I think the UK will soon have other issues to worry about than some shortlived technical issue...

Hundreds of UK companies are preparing to switch operations to countries inside the EU in what is threatening to become a dramatic exodus of investment and jobs caused by Brexit. While ministers have tried to dismiss business concerns about the new barriers to trade caused by the UK exit from the single market and customs union, the loss of jobs, investment and tax revenue is fast turning into a full-blown crisis.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... exit-chaos

Olddog wrote:

But we, europeans, totally ignore him.

Do you though? (Genuine question).

A more balanced view from a former head of the UK’s Brexit department.

“ The UK is now a third country. That’s the new reality. The EU will only act in a way that suits the UK if it also suits the EU. Whether pressure points emerge over financial services regulation, over the bureaucracy of border controls, over Gibraltar or other UK Overseas Territories or any other aspect of our complex relationship, the EU will predictably and forcefully pursue its own advantage and that of the 27 member states. That should come as no surprise, not least since the UK will pursue its own interests with exactly the same vigour. But it won’t stop a puzzled sense from some in the UK that somehow the EU is being unfair.”

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/poli ... oronavirus

ElPistolero wrote:

A more balanced view from a former head of the UK’s Brexit department.

“ The UK is now a third country. That’s the new reality. The EU will only act in a way that suits the UK if it also suits the EU. Whether pressure points emerge over financial services regulation, over the bureaucracy of border controls, over Gibraltar or other UK Overseas Territories or any other aspect of our complex relationship, the EU will predictably and forcefully pursue its own advantage and that of the 27 member states. That should come as no surprise, not least since the UK will pursue its own interests with exactly the same vigour. But it won’t stop a puzzled sense from some in the UK that somehow the EU is being unfair.”

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/poli ... oronavirus

Very balanced indeed. The last sentence can become very dangerous.

Still headline news in Ireland and the UK tonight so very much Brexit related . Just because the shame might not be palatable for some does not require censorship. The EU had a very strong line about the importance of the GFA and the vital promise of keeping an open border as part of the Brexit negotiations. Sadly as many are saying tonight in various TV interviews damage has been done and its not going away .


Former PM of Finland tonight :






https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1355 ... 75747?s=21

EU 'fiasco' on N Ireland heaps pressure on Commission

"Over and again, I've repeated to the press the importance and the fragility of peace in Northern Ireland and how we in the EU appreciated and respected the importance of getting the Brexit deal right," a representative from a prominent EU country told me.

"And what do we look like now? This was a disaster. It plays into the hands of EU-haters and UK opponents of the Brexit deal."

Another diplomat questioned whether the team around Commission President Ursula von der Leyen actually understood the Irish protocol in the Brexit deal. "They came in right at the end. Most of the deal was agreed under [former Commission President Jean-Claude] Juncker. Maybe they just don't get it?"

www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-55872763

OA260 wrote:

EU 'fiasco' on N Ireland heaps pressure on Commission

"Over and again, I've repeated to the press the importance and the fragility of peace in Northern Ireland and how we in the EU appreciated and respected the importance of getting the Brexit deal right," a representative from a prominent EU country told me.

"And what do we look like now? This was a disaster. It plays into the hands of EU-haters and UK opponents of the Brexit deal."

Another diplomat questioned whether the team around Commission President Ursula von der Leyen actually understood the Irish protocol in the Brexit deal. "They came in right at the end. Most of the deal was agreed under [former Commission President Jean-Claude] Juncker. Maybe they just don't get it?"

http://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-55872763

They are really seizing the opportunity to distract from the ever more likely conspiracy between the UK government and AZ to fraud the EU out of tens of millions of vaccine doses.

Best regards
Thomas

I am hearing way more EU "nationalism" than anything in these recent posts on the vaccine issue. The EU is being rightly castigated globally for their basically asinine and blatantly political response to a production and contract issue which actually threaten the global cooperative response to the situation.

