breeches the WA/NIP it gives the ROI justification for Irish Nationalist to return to violence

Nah, RoI won’t support anything - certainly not a return to violence. That’s for the birds. And Brexiteers.

It just doesn’t need to do anything more than treat any post-Brexit violence as a strictly UK problem once the precedent of not respecting international agreements is set by the UK breaching the WA/NIP.

Again, one can’t pick and choose what agreements one is going to adhere to, and expect everyone else to abide by all of their agreements regardless. This is a fairly simple an innocuous principle. A truism, even.

A101 wrote:

And so far no one on here has said how the IMB breeched the Belfast Agreement but you take it as gospel that it does.

It doesn’t need to. Just needs to break international law by breaching a legally-binding treaty. I believe the UK Government admitted as much in Parliament. Did it not?

Anyway, to the extent that Brexit results in an uptick in violence in NI going forward, Brexiteers will need to own that. Brexit was not an Irish nationalist endeavour.

Sounds like you are clutching at straws to justify what you said earlier.

Hmmm? Sounds more like a case of Brexiteer delusions.

Tell us, do you honestly believe that tearing up the WA/NIP - effectively insulting RoI to its fact - will not affect the RoI government’s approach to the UK going forward?

Maybe that yearning for the good old days of empire is skewing Brexiteer perceptions, but I think we can both agree that the time for treating the Irish as inferiors and believing you can insult them with impunity has long passed.

No deal is not going to be only of economic consequence; there will be political/geopolitical consequences as well. This notion that both sides will walk away amicably in the event of a no deal / breaching WA/NIP is a bit far fetched, no?

So the horror show of Brexit continues made far worse by the Covid-19 pandemic taking a bad turn. Seems like a lot of Brits will get coal in their stockings hung up for Santa. Wait until shortages crop up, truckers go on strike over delays at the ports, people out of work from supply problems, growing hate for the UK (in particular the English, less so for the more EU friendly Scots) and the trade issues with NI and ROI make a real cock up. You can't make this stuff up. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

I choose to assume two things: The UK will honor the WA and the EU will make things, in the even of a no deal as easy as possible. In addition NI will be given, as it already has, as much slack as possible with some imports from the UK.

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

because it has nothing to do with Brexit.

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

Curious post.

Not least because when you previously claimed this, it was debunked twice citing the UK government’s own statement on this issue.

Not sure if this is a case of you deliberately lying, or just poor comprehension on your part, so feel free to tell us which of the two it is.

Dutchy wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

because it has nothing to do with Brexit.

The approval of the vaccines may not be a Brexit-issue, but this tendency to persist with falsehoods despite being shown that they’re false does reveal a very Brexit-y trait of some sort.

Not clear yet if it’s rooted in an inherent dishonesty, or a lack of intellectual capability.

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.
!

Because the approval didn't occur because of brexit....this was stated by the regulator specifically at the original press conference. EU legislation was used.
Only the incompetent, brexiteering bozos of government claimed "it was due to brexit", and they were roundly discredited on that one.

Meanwhile, 'they need us more than we need us' nonsense is debunked, less than 24 hours after France blocked all passenger and lorry traffic across the Chanel.
Boris Johnson had a Corba meeting this afternoon and all they could come up with was to call the French President to beg him to lift the blockade asap.
But fear not: there's food for at least a week, possibly 10 days left in the UK.
Seriously... and these clowns were going to have this type of trade arrangement as their baseline outcome of Brexit, after 4 years of planning?

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

Lies, lies, lies, lies and - oh yeah - lies.

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

Lies, lies, lies, lies and - oh yeah - lies.

Next to that, 2 other old Brexit myths were very visually proven wrong today, for everybody in the UK to see and appreciate the ridicule of them:

1- A country can most certainly be part of the EU *and* control its own borders.

2 "We hold all the cards since they need us more than we need them"

"Hello, Monsieur Le Président? Boris on the line here. Could you please reopen your borders? We're facing empty shelves as from this weekend, otherwise!"
'But my dear Boris, just go on a diet over Xmas and on New Year's Day, you'll be able to eat all that fish caught in your sovereign waters again..."
"If you excuse me now, I have to go... diner is ready"

ElPistolero wrote:

Tell us, do you honestly believe that tearing up the WA/NIP - effectively insulting RoI to its fact - will not affect the RoI government’s approach to the UK going forward?

