In other words, ask what you *want* from a trade deal, and ask *what you cannot accept* and try to gain as much as possible, while limiting the costs and negative impact
Or - as it otherwise might be called - do good policymaking
Which is not really to be seen here
And then there was a second example
David Frost at the House of Lords European Affairs Committee
"it's a fundamental issue of principle that we do not align with the EU on any areas."
Let that sink in
Even *were* a Swiss-style SPS Agreement *in the UK's interests*, and it is pretty certain it would be - at least short term it would be - it shall be rejected on principle
Or in other words, even a sovereign decision to align, and even if that decision were in the UK's interests, it shall not be done
What please is politics *for* if it is not doing good for people? Helping their livelihoods, their businesses, their wellbeing?
Let them eat sovereignty and non-alignment on principle!
This is not about Brexit or not
This is about basic competence in policymaking, and the not unreasonable need to take practical consequences into account in policymaking
These 2 cases today seem to indicate the UK Government is incapable of that, and that is going to cause real pain to real people
With the rationale that it was about a principle
🤦♂️
/ends
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There's now a kind of briefing war going on between Reed and Tory HQ as to who knew what. @rupertevelyn from ITV has been following it all: itv.com/news/2021-05-0…
Tory HQ knew for *at least a week*
But that's not the strangest thing... the *reaction* is weird. Because this ought to be simple
There are two issues here, and you have to separate them
The rule is clear: Reed did not comply with the rules, cannot legitimately stand, and was disbarred. Done. Clear cut
Twitter is full of wrong takes on Labour's Hartlepool loss
Was Labour too left/not left enough? 🤷♂️
Would Corbyn have done better than Starmer? 🤷♂️
Should Labour have been more/less pro-Brexit? 🤷♂️
Wrong candidate, chosen the wrong way? 🤷♂️
And it needs to take account of the changes in voter behaviour documented by @robfordmancs in Brexitland
It also ought to look at what is happening elsewhere in Europe (sorry, but despite Brexit, what's happening in Britain reminds me of so much from European politics!)
It's like Labour is the SPD 🇩🇪 or PS 🇫🇷
And the Tories Fidesz 🇭🇺 or PiS 🇵🇱
The critique from plenty of people in 🇪🇺 and 🇬🇧 has been 🇪🇺 got its vaccines strategy *wrong*
So if it were wrong, what should it have done better?
First BioNTech/Pfizer orders and approval
🇬🇧 approved 3 weeks before 🇪🇺, and received a solid early order (shipped from Puurs 🇧🇪)
🇬🇧 signed contract with Pfizer/BioNTech 4 months before 🇪🇺, but EIB and 🇩🇪 provided funding, 🇬🇧 govt did not
BioNTech has also stated that more public funding would have not helped it scale up faster
Also looking forward, with Marburg 🇩🇪, Frankfurt 🇩🇪 due on stream in a couple of months, and lipids from Hanau 🇩🇪 (Evonik) to complete the 🇪🇺-based supply chain, this looks solid now
tl;dr: the worst of 🇪🇺's supply woes are behind it now...
1/11
22-29 January was really the low point
22 Jan: AZ scaled back its delivery forecast to the EU for Q1 from 100m to 31m
29 Jan: von der Leyen caused all the controversy by including reference to Art 16 NI Protocol in the transparency mechanism
2/11
But that transparency mechanism was when it all began to turn. For it allowed the EU to explain what vaccines were going where - and also highlight how much of UK's early vaccine success was based on exports from the EU