Oh I know "you were wronged" but even if it were accurate, as they say two wrongs do not make it right. The problem is being resolved. With absolutely NO help from their political response. What is working is reading the contract and negotiating with the supplier and helping with addressing the supplier issue in their EU plants.

This "UK is stealing from us" crap is as bad and purely political as it gets. In fact based on how people here are posting I am completely positive that if it was the UK plant that was having issue the Eu would in no way try to help or allow support from "their" plants. It really is pretty disgusting. And coming from an American who has lived in and with disgust for years now, that's saying something.

The whole UK Brexit thing may be as dumb as it gets and the Brexiteers equally so but Brexit has also brought out the ugly side of a lot of Europeans sadly.
I my opinion.

Tugg

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-5 ... ssion=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

Australia poured cold water on that a couple of years ago. The UK isn’t a pacific nation and there are other Asian nations ahead of it in the line for entry. Has that changed? Admittedly haven’t been paying attention.

“Australia's trade minister Simon Birmingham said that it was unlikely the UK will have any likelihood of joining CPTPP in the short-to-medium term, largely because it is not in the Pacific, making the political nature of the UK's joining difficult.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... hip-2019-2

In any case, it seems to be following the gravity model of trade - ie big benefits for Australia, not much for Canada. So good luck.

“On the one hand, Australia has seen a trade boom with CPTPP partners. In 2018, its trade grew 19.1 percent with Japan, 16.5 percent with Malaysia, and 13.3 percent with Vietnam, all exceeding its overall annual trade increase of 11.6 percent. Its goods exports skyrocketed, increasing 25.2 percent with Japan and 25.6 percent with Malaysia, compared to 14.4 percent overall. On the other hand, for Canada, exports have experienced more measured growth. Ottawa saw modest export growth of about 1 percent with all CPTPP partners, similar to its overall export volume increase.“

https://www.csis.org/analysis/cptpp-alm ... year-later

ElPistolero wrote:

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

Australia poured cold water on that a couple of years ago. The UK isn’t a pacific nation and there are other Asian nations ahead of it in the line for entry. Has that changed? Admittedly haven’t been paying attention.

“Australia's trade minister Simon Birmingham said that it was unlikely the UK will have any likelihood of joining CPTPP in the short-to-medium term, largely because it is not in the Pacific, making the political nature of the UK's joining difficult.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... hip-2019-2

In any case, it seems to be following the gravity model of trade - ie big benefits for Australia, not much for Canada. So good luck.

“On the one hand, Australia has seen a trade boom with CPTPP partners. In 2018, its trade grew 19.1 percent with Japan, 16.5 percent with Malaysia, and 13.3 percent with Vietnam, all exceeding its overall annual trade increase of 11.6 percent. Its goods exports skyrocketed, increasing 25.2 percent with Japan and 25.6 percent with Malaysia, compared to 14.4 percent overall. On the other hand, for Canada, exports have experienced more measured growth. Ottawa saw modest export growth of about 1 percent with all CPTPP partners, similar to its overall export volume increase.“

https://www.csis.org/analysis/cptpp-alm ... year-later

I guess we’ll all have to wait and see what happens.

Vaccine discussion has moved. There is a dedicated thread for that. Please stay on topic. No further Vaccine discussion. Please flag Vaccine posts.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1457267

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

I don't know if there is much to being part of that agreement while being on the other side of the planet, but if there is, maybe the EU could join too ? That would be kind of ironic.

Aesma wrote:

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

I don't know if there is much to being part of that agreement while being on the other side of the planet, but if there is, maybe the EU could join too ? That would be kind of ironic.

The EU doesn't really need to: it either has a FTA or is in advanced stages of negotiating one with each of the individual participating countries already.
FTAs that are bespoke and in which it plays the full advantage of it's own weight as the senior partner each time.