Who’s insulting who?

It’s the ROI/EU that have been dishonest in its campaign on a what is can be put on the frontier via the Belfast Agreement when negotiating the WA, if the UK/EU does not come up with a satisfactory trade deal then its quite prudent of the UK to look after its own interests, and those interest across the entire UK sovereign territory as it stands today. The WA as it stands certainly does not respect UK interest in full.

scbriml wrote:

zkojq wrote:

Nigel's not happy with EU countries having the audacity to control their borders!

I know, it's just shocking, isn't it? Apparently, Farage's dictionary is missing the word irony.

Still, anything that annoys Farage is good in my book.

In addition to the “thugs and bullies” in the EU, the “thugs and bullies” in Hong Kong, Argentina, India, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador ... [insert 30 countries] have banned travel from the UK.

So much “take back control” going on, all thanks to the “covid is overhyped” gang who, unsurprisingly, also happen to be brexiteers. Really giving a masterclass in why we should trust their judgment.

sabenapilot wrote:

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Of course - no one brings up the vaccine was approved in the UK ahead of the EU. Possible because of brexit.

Meanwhile the EU was farting about arguing amongst themselves about it. Germany was not happy!

Lies, lies, lies, lies and - oh yeah - lies.

Next to that, 2 other old Brexit myths were very visually proven wrong today, for everybody in the UK to see and appreciate the ridicule of them:

1- A country can most certainly be part of the EU *and* control its own borders.

2 "We hold all the cards since they need us more than we need them"

"Hello, Monsieur Le Président? Boris on the line here. Could you please reopen your borders? We're facing empty shelves as from this weekend, otherwise!"
'But my dear Boris, just go on a diet over Xmas and on New Year's Day, you'll be able to eat all that fish caught in your sovereign waters again..."
"If you excuse me now, I have to go... diner is ready"

And in the longer term the UK looks for alternate suppliers to fill the supermarket shelves. which other nations will be chomping at the bit to do.

Mmmm classic case of the "Cutting off the nose to spite the face" from the french

A101 wrote:

Who’s insulting who?

It’s the ROI/EU that have been dishonest in its campaign on a what is can be put on the frontier via the Belfast Agreement when negotiating the WA, if the UK/EU does not come up with a satisfactory trade deal then its quite prudent of the UK to look after its own interests, and those interest across the entire UK sovereign territory as it stands today. The WA as it stands certainly does not respect UK interest in full.

When two parties voluntarily sign a deal, and one proceeds to celebrate it and use it as the basis for an election, then tears it up within a year, it’s pretty clear who is insulting whom, don’t you think?

Lest it needs to be said - again - the EU did not force the UK to sign the WA. The UK did that on its own, and ratified it under the same government/Parliament that now wants to get rid of it ( so you can’t even blame May for that).

We’re not in the 1800s anymore, Toto. Can’t push Ireland around anymore. Not least when they have the backing of the EU 27 and the US Administration (and probably many more).

A101 wrote:

And in the longer term the UK looks for alternate suppliers to fill the supermarket shelves. which other nations will be chomping at the bit to do.

Mmmm classic case of the "Cutting off the nose to spite the face" from the french

In the long term, we're all dead.

Wonder how those alternate suppliers are going to deliver to the UK...
by plane? good luck keeping costs low then
by ship from the other end of the world? Now that will be some nice lettuce...
Seriously,

Word had is BoJo just made another proposal to the EU:

the demand to repatriate 60% EU quota of fish from the British EEZ got slashed by (almost half): now 35% is demanded; the EU offers Britain 25%
the new quota would go into effect in 5 years from next year, if the British offer is accepted, iso the 6 asked by the EU.

Ironically, with this quota, British fishermen would not be able to catch more fish in total, since they'd stand to loose access to EU waters where they make about 40% of their catch too of course.

