Gather UK application to join CPTPP is finally about to be announced, not that it was exactly a secret. Economic value limited given distance and existing UK deals, not a particularly strong or modern agreement in areas of UK strength like services, but...
CPTPP member countries like Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Singapore are likely to be the UK's new allies in trade policy terms, navigating the big 3 of US, EU, China, so in that sense pooling sovereignty in this different 'club' makes sense.
Two cautionary notes - there are question marks about the compatibility between UK law and existing CPTPP text in a few areas including food rules and technical standards (where text was US model), and we can't assume application = automatic membership.
One advantage hopefully - the fact the agreement is already written should allow proper scrutiny of UK interests against provisions. Because we expect changes or derogations for new members to be limited. That's preferable to keeping text secret until too late to discuss.
Expect to hear a lot more about the UK's Indo-Pacific strategy. But is still doesn't substitute for markets closer to home, particularly given regional integration of production. CPTPP opens few new doors to trade, but the politics is more interesting. We shall see.
Oh, final point. There haven't been CPTPP accessions before so we don't know the process or timescales. I am guessing a couple of years more likely than a couple of months, but we shall have to watch this space as they say.
Gut feeling is neither China or US will join CPTPP any time soon. South Korea or Thailand perhaps next from what I'd heard previously.
Reckon @SophyRidgeSky should ask Liz Truss this tomorrow. Which bit of the Pacific should the UK move to...?
I said question marks, Sam says tentative take. Basically this is the big question. Because if there's no policy issues why not join CPTPP. But to be explored. Also, will new members have rights over others joining like existing members?
Fact check: False. Sorry. Minimal economic benefits, given existing deals with so many, distance, low barriers in most, limited text. Now, if you wanted to use CPTPP as the basis for a new services plurilateral, then perhaps...
Basically one possibility, trade policy to get as many deals as possible to get good headlines and get Liz Truss a promotion. Other, trade policy to benefit UK business, starting by lifting US whisky tariffs, reducing EU barriers, then focusing on services. The debate we need.

• • •

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

1 Feb
The first is not geographically possible. The second is limited. The third is a slogan with no meaning.
Realistic CPTPP take. Of marginal economic benefit given that value chains of production remain mostly regional and provisions are limited in services and non-tariff barriers. But these should be our trade allies against the big players.
There is a big gap between the UK government's trade policy priorities and those of business. That's not healthy. Government persuading trade associations to make false boosterist statements to keep a place at the table doesn't help. More on this soon.
Read 4 tweets
1 Feb
My first @ECIPE paper of the year is out today - on how Global Value Chains now dominate trade flows in all sectors and what it means. It is short and accessible, so you can read it all. But there must always be the twitter version, so here goes... ecipe.org/publications/g…
So Global Value Chains is just about cars right? 30,000 components going into one finished car. But actually it is widespread in all sectors, vaccinations represent global chains of activity led by pharma companies, supermarkets, football clubs, app stores, you name it. Image
Why global value chains? Basically companies have the technology and information to combine goods and servives from around the world, and in a competitive global economy they need to optimise this. But management of complexity comes at a cost. Image
Read 8 tweets
1 Feb
Reading this it seems the Scottish fishing fleet are unlikely ever to be happy with any arrangements, which might not be the message they were hoping to pass on. politico.eu/article/scotla…
Extra costs whether for fishing fleets or manufacturers trading with the EU are here to stay. It is unfortunately to say the least that neither major political party is prepared to admit this. reuters.com/article/us-bri…
Some eye watering figures here, such as 43 certified documents per truck going to Ireland. But again Ireland seems to be more prepared with capacity on direct routes to the EU rapidly increasing. The cost of denial in the UK? politico.eu/article/uk-ire…
Read 8 tweets
31 Jan
Thinks. For all the complex analysis of why the UK has done so well on vaccinations to date, could a simpler reason be a PM always in favour of big and quick spending on projects finally finding one where that was the right answer?
Developing the Johnson spending money on vaccinations theme, most people have no idea how resistant the Treasury is to spending money, how many processes are required, how long it takes. Good thing much of the time. But covid vaccination might have needed spend spend spend.
And yes there were good people on the vaccination programme, but we have plenty of skilled people on all manner of subjects, as do other countries. It isn't usually the lack of skills that hold you back.
Read 4 tweets
31 Jan
Headline is definitely, categorically, 100% untrue. I await the report on which the story is based, but the primary reason we do not have a trade deal with the US is because Brexit was delayed. The secondary reason is the US isn't that fond of trade deals. thetimes.co.uk/article/us-tra…
Then of course there is the UK sensitivity on US food. So a trade deal was never going to be easy, plus the US hasn't completed a full new trade deal since 2012.

But also even the Sunday Times story suggests Brexit was also an issue in the US. So let us wait for the report.
But in general the reason we haven't got loads of new trade deals is that trade deals are complicated and take time. But it doesn't help that ministers and trade officials outside the UK are baffled by our Ministers sheer lack of reality on trade issues.
Read 4 tweets
31 Jan
Tariff reduction has not been a route to growth for at least 30 years on account of tariffs no longer being particularly high. We really should be doing better than shallow deals replicating existing deals we have with the same countries.
For a UK Cabinet Minister to say that our EU deal means "we can trade freely" is trade and economic illiteracy. That this comes from the Secretary of State for Trade is appalling. A 19th or 20th century trade policy for a 21st century world.
It should be noted that business shares these concerns about UK trade policy focusing on the wrong things but as previously reported with regard to the EU deal feels they will be frozen out from meetings if they ever say so. Suffice to say this is not a healthy state of affairs.
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!