The UK by contrast is - at best - going to have to sign on the dotted line on an existing multilateral agreement, as the junior partner... how is that for 'taking back control'?
It's just a way to get some access to a whole bunch of countries at the same time quickly and it's definitely better than not having access any longer after it dropped out of the EU, but its less good than negotiating individual FTAs with each country separatly.
It's a sign the UK is overwhelmed by the task of reproducing the vast portfolio of FTAs the EU gave them access to and is accepting suboptimal off the shelf deals for as long they come fast.

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

ok, trading in one trading block for another. Accounting for 500.000.000people with 13% of global trade, the EU has 16% with 450.000.000. Not to mention, if the UK would join, it will be thousands of miles away from the nearest member.

From the article:

In practice, however, the short-terms gains for households and business would be limited. The UK already has trade deals with seven of the 11 nations - and is pursuing two more. In total, CPTPP nations account for less than 10% of UK exports, a fraction of what goes to the EU.

But congrats with applying to it, a real piece of positive news.

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

It will be interesting to see if they get accepted and what the rules are . A large enough trading bloc with certain benefits for either side . Maybe more for certain members . The difference in rule taking etc..


UK’s CPTPP Inclusion Would Be A Win For Exporters

Sunday, 31 January 2021, 4:39 pm

The UK’s addition to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) would reduce barriers and give exporters a much-needed boost in the wake of Covid-19, BusinessNZ Network Chief Executive Kirk Hope says.

"I expect to see significant gains in both economies if the UK is able to join.

www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU2101/S00197/u ... orters.htm

Any deal is a win the UK right now, given the position it is in.
However, why not go the bilateral bespoke way with each of these countries individually, but opt for an off the shelf package deal instead?
It's making a mockery of the claim of sovereignty and the desire to take back control in fact...
Remember this is the exact same deal D.Trump blew up, exactly for the reasons Brexiteers left the EU for...
How ironic.

sabenapilot wrote:

Any deal is a win the UK right now, given the position it is in.
However, why not go the bilateral bespoke way with each of these countries individually, but opt for an off the shelf package deal instead?
It's making a mockery of the claim of sovereignty and the desire to take back control in fact...
Remember this is the exact same deal D.Trump blew up, exactly for the reasons Brexiteers left the EU for...
How ironic.

So are you saying that they also have to sign up to freedom of movement , stricter regulations and the same rules that are required for EU membership? I cant find a list of those requirements . Do you have a link ?

You mean the FoM that Australia and New-Zealand rejected when UK suggested that between commonwealth countries last year ?

OA260 wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

Any deal is a win the UK right now, given the position it is in.
However, why not go the bilateral bespoke way with each of these countries individually, but opt for an off the shelf package deal instead?
It's making a mockery of the claim of sovereignty and the desire to take back control in fact...
Remember this is the exact same deal D.Trump blew up, exactly for the reasons Brexiteers left the EU for...
How ironic.

So are you saying that they also have to sign up to freedom of movement , stricter regulations and the same rules that are required for EU membership? I cant find a list of those requirements . Do you have a link ?

Are you saying that if the UK signs up for this, it has no bearing on the sovereignty of the UK?

Dutchy wrote:

OA260 wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

Any deal is a win the UK right now, given the position it is in.
However, why not go the bilateral bespoke way with each of these countries individually, but opt for an off the shelf package deal instead?
It's making a mockery of the claim of sovereignty and the desire to take back control in fact...
Remember this is the exact same deal D.Trump blew up, exactly for the reasons Brexiteers left the EU for...
How ironic.

So are you saying that they also have to sign up to freedom of movement , stricter regulations and the same rules that are required for EU membership? I cant find a list of those requirements . Do you have a link ?

Are you saying that if the UK signs up for this, it has no bearing on the sovereignty of the UK?

Thats what Im asking . Do you know the full rules and what it means for the UK as opposed to rules for EU membership . What would be the key differences and as Sabenapilot has stated and suggested it would be swapping EU membership for more of the same . But what are the rules ? Maybe Sabenapilot will come back to tell me because I genuinely cant find those . Does anyone have a link ?

And another sop story by a Brexiteer business owner.