Where's the big win in all of this?
BoJo sometimes makes the weirdest of moves I must say, with the only rational reason behind it, is his own gain.
He needs a deal now, to avoid a massive Brexit-Covid meltdown, so out go all the principles and promisses, just as they went overboard in the WA and the NIP too, in order to win the election and save his own job.

sabenapilot wrote:

A101 wrote:

And in the longer term the UK looks for alternate suppliers to fill the supermarket shelves. which other nations will be chomping at the bit to do.

Mmmm classic case of the "Cutting off the nose to spite the face" from the french

In the long term, we're all dead.

Wonder how those alternate suppliers are going to deliver to the UK...
by plane? good luck keeping costs low then
by ship from the other end of the world? Now that will be some nice lettuce...
Seriously,

Just as they do now all our fresh, frozen, and dried fruit can be replicated and increased domestically, not all imports from the will stop be they can be reduced by a fair margin

A101 wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

A101 wrote:

And in the longer term the UK looks for alternate suppliers to fill the supermarket shelves. which other nations will be chomping at the bit to do.

Mmmm classic case of the "Cutting off the nose to spite the face" from the french

In the long term, we're all dead.

Wonder how those alternate suppliers are going to deliver to the UK...
by plane? good luck keeping costs low then
by ship from the other end of the world? Now that will be some nice lettuce...
Seriously,

Just as they do now all our fresh, frozen, and dried fruit can be replicated and increased domestically, not all imports from the will stop be they can be reduced by a fair margin

Don’t you think you’re reading a bit too much into this?

At its core, it’s about France stopping British truckers until it has measures in place to stop a new variant of COVID from spreading. There’s a reason countries form El Salvador to India have slammed the door shut on the UK, and it isn’t Brexit.

If you’re going to blame anyone, blame your Brexiteer brethren who, unsurprisingly, are also COVID-skeptics and probably contributed to this.

ElPistolero wrote:

Don’t you think you’re reading a bit too much into this?

At its core, it’s about France stopping British truckers until it has measures in place to stop a new variant of COVID from spreading. There’s a reason countries form El Salvador to India have slammed the door shut on the UK, and it isn’t Brexit.

If you’re going to blame anyone, blame your Brexiteer brethren who, unsurprisingly, are also COVID-skeptics and probably contributed to this.

Why isn't France just instituting tests for the truckers like the airlines do for passengers?

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

Don’t you think you’re reading a bit too much into this?

At its core, it’s about France stopping British truckers until it has measures in place to stop a new variant of COVID from spreading. There’s a reason countries form El Salvador to India have slammed the door shut on the UK, and it isn’t Brexit.

If you’re going to blame anyone, blame your Brexiteer brethren who, unsurprisingly, are also COVID-skeptics and probably contributed to this.

Why isn't France just instituting tests for the truckers like the airlines do for passengers?

Tugg

Probably because:
1) Rapid tests have a lot of false negatives
Combined with:
b) this new variant of Covid appears to be extra spready.

ElPistolero wrote:

A101 wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

In the long term, we're all dead.

Wonder how those alternate suppliers are going to deliver to the UK...
by plane? good luck keeping costs low then
by ship from the other end of the world? Now that will be some nice lettuce...
Seriously,

Just as they do now all our fresh, frozen, and dried fruit can be replicated and increased domestically, not all imports from the will stop be they can be reduced by a fair margin

Don’t you think you’re reading a bit too much into this?

At its core, it’s about France stopping British truckers until it has measures in place to stop a new variant of COVID from spreading. There’s a reason countries form El Salvador to India have slammed the door shut on the UK, and it isn’t Brexit.

If you’re going to blame anyone, blame your Brexiteer brethren who, unsurprisingly, are also COVID-skeptics and probably contributed to this.

I understand the reasoning behind what France is doing, but at the end of the day it just goes to show how reliant we are with trade on the continent and that needs to be more balanced.

Most of the electorate don’t care where the goods on the shelf’s come from but they do recognise when someone is trying to take the mickey out of them and will buy accordingly. I know for a fact I try to buy homegrown 1st and every where in the EU last I still get my Tim Tam from my young one from oz as well as vegimite

Tugger wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

Don’t you think you’re reading a bit too much into this?

At its core, it’s about France stopping British truckers until it has measures in place to stop a new variant of COVID from spreading. There’s a reason countries form El Salvador to India have slammed the door shut on the UK, and it isn’t Brexit.

