This is mostly about the difference between being in a single market and customs union, and a 'free trade agreement', plus the fact UK-EU trade is set up for the first and went into the second under-prepared. theguardian.com/politics/2021/…
So you can (and should) be in a permanent negotiation with major trade partners to ease trade issues, but that ultimately can't return you to the trade flows we had before December 31 under this structure of relations, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise.
Nor can we make up for the increase in trade barriers to the EU with agreements with other countries, for the rise in barriers to trade in moving from SM / CU to FTA is much greater than the easing of trade barriers between FTA and WTO.
As I might have mentioned a few times the UK government has moved against free trade, and virtually all economists will agree that this will have a hit on trade flows and GDP. We don't know how much, because no country has done what the UK has in recent history.
Question, why are Free Trade Agreements good enough for trade in North America and South / East Asia, but not Europe? Because 30-odd countries have chosen deeper relations, so the UK is relatively worse-off. You can't pick your neighbours (though US or China equally tricky ones).
Question, will the difficulties in UK-EU trade stabilise? Yes, probably, but at a lower level (how much we don't know), higher cost, and higher risk of disruption. But we're entering a period of economic adjustment to this which could last a few years.
Question, what could government do to facilitate the transition in UK-EU trade? Appoint a dedicated Minister, be honest about the changes, listen to business, invest in extra resources in Brussels, and seek to negotiate some of the worst problems away.
Question, will 23 virtual blockchain enabled, red tape busting, crypotcurrency powered, tax eliminating, Freeports, named after prominent politicians who claimed Brexit equals free trade, help?

No.
Question, will pretending the EU doesn't exist or focusing on ensuring a future government will find it harder to change trade relationships with the EU help?

What do you think? But this doesn't exactly scream "mature post-Brexit government"

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David Henig

David Henig Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DavidHenigUK

12 Jan
Ten days in and it seems the government's post-Brexit economic policy is to ignore reality, priority and choice, and just claim with no evidence that everything is going to be great. This, needless to say, is dangerous territory. Exhibit 1... 1/ ft.com/content/cdaf23…
Here's a good example of what is currently passing for UK economic policy. The theory the UK can be 'nimble' in regulations has been present since 2016. In 5 years nobody has found the detail. We presume others might have a similar idea. And trade needs regulations to align 2/ Image
There will of course always be someone to blame. Usually the EU. Because they do indeed want to compete with the UK. This is not exactly surprising. A vague UK idea versus the bigger next door market (or indeed a big one over the pond). Who's going to win? 3/ Image
Read 12 tweets
11 Jan
One thing new here I think - a new unilateral preferences scheme later in the year claimed to give developing countries better access to the UK market.

Unfortunately rather lost amongst among excitable but often meaningless or misleading platitude.
For example "We will champion high environmental and animal welfare standards in a science-led approach…" is a meaningless mash-up of trade words. Kind of curious about bringing together countries for some very worthy activities. How? Image
And above all that tricky one that no Minister is going to admit but is going to undermine their argument. If free trade brings opportunity and jobs, then the UK in significantly raising trade barriers must be reducing both. Awkward.
Read 4 tweets
11 Jan
Today, in "predicted consequences of Brexit turn out to be right", our first entry is some shortages of fresh fruit and veg... dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9…
Our second entry in "predicted consequences of Brexit turn out to be right" is potential losses of financial services both to the EU and US. This article usefully also pointing out the City will have to change / evolve / innovate.

ft.com/content/d8b906…
So far the impacts of Brexit have been entirely predictable to anyone with a good understanding of economics and trade who isn't also blinded by visceral anti-EU hostility. As per previously, how the UK economy adapts to trade barriers is key, not denying their existence.
Read 10 tweets
9 Jan
Reading of the difficulties around trade from Britain to Northern Ireland and EU I am reminded of US trade colleagues before 2016 complaining about EU customs difficulties. And an MEP from before the single market saying half their work was trying to resolve trade issues.
I'm also reminded that saying the EU was a difficult market to trade with was regarded as Euroscepticism in 2016 but being an EU lover in 2020. I do wonder how much damage will have caused by the UK government only listening to those 'experts' claiming improbable solutions.
Ask any of the EUs neighbours - it is a difficult market to do business with. But it is large and nearby, so you have to trade with it. And by the way more distant large markets aren't that easy either.
Read 4 tweets
8 Jan
How to make sense of the increasing number of UK-EU trade disruption stories?

In short - outside of a single market product checks and people working restrictions are inevitable. And outside a customs union you will have tariffs and / or rules of origin.

Detail ---> 1/
The UK decided to leave a Customs Union. Within that Customs Union, no tariffs, just a common external tariff or preferential rates for bilateral deals or developing countries. Hence, distribution hubs in one country for all make a lot of sense. 2/
Outside a Customs Union our choice was tariffs under WTO rules or remove them subject to rules of origin with a deal. We chose the latter, but it means we can't just import from China, rebadge, and get zero tariffs from the EU. As we could until December 31. 3/
Read 19 tweets
7 Jan
An "instinctive free trader" overseeing the largest rise in trade barriers in living memory, and "pro-migration at heart" while dramatically curtailing these rights in Europe. So could the main similarity with Trump be power for its own sake on this reading?
The problem with the reading of Johnson as a socially liberal politician is it isn't remotely the policy he's putting into practice, whatever the rhetoric. He isn't much bothered by the constitution or parliamentary scrutiny. But of course right now Trump association is toxic.
The fair assessment of Johnson and Trump is there are plenty of populist similarities, but ultimately Johnson is cleverer, marginally less shameless, and certainly less incendiary when it comes to open racists. And that matters a lot.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!