'I made a mistake voting for Brexit' says business owner as stock sits waiting to leave warehouse

And the reason why she voted Brexit:

She admits to having voted ‘leave’ because she was sick of employment and health and safety rules originating from Brussels.

There you go, here is a Brexiteer wanting to lower the standards for British workers. She admitted she shot herself in the foot, perhaps she will at least get her wish for lower standards granted by the Torry government.

Dutchy wrote:

And another sop story by a Brexiteer business owner.

'I made a mistake voting for Brexit' says business owner as stock sits waiting to leave warehouse

And the reason why she voted Brexit:

She admits to having voted ‘leave’ because she was sick of employment and health and safety rules originating from Brussels.

There you go, here is a Brexiteer wanting to lower the standards for British workers. She admitted she shot herself in the foot, perhaps she will at least get her wish for lower standards granted by the Torry government.

Would the UK have to sign up to such tight regulations when and if they join the CPTPP ? We still have not got to the answers about what part of EU membership would be the same as the UK joining the CPTPP. Maybe this lady above might find it easier to trade with CPTPP members if the rules were easier?

Well I am glad that the UK is going for CFTPP. It will be a nice distraction for the EU to read the british press bashing the members of that partnership every time you don't get what you want. And good luck with China !

Olddog wrote:

Well I am glad that the UK is going for CFTPP. It will be a nice distraction for the EU to read the british press bashing the members of that partnership every time you don't get what you want. And good luck with China !

Do the EU shut down deals with China and Turkey for that matter on human rights? The so called hardline Brexiteers were seemingly bashing the EU over sovereignty but what bit of sovereignty would the UK have to give up to join CPTPP?

ElPistolero wrote:

noviorbis77 wrote:

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/business-55871373?__twitter_impression=true

Positive news here for the UK post Brexit.

Australia poured cold water on that a couple of years ago. The UK isn’t a pacific nation and there are other Asian nations ahead of it in the line for entry. Has that changed? Admittedly haven’t been paying attention.

“Australia's trade minister Simon Birmingham said that it was unlikely the UK will have any likelihood of joining CPTPP in the short-to-medium term, largely because it is not in the Pacific, making the political nature of the UK's joining difficult.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... hip-2019-2

In any case, it seems to be following the gravity model of trade - ie big benefits for Australia, not much for Canada. So good luck.

“On the one hand, Australia has seen a trade boom with CPTPP partners. In 2018, its trade grew 19.1 percent with Japan, 16.5 percent with Malaysia, and 13.3 percent with Vietnam, all exceeding its overall annual trade increase of 11.6 percent. Its goods exports skyrocketed, increasing 25.2 percent with Japan and 25.6 percent with Malaysia, compared to 14.4 percent overall. On the other hand, for Canada, exports have experienced more measured growth. Ottawa saw modest export growth of about 1 percent with all CPTPP partners, similar to its overall export volume increase.“

https://www.csis.org/analysis/cptpp-alm ... year-later

The point was made on UK TV this morning that we already have trade deals in some form with many of these countries - examples being new trade deals with Australia and New Zealand should be signed in the coming months.

What should the EU care about the share of the sovereignty that the UK is willing or not to concede with CFTPP. You left, whatever you do is your problem/choice. The EU will decide what it will have to do given the circumstances.

Olddog wrote:

What should the EU care about the share of the sovereignty that the UK is willing or not to concede with CFTPP. You left, whatever you do is your problem/choice. The EU will decide what it will have to do given the circumstances.

But it was claimed that joining the CPTPP would mean more of the same and that it would be ironic after leaving the EU to sign up to such a pact but no one seems to be able to provide links to the rules and comparing like for like to back up those claims. So do we take it that those claims were false?

BTW its CPTPP and not CFTPP . Just to give it the correct name.

By the way, it was reported a while ago that EU CPTPP actualy also starts to get closer relations ships.

It seems like in the future it will be NAFTA, EU and CPTPP as the three major trading blocks and they seems to get closer relations over time.

