1/ Hi. I've negotiated in the WTO, unlike the author of this article who appears to have read the title of some WTO agreements and inferred a system which does not exist.
This article is incorrect on every count.
I am so sick of writing these threads I could vomit.
This article is incorrect on every count.
I am so sick of writing these threads I could vomit.
2/ The SPS and TBT agreements call for technical regulations to be evidence based, to serve a policy objective and to minimally distort trade.
They do NOT prevent, for example, the EU from requiring certification by an EU authority (which, absent an agreement, UKs won't be).
They do NOT prevent, for example, the EU from requiring certification by an EU authority (which, absent an agreement, UKs won't be).
3/ To use a contrived example, the amount of lead paint on a toy shipped to Europe won't change.
However, UK issued documentation stating the toys lead content will no longer be accepted because the regulations require an EU entity issued certificate.
However, UK issued documentation stating the toys lead content will no longer be accepted because the regulations require an EU entity issued certificate.
4/ The WTO cannot prevent this and it certainly cannot force the EU to accept goods bearing a certificate it no longer trusts.
5/ Of the hundreds of complaints raised in the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade or SPS Committee, only a tiny fraction go to dispute resolution, where they tend to go nowhere.
I don't care what your textbook says about how trade law is meant to work. This is how it does.
I don't care what your textbook says about how trade law is meant to work. This is how it does.
6/ The Trade Facilitation Agreement is even more toothless. It's a largely unenforceable best endeavor agreement to encourage some lowest common denominator best practice in goods clearance.
I covered the TFA for Australia guys. I WISH it was some all powerful codex. It's not.
I covered the TFA for Australia guys. I WISH it was some all powerful codex. It's not.
7/ Even if the letter of the WTO rules were 100% on the UKs side (it's not), the very slow and uncertain pace of WTO 'enforcement' renders the whole thing a little moot.
Disputes take years and can't force regulatory changes, only allow tariff retaliation.
Disputes take years and can't force regulatory changes, only allow tariff retaliation.
8/ No one is disputing that eventually, the UK will be able to trade under WTO rules.
The problem with the 'No deal will be fine' rhetoric is that it may convince government and businesses not to put in place the hundreds of preparations required to manage the long transition.
The problem with the 'No deal will be fine' rhetoric is that it may convince government and businesses not to put in place the hundreds of preparations required to manage the long transition.
9/ This all also glosses over the many areas the WTO doesn't even pretend to cover.
Everything from certification for pilots to lisencing for truck drivers and foreign presence for banks is well beyond the WTO Agreements.
Everything from certification for pilots to lisencing for truck drivers and foreign presence for banks is well beyond the WTO Agreements.
10/
Stop saying stupid things.
Stop writing stupid articles.
You can be concerned about the practicalities of Brexit without being a Remainer.
The WTO won't save you. This stuff needs a fix.
Stop saying stupid things.
Stop writing stupid articles.
You can be concerned about the practicalities of Brexit without being a Remainer.
The WTO won't save you. This stuff needs a fix.
Having a million people read your rant gives a man pause for reflection:
