The new @iealondon report opens with a bold claim that I presume will be substantiated later in the report.
iea.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
iea.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
Apparently big egs of EU regulations that are anti-competitive:REACH, MFIDII (cc @SMTuffy), GDPR, Port Services Regulation.
It then acknowledges that EU is exporting its approach globally (without noting this helps reduce barriers to trade) &says UK should lead charge against
It then acknowledges that EU is exporting its approach globally (without noting this helps reduce barriers to trade) &says UK should lead charge against
Which is ... ambitious, what when you consider the relative size of the UK economy vis-a-vis the true regulatory superpowers of EU27, US and one day China.
I'm not convinced using the example of a country that benefited from an agreement (as a first mover) to reduce barriers to trade with the massive regional economy on its doorstep is quite the winning hard Brexit argument they think it is ...
After a long time slating other models for making reasonable assumptions, we get to IEA's model which finds that a 30% reduction in anti-competitive market distortions (still no idea) would be good for loads of countries. Unfortunately the methodology is not currently available.
The big criticism of Shanker's approach (the UK should potential new free trade deals & regulatory reform over frictionless trade with UK's most important trading partner) has always been there's no credible economic analysis to suggest this is a good idea.
There still isn't.
There still isn't.