These 3 blocks seems increasingly controlling world trade, and it currently after Trump and China domination it seems biggest rules.

--------------------
EU invited to join CPTPP as rug pulled from under Boris Johnson's Brexit dream

THE EU has been invited to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) - the free trade area with 11 countries the UK is hoping to enter - by Australian Senator Eric Abetz.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13839 ... -biden-spt

Assuming that we are accepted there will be terms.

So far we have no idea what those terms will be. We also have no idea of the pros and cons.

bennett123 wrote:

Assuming that we are accepted there will be terms.

So far we have no idea what those terms will be. We also have no idea of the pros and cons.

The terms will be depending of what you can offer for "home" market and how desperate you are to export.

Same rules for everyone.

So are you saying the terms will depend on what we offer and how much we need a deal or will it be the same terms for all members.

bennett123 wrote:

So are you saying the terms will depend on what we offer and how much we need a deal or will it be the same terms for all members.

I have been living in South america and saw the effect of Trump coming in power and leaving this trade organisation.

As I remember the main reason for USA to leave was because it was giving advantages to exporters of basic products but did not open up enough the markets for services an more advanced products. Therefore USA thought it was too much in disadvantage for them and backed out.

By accident similar discussion like Brexit conversations at the time UK complaining about eastern Europe and products be in favor compared to services.

If you look at Chile, Peru, Australia etc many of them have in common big exporters of mining products.

At the time China was main importer beside USA and EU. China now play a hard ball game with those special Australia even if they are member.

Sounds familiar?

Not sure that this is going to work for the UK.

Well the UK lowered Commonwealth trade to be closer and in compliance with EU rules / regulations etc. most of the former "empire" moved on and made new friends. If the UK is now attempting to renew friendships after being a member of a major trading group forcing all manner of rules and regs on smaller nations, do they expect them to be excited with welcome mats all over the place? Maybe now they will understand the complaint smaller nations have about heavy handed tactics now that it is applied to them, was what happened recently really a mistake by a desk jockey, conspiracy theorist say hhmmmm.....

bennett123 wrote:

Not sure that this is going to work for the UK.

Well it wont if as has been claimed its swapping an EU membership type system and rules for the CPTPP one. Although this has not yet been backed up by any facts to support it.

We will certainly not have same rules, but on the other hand CFTTP has nothing like the advantages of the SM....
And the Teething problems are not temporary it is a permanent feature

CPTPP despite its name is a very basic FTA, there are almost no rules, there is some recognition of standards to lower trade barriers, but mostly it's just a way to lower tariffs beyond most favored nation.

What I don't get is that the UK was an EU member for decades, and a big one at that. It was also a major proponent of all things free market/free trade, and pushed for Eastern European countries joining the EU for that reason.

So why didn't the UK push for the EU to make free trade deals with Canada, Australia and New Zealand (at least) decades ago ?

Just a reminder..

When posting links, please provide a brief description of the link. Links are always required to be accompanied by comments in your own words.

✈️ atcsundevil

OA260 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

And another sop story by a Brexiteer business owner.

'I made a mistake voting for Brexit' says business owner as stock sits waiting to leave warehouse

And the reason why she voted Brexit:

She admits to having voted ‘leave’ because she was sick of employment and health and safety rules originating from Brussels.

There you go, here is a Brexiteer wanting to lower the standards for British workers. She admitted she shot herself in the foot, perhaps she will at least get her wish for lower standards granted by the Torry government.

Would the UK have to sign up to such tight regulations when and if they join the CPTPP ? We still have not got to the answers about what part of EU membership would be the same as the UK joining the CPTPP. Maybe this lady above might find it easier to trade with CPTPP members if the rules were easier?

That might be, but the question is, why hasn't she done it already? When the UK was an EU-member, she could have benefited from many trade deals the EU has. So does she has a product which is compatative in the CPTPP region or not? Competitive with the added cost of shipping and time.