If you’re going to blame anyone, blame your Brexiteer brethren who, unsurprisingly, are also COVID-skeptics and probably contributed to this.

Why isn't France just instituting tests for the truckers like the airlines do for passengers?

Tugg

They are. It takes time to roll out though, and it’s not clear who should be administering it.Rumor has it that France wants truckers to use a particular type of test - a particularly accurate one that isn’t cheap - on a cost recovery basis, which may be part of the issue. But it looks like this has been downgraded to just requiring a negative test result from a test administered in the UK.

Suffice it to say, there’s a lot of work going on to get those trucks running again. Sea freight is moving normally, so this is a tempest in a tea cup. It’s only related to Brexit to the extent that it shows how important the smooth flow of goods by road is for the UK.

A101 wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

A101 wrote:

Just as they do now all our fresh, frozen, and dried fruit can be replicated and increased domestically, not all imports from the will stop be they can be reduced by a fair margin

Don’t you think you’re reading a bit too much into this?

At its core, it’s about France stopping British truckers until it has measures in place to stop a new variant of COVID from spreading. There’s a reason countries form El Salvador to India have slammed the door shut on the UK, and it isn’t Brexit.

If you’re going to blame anyone, blame your Brexiteer brethren who, unsurprisingly, are also COVID-skeptics and probably contributed to this.

I understand the reasoning behind what France is doing, but at the end of the day it just goes to show how reliant we are with trade on the continent and that needs to be more balanced.

Most of the electorate don’t care where the goods on the shelf’s come from but they do recognise when someone is trying to take the mickey out of them and will buy accordingly. I know for a fact I try to buy homegrown 1st and every where in the EU last I still get my Tim Tam from my young one from oz as well as vegimite

Huh? Reliant? Land is one of the fastest and most efficient modes of transporting goods. Would you rather be reliant on modes of transport that are disproportionately affected by the vagaries of weather (air, sea) or piracy (sea)?

On a broader note, how do you intend to reduce your reliance on the EU to a point where it makes a difference? Australia hasn’t been able to shake off its reliance on trade with China despite an FTA with the US. Geography matters that way.

This mutant virus situation is really amazing. It has been hyped up by BoJo and the UK media to justify a colossal U-turn 3 days after having mocked the opposition for wanting to "cancel Christmas", despite everybody being able to see the virus was already out of control in the UK (and not just there). I would bet anything that BoJo didn't realize that the consequence would be borders shutting down (and the French one was far from the first one). Ask scientists, they have barely any data on the new variant (RNA analysis is not something widespread), and saying it is more contagious (but not more deadly) is pretty much a guess, used for politics.

At least having people fear the virus again and act accordingly, and travel less, will be helpful regardless of the risk presented by this mutation...

An innovative and world beating solution has been found to all the lorries stuck on the roads of Kent: give them parking fines!

Insult to injury...

Lorry drivers parked up on roads in Kent slapped with Parking Fines

https://twitter.com/PGMcNamara/status/1 ... 2356555776

You've really got to feel sorry for all the hauliers caught up in this mess.

A101 wrote:

I understand the reasoning behind what France is doing, but at the end of the day it just goes to show how reliant we are with trade on the continent and that needs to be more balanced.

If only Stena Line, DFDS Seaways and Brittany Ferries would start believing in Brexit a bit more and start up services to Newfoundland, Moldova and the Faroe Islands so that lorries could flow freely from one nation to the next - bypassing the blasted EU - and Britain's potential as an outward looking trading nation could truly be unleashed.

You all do understand that Britain will be OK don't you?. It's not suddenly starving and dying. Right? You get that, yes?

I honestly just want all this taunting, weird gloating, misinformation, and stupid brinkmanship that BOTH SIDES ARE DOING too stop.

I really just want both sides here to be shown they are wrong.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

You all do understand that Britain will be OK don't you?. It's not suddenly starving and dying. Right? You get that, yes?

The UK government itself came to the conclusion that a hard Brexit would kill people in the UK. The UK government itself came to the conclusion that a hard Brexit may very well lead to food shortages.

The Imperial College London and the University of Liverpool expect ~1500 death/year from a hard Brexit until 2030.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/190038/ ... ore-heart/

It is one of the few Items the EU and the UK have been in agreement about.

best regards
Thomas

A101 wrote:

Just as they do now all our fresh, frozen, and dried fruit can be replicated and increased domestically, not all imports from the will stop be they can be reduced by a fair margin

You do realise that there is a difference in quality between frozen foods and fresh food? The most important reason why the Dutch export turkeys to the UK is because it's fresh and thus tatst better than the frozen turkey from Brazil. Moreover, setting up your own production will yake years and I doubt that the UK has the proper climate to grow oranges.

Tugger wrote:

You all do understand that Britain will be OK don't you?. It's not suddenly starving and dying. Right? You get that, yes?

Britain isn't self sufficient in food. They rely on imports that arrive by truck. None of that is a secret. Neither is it that a hard brexit will mean customs and border checkpoints on both sides of the border, and that such checks take a long time.

Tugger wrote:

You all do understand that Britain will be OK don't you?. It's not suddenly starving and dying. Right? You get that, yes?

I honestly just want all this taunting, weird gloating, misinformation, and stupid brinkmanship that BOTH SIDES ARE DOING too stop.

I really just want both sides here to be shown they are wrong.

Tugg

I’m surprised you haven’t figured out the obvious yet. Brexit is kind of like abortion or euthanasia - deeply political and heavily polarizing because it speaks directly to people’s sense of values and self. There is no middle ground - no room for pragmatism.

Both sides have no issue with the cost of being wrong, as long as the cost borne by the other side is higher. If you think this is bad, wait till the post deal/no-deal resurgence of the Leave/Remain divide in the UK.

Seems that Gibraltar will become part of the Schengen area with EU customs officials controlling the border. This means that Gibraltar is moving away from the UK. I wonder if anyone in the UK will care (then again, I doubt that this will be reported in the Express as this goes against any benefit of Brexit).

https://english.elpais.com/brexit/2020-12-21/spain-and-uk-in-last-ditch-talks-to-bring-gibraltar-into-schengen-area.html

VSMUT wrote:

Tugger wrote:

You all do understand that Britain will be OK don't you?. It's not suddenly starving and dying. Right? You get that, yes?

Britain isn't self sufficient in food. They rely on imports that arrive by truck. None of that is a secret. Neither is it that a hard brexit will mean customs and border checkpoints on both sides of the border, and that such checks take a long time.

Actually, not all foods is arriving by truck. Boris Johnson was correct when he mentioned that the majority (around 80%) arrives via unaccompanied containers/trailers yesterday. On the Dutch news they interviewed a hauler specialised in poultry transport yesterday. He pointed out that he is prepared for Brexit (using unaccompanied trailer ferries, documentation) and expects that he can manage with only a slight delay after January 1st. However, he also pointed the the limits of transporting via unaccompanied trailer ferries and that they needed the Calais - Dover crossing as a back-up.

A101 wrote:

I know for a fact I try to buy homegrown 1st and every where in the EU last I still get my Tim Tam from my young one from oz as well as vegimite

Two things:
a. anecdotical, as with all anecdotical evidence, it is totally irrelevant.
b. that is very dogmatic: just because it is from the EU, it is last. So you do not care about price or quality, it is just about the place of origine.

Dogmatic in general is associated with religion.

LJ wrote:

Seems that Gibraltar will become part of the Schengen area with EU customs officials controlling the border. This means that Gibraltar is moving away from the UK. I wonder if anyone in the UK will care (then again, I doubt that this will be reported in the Express as this goes against any benefit of Brexit).

https://english.elpais.com/brexit/2020-12-21/spain-and-uk-in-last-ditch-talks-to-bring-gibraltar-into-schengen-area.html

Interesting. So Gibraltar is actually moving closer to the EU because of Brexit. It will remain in de custom union and single market and even in the Schengen area.

Dutchy wrote:

LJ wrote:

Seems that Gibraltar will become part of the Schengen area with EU customs officials controlling the border. This means that Gibraltar is moving away from the UK. I wonder if anyone in the UK will care (then again, I doubt that this will be reported in the Express as this goes against any benefit of Brexit).

https://english.elpais.com/brexit/2020-12-21/spain-and-uk-in-last-ditch-talks-to-bring-gibraltar-into-schengen-area.html

Interesting. So Gibraltar is actually moving closer to the EU because of Brexit. It will remain in de custom union and single market and even in the Schengen area.

