Feeling like those who jumped on the AstraZeneca bandwagon did so unwisely. Many repeat offenders.

Starts to feel like an entirely normal case of over promising and contractual ambiguity, made toxic by urgency, heightened emotion and regional politics.
You might be surprised how ambiguous government - business contracts can be (and trade agreements for that matter). And therefore that you never want to go to dispute if you can help it.
From a UK point of view it would be wise not to assume the EU is always wrong, and not to make a habit of telling them how wrong they are. Because there's always the risk this will come back to hurt us.
In other words even if the Commission is wrong (and they will be, though the Member State filter can be helpful if slowing) it isn't necessarily in the interests of a smaller neighbour to be the one constantly pointing that out.

• • •

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

29 Jan
Many warning signs should be flashing that Ministers will see one success (so far) and use how they think that worked as a straitjacket for a future economic policy of self sufficiency at odds with how the global economy actually works. When it was (again) global collaboration.
In so far as we can tell so far (and we can't, but let's try) the UK's vaccine success has been based on offering large sums of money to multinationals to set up here, and using trans-national research networks in support. I suspect that model is only marginally transferrable.
Attracting the multinationals who direct global supply chains is important, but there is inevitably global competition and we just opted to put barriers up to a lot of trade multinationals care about. Though less so in pharmaceuticals.
Read 7 tweets
28 Jan
Very good, and what those of us who had worked with contracts largely thought - that the story was rather messier than the 'incompetent Commission brings EU to verge of collapse' suggested by those who always say 'incompetent Commission brings EU to verge of collapse'
Classic EU Commission playbook - threaten those seen to be in some way in breach, in the hope of being able to deliver a better result. Often successful but quite possibly at a cost of both public reputation and business innovation.
As for the UK, its been said plenty of times that there are opportunities in regulatory nimbleness, though they are each marginal economically because it is about doing the same as the EU but quicker. But also, the vulnerability to the big neighbour is obvious.
Read 6 tweets
28 Jan
Small business in particular struggling with new Brexit red tape. Entirely predictable, and a function of a world trade system distorted against smaller traders. Stay with me a short while as Brexit threadmeister and story author @pmdfoster may say... 1/ ft.com/content/13f0f1…
The nub of the issue is the extra costs for most exports, whether this is paperwork or meeting different regulatory requirements. A fixed cost per exported load inevitably adds a higher percentage cost to small than larger business... and they may lack expertise. 2/ Image
You'll note that in the EU, with virtually no paperwork or differing regulations, the costs of exports are similar for smaller and large companies - though even there there is a big company bias, because who can afford to lobby for friendly regulations? 3/
Read 10 tweets
27 Jan
Almost as if the Prime Minister and government haven't been telling the truth about the absence of checks between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northe…
I'm beginning to think a lot more people should have been following trade twitter before December 31 because this was another known issue the UK government chose to ignore.
What you need to know now from trade twitter is that the UK-EU agreement will not be the subject of tweaks or renegotiations until both sides want it to be, and the chances are right now neither want that, so we are stuck with the text we have.
Read 5 tweets
26 Jan
A bit to disentagle here. In principle yes. But there will be some performance on both UK and EU sides. And some healthy competition. That's fine.

More seriously, a UK wanting to show itself a better ally to the US than the EU has to be tempting.

@thomaswright08 @Sime0nStylites
Pretty clearly the current UK government wants to pretend the EU isn't our neighbour and largest trade partner. We want to be a Pacific power. Does the US respond wearily and point us back to Europe or encourage anything the UK can helpfully do? Tricky diplomatic issue.
In trade key UK advisers have long dreamed of the UK leaving the European regulatory area and joining the US in battle against EU regulation. That could be good for US agriculture interests, but bad for existing trade disputes with the EU. Again, how does the US respond?
Read 4 tweets
26 Jan
A milesone, or perhaps millstone, in world trade. It is now 25 years since the start of the first US-EU dispute over food at the WTO. The US asked for consultations over the EU ban of hormone treated beef on 26 January 1996. This issue has never been satisfactorily resolved.
The EU-US disagreement over hormone treated beef goes back even further than formal dispute, to 1981, with the first US retaliation coming in 1989. Although the EU now give a special 'high quality beef' quota as recompense, the disagreement essentially remains live.
Over time US and EU disagreements over food trade policy have grown to include chlorinated chicken, EU geographical indications, and ractopamine in pork. And each side is well backed by domestic interests with large financial stakes, to leave little room for changing policy.
Read 5 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!