OA260 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Not sure that this is going to work for the UK.

Well it wont if as has been claimed its swapping an EU membership type system and rules for the CPTPP one. Although this has not yet been backed up by any facts to support it.

If you are referring to me, let me clear this misunderstanding from your mind.
I haven't meant to say the UK is swapping EU membership with something similar.
I said that one of the key reasons for leaving the EU was said to be the ability to strike own FTAs.
No more existing multilateral agreements which involved constants tradeoffs, only bilateral negotiations in which the own interests could be fully protected.
Yet here CPTPP is exactly the opposite of that: It's an existing multilateral framework, where the UK can simply sign on the dotted line.
I find that very ironic, although not surprising given that the trade benefits of Brexit have always been a moving goalpost really.
From: "we'll have a set of countries all lined up to sign bilaterals with us the minute after Brexit", over "we'll focus on a FTA with the USA first which will replicate and exceed the benefits of our SM membership, and fast", to "we'll do some big bespoke deals with key allies across the globe" and now finally just signing on the dotted line of an already existing FTA from a block of countries half across the globe.
Pretty meager outcome really, especially since most of them already have a bilateral with the EU (which the UK can still piggy back on thanks to the WA and the Christmas deal), but I notice the formal demand will come on the first anniversary of Brexit. Did the government need something to show on that date maybe?
Brexit has been much spin and no delivery so far...

sabenapilot wrote:

OA260 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Not sure that this is going to work for the UK.

Well it wont if as has been claimed its swapping an EU membership type system and rules for the CPTPP one. Although this has not yet been backed up by any facts to support it.

If you are referring to me, let me clear this misunderstanding from your mind.
I haven't meant to say the UK is swapping EU membership with something similar.
I said that one of the key reasons for leaving the EU was said to be the ability to strike own FTAs.
No more existing multilateral agreements which involved constants tradeoffs, only bilateral negotiations in which the own interests could be fully protected.
Yet here CPTPP is exactly the opposite of that: It's an existing multilateral framework, where the UK can simply sign on the dotted line.
I find that very ironic, although not surprising given that the trade benefits of Brexit have always been a moving goalpost really.
From: "we'll have a set of countries all lined up to sign bilaterals with us the minute after Brexit", over "we'll focus on a FTA with the USA first which will replicate and exceed the benefits of our SM membership, and fast", to "we'll do some big bespoke deals with key allies across the globe" and now finally just signing on the dotted line of an already existing FTA from a block of countries half across the globe.
Pretty meager outcome really, especially since most of them already have a bilateral with the EU (which the UK can still piggy back on thanks to the WA and the Christmas deal), but I notice the formal demand will come on the first anniversary of Brexit. Did the government need something to show on that date maybe?
Brexit has been much spin and no delivery so far...

Trade deals are not static things and why would the UK or any other nation for that matter not sign up to something that suited it at the current time. One might argue that the benefits of the CPTPP have a lot of benefits without the many rules and restrictions that the EU membership has. Its not as is if its a small trading bloc by any means. As for goal posts shifting the EU has never done that The UK has already from what I have read done various bilateral agreements with other mid/smaller countries. The UK will do what suits it as will the EU thats called business.

According to the Express article above the EU wouldn't comply with CPTPP because it protects its agriculture. So I guess the UK will throw its agriculture away to join.

Aesma wrote:

According to the Express article above the EU wouldn't comply with CPTPP because it protects its agriculture. So I guess the UK will throw its agriculture away to join.

Well that very much depends on if and what is negotiated. So not a given by any means.

OA260 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

According to the Express article above the EU wouldn't comply with CPTPP because it protects its agriculture. So I guess the UK will throw its agriculture away to join.

Well that very much depends on if and what is negotiated. So not a given by any means.

There's not much to negotiate, OA260;
this deal is negotiated and done a long time ago already; the UK can simply apply to join it and sign on the dotted line if it is accepted.