If Gib manage to join the Schengen area I understand it means Britons would need a schengen visa to enter their own territory while EU citizen would just need their ID ? That would be brilliant.

VSMUT wrote:

Britain isn't self sufficient in food. It relies on imports that arrive by truck. None of that is a secret.

Indeed, and while none of that is a scandal, it does set the UK straight.
If you can't effectively feed yourself as a nation, it basically puts to rest alll the toity-toity talk of reclaiming full sovereignty, especially if virtually all of the imported food has to come from land crossings with the ROI or sea crossings with France, Belgium and The Netherlands, all of which members of the EU which Brexiteers can't resist insulting and would preferably distroy...
It clearly hadn't crossed the minds of Brexiteers so far because of their obsession, but Brexit Britain is effectively enclaved in the EU just as Switzerland is....
On top of that, it's completely reliant on it for its daily food supplies, just like a toddler is entirely reliant on his mom. How much independance does that thus allow, you think?
Very sad to see it took a new variant of the Covid virus and a surprise general closure of all EU-UK borders to demonstrate the immediate effect of this to ordinary people in the UK who are mostly completely unaware of the real power balance. Some basic information and a view of the UK more in line with reality would have made live much easier for both the Brits and the rest of the Europeans during the past 4 years of tedious negotiations over unicorns which the EU just had to deliver according to those geniuses who now run the show in Westminster.

LJ wrote:

Seems that Gibraltar will become part of the Schengen area with EU customs officials controlling the border. This means that Gibraltar is moving away from the UK. I wonder if anyone in the UK will care (then again, I doubt that this will be reported in the Express as this goes against any benefit of Brexit).
https://english.elpais.com/brexit/2020-12-21/spain-and-uk-in-last-ditch-talks-to-bring-gibraltar-into-schengen-area.html

Thanks for that, LJ.
We've been wondering for some time what was going on there, as nothing was leaking.
Another 'great win' for the UK hen, which obviously had to be hiden from view with carefully timed leaks about a few patrol boats prepared to protect britain's sovereignty at sea.

The Spanish Foreign Ministry revisited the idea, which in practice would mean that the EU’s external borders would be established at Gibraltar’s airport or seaport, but not its land border with Spain. This is the scenario that Gibraltar’s Chief Minister Fabian Picardo discussed on Friday . If talks are successful, Gibraltar would become part of the Schengen Area. The British territory was not a part of this passport-free space even when the UK was still a member of the EU.

I can't but notice this ironic fact:
while Brexit was said to be about taking back control of UK borders, it is moving an awful lot of those external borders with the EU, to inside the UK:
- a custom border for goods down the Irish Sea, cutting off NI from the rest of GB and leaving it behind in the EU's SM.
- a full custom border (for goods as well as for people) at Gibraltar's external borders, effectively cutting it of from the rest of the UK...
- and then of course the trend in scotland where there's now a steady majority for independance...
Brexit is carving up the UK, all for the sake of Little England having the illusion of being sovereign again.

zkojq wrote:

Sounds so easy! Why hasn't this been done already? Could it be that tomatoes don't grow as well in the UK as they do in Southern Spain?

With a little dedication you can grow anything almost everywhere. It won't come cheap though and ultimately it's better to import.

There's also the problem of wanting to have certain products year round. Back in the day you would grow a ton of potatoes to store (which meant that for quite a few months you would be eating old stale potatoes) but now everyone wants new potatoes, tomatoes, carrots, etc. year round. And why wouldn't they? They're bigger, not wrinkled and just taste better.

The logistics of the food chain in fresh vegetables is an extremely complex thing which has been perfected for decades. During the British season Britain exports plenty of potatoes to the likes of Poland, Germany, France, etc. The rest of the year? The UK is a net importer.

The UK can still get early potatoes from the likes of Egypt or Israel (just like other countries in Europe), but what about the rest of the year? What about British exports? Brexit has been fixated about "we'll just get our stuff elsewhere" not realising they're disrupting a carefully built dance of trade movements in which everyone goes in lockstep.