Which is why it would make far more sense to try to negotiate bilataral deals with each of the participating countries separately.
However, I understand the UK is both pressured on time to come up with something fast, and is obviously also short on resources and skills to conduct tens of these bilateral trade negotiations at the same time, so it simply settles for a package deal off the shelf, even if it will have to accept suboptimal conditions with some nasty conditions for domestic sectors, like for instance British agriculture, which is exactly why the EU has refused to join in the first place despite being invited and went the bilateral way with each of the countries of this agreement instead. µ

UK Steel is urging the UK government to renegotiate part of the TCA as the quota for certain steel products is probably going to be run out by the end of Q1 2021 (and thus their steel becomes less competitive for EU buyers). When the quota has run out, a 25% tariff will apply on the relevant steel products when exported to the EU.

BTW didn't Boris Johnson say "No quotas and no tariffs" when he sold the TCA in his press briefing last December?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-55845067

sabenapilot wrote:

OA260 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

According to the Express article above the EU wouldn't comply with CPTPP because it protects its agriculture. So I guess the UK will throw its agriculture away to join.

Well that very much depends on if and what is negotiated. So not a given by any means.

There's not much to negotiate, OA260;
this deal is negotiated and done a long time ago already; the UK can simply apply to join it and sign on the dotted line if it is accepted.

Which is why it would make far more sense to try to negotiate bilataral deals with each of the participating countries separately.
However, I understand the UK is both pressured on time to come up with something fast, and is obviously also short on resources and skills to conduct tens of these bilateral trade negotiations at the same time, so it simply settles for a package deal off the shelf, even if it will have to accept suboptimal conditions with some nasty conditions for domestic sectors, like for instance British agriculture, which is exactly why the EU has refused to join in the first place despite being invited and went the bilateral way with each of the countries of this agreement instead. µ

But we dont know that because negotiations have not taken place. The EU said the UK could not have certain things but in the end deals were done and things that were once said red lines and impossible were negotiated. As we saw no one gets what they all want in a trade deal thats business. Its not rocket science. There well maybe clauses that are put in to take into account the geographic location and situation. Things maybe bartered either side. That certainly would not come as a surprise to even the most basic of business understanding.

LJ wrote:

UK Steel is urging the UK government to renegotiate part of the TCA as the quota for certain steel products is probably going to be run out by the end of Q1 2021 (and thus their steel becomes less competitive for EU buyers). When the quota has run out, a 25% tariff will apply on the relevant steel products when exported to the EU.

BTW didn't Boris Johnson say "No quotas and no tariffs" when he sold the TCA in his press briefing last December?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-55845067

Uh oh. I hadn't heard about this. From what I can find the steel is really made in the UK (from imported ore and coal) so the problem isn't the origin of it.

OA260 wrote:

sabenapilot wrote:

OA260 wrote:

Well that very much depends on if and what is negotiated. So not a given by any means.

There's not much to negotiate, OA260;
this deal is negotiated and done a long time ago already; the UK can simply apply to join it and sign on the dotted line if it is accepted.

Which is why it would make far more sense to try to negotiate bilataral deals with each of the participating countries separately.
However, I understand the UK is both pressured on time to come up with something fast, and is obviously also short on resources and skills to conduct tens of these bilateral trade negotiations at the same time, so it simply settles for a package deal off the shelf, even if it will have to accept suboptimal conditions with some nasty conditions for domestic sectors, like for instance British agriculture, which is exactly why the EU has refused to join in the first place despite being invited and went the bilateral way with each of the countries of this agreement instead. µ

But we dont know that because negotiations have not taken place. The EU said the UK could not have certain things but in the end deals were done and things that were once said red lines and impossible were negotiated. As we saw no one gets what they all want in a trade deal thats business. Its not rocket science. There well maybe clauses that are put in to take into account the geographic location and situation. Things maybe bartered either side. That certainly would not come as a surprise to even the most basic of business understanding.

But the UK isn't negotiating, the UK is joining a trade deal that is already in place, fully negotiated.