Morning. In broad terms it seems the government is announcing today that it hasn't quite finalised a trade deal with Australia.
This is regrettably normal in global trade policy terms, where the same deal can be announced several times.
Indeed one of the reasons why so many have lost faith in trade deals is the repeated announcement of completed deals of very limited benefit. And so the UK government has chosen to follow that rather dismal path.
We're not expecting too many details today about what has been agreed beyond that we know already such as tariff elimination, though from the Australian press it seems generous terms on people movement might be new.
As we might now realise from the rushed agreements with the EU, the details of trade deals are rather important. So if we don't see these today regarding the Australia deal there isn't a lot we can honestly say about whether this is a good or bad deal.
But again in broad terms, expect zero overall economic impact (even the pessimistic version of the official impact assessment makes assumptions never met in a trade deal) but some sectoral impact eg farming. And big headlines.
Remember most trade takes place in regional value chains and the UK and Australia being in different regions are typically in different corporate worlds. There will be some new opportunities from so e removal of barriers - but most likely not many.
Oh and for the slow class that keeps talking of current government policy being free trade - global tariffs are fairly insignificant for countries like Australia and UK, so their removal has similarly insignificant effects on eg prices. You may get slightly wider choice.
Huge difference between a single market, as Australia has with New Zealand or we used to have with the EU, and a tariff reducing agreement. The first is close to free trade, the second is still a world of trade barriers.
Also worth saying that free trade always comes with conditions, the bit you never hear from its self proclaimed cheerleaders. Those conditions always include perceived fairness balanced against outright protectionism. That's the small print we probably won't see today.
Watching the UK-Australia discussion evolve this morning, important we add that the estimated 0.02% UK GDP gain is based on heroic assumptions not even close to being achieved in any previous deal. 0.00% is a more realistic estimate.
Second important note - for Australia this is about at least equalising tariff free access with New Zealand to the UK - at the lowest possible cost. Aus tariff free WTO quotas on lamb and beef were very low. Job therefore done.
Ah yes, an Australia trade deal as a gateway to half a billion people in the CPTPP. All but 30 million of whom we'll already have bilateral deals with. Oh, and they're in Malaysia and Brunei, who haven't in fact ratified CPTPP and may never do so.
Look out for a CPTPP impact assessment coming soon - I would be surprised if the forecast GDP gain is more than 0.1%.
So far the details of the UK-Australia trade deal announced today have been nothing we didn't already know. Hence the relatively low key announcement. There had to be an announcement as the Australian PM was here. But it doesn't feel like negotiations are in fact complete.
Also watch out for the opportunity cost of new trade deals. Australia got their top asks from the UK - agriculture. The UK didn't have a top ask of Australia, hence why none is being flagged. If we find one in the future, too late, we already gave them what they wanted.
Incidentally the UK-Australia deal also isn't the first we have negotiated from scratch since Brexit. The text of our deal with EFTA countries was also created from scratch as we couldn't replicate the previous situation. That was completed last week.
Those with long memories may also recall that the UK government claimed last year that the Japan deal was "the UK’s first major trade deal as an independent trading nation" (it wasn't, it was largely based on the EU text).
Anyway, back to the new first UK trade deal...
So, to summarise, this Australia deal is the second time the UK government has claimed a first post-Brexit trade deal, neither was true as that was EFTA, the economic value is insignificant, and the deal probably isn't quite finished anyway. Apart from that...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The biggest trade news of the day (also the biggest in the UK given Airbus presence here). Interestingly not announced at the G7 but rather in Brussels (don't tell me, they were still negotiating... these decisions are made for a reason) ft.com/content/985ae1…
Context - US want to remove trade irritants with the EU to focus on China. For both EU and US there is a domestic economic focus in which China is now the enemy. But then there's a globally interlinked economy. Much to piece together. politico.eu/article/trade-…
Looking globally the UK's deal with Australia is small beer. Protectionist stances of the US and EU (towards China) and the UK (towards the EU) are more worrying. But maybe also less effective given the realities of modern global trade.
Not it seems a particularly productive G7 summit. That's in line with most of them to be honest. But also a lost opportunity for the Global Britain project. As has been stated so frequently there is a large chasm between UK domestic politics / media and global realities.
Global Britain is right now destined to be seen as a domestic media management project (look at how impressive we are) more than a realistic project to put the UK on a world stage (which would involve money, serious negotiation etc).
A UK-Australia trade deal doesn't change that given economic and trade insignificance. Unless taking more lamb and beef from Australia, and a few pennies off a bottle of wine, is the new definition of Global Britain.
I think a little comparison between Gibraltar and Northern Ireland may be in order, because both were widely predicted as Brexit flashpoints, but so far only one of them has been. The reasons, I believe, come down to confidence and leadership more than history. 1/n
Obviously there are similarities and differences between Gibraltar and Northern Ireland. Both have sensitive borders with the EU, but Northern Ireland has the legacy of the troubles while Gibraltar is more singular in views about being British. Even so, enough to compare... 2/
In terms of the Brexit aftermath Gibraltar and Northern Ireland look similar on the surface - checks on goods coming from Great Britain, relatively open borders to the EU. But very different in the acceptance of this - Gibraltar happy, N Ireland not. Why? 3/
A splendidly clear and concise exposition of the Brexit and Northern Ireland issue. Not one suspect that this will lead to any changes of mind from those whose mind is made up to blame the EU come what may.
And you wonder if the UK government anger that led to Boris Johnson sabotaging his own summit was in large part a deflection from his own failings. theguardian.com/world/2021/jun…
I know he's a good actor but seeing this it is also possible that the PM has really not grasped that his triumphant Northern Ireland protocol actually contains within it numerous checks on trade into Northern Ireland. Oh dear.
Perhaps someone could ask the PM whether his goal for the Northern Ireland protocol is no checks at all or proportionate checks. But I don't think they would get an answer - because I don't think he knows.
The complaints about the way the EU is implementing the protocol cover up that the UK government either does not know or does not want to admit how it thinks the protocol should be implemented.
Oops. I must confess to being baffled by Johnson picking a fight with the EU and US rather than presiding at his summit over a common front with regard to China. And baffled won't even start to describe what they think of him.
The EU and US get another summit next week. But this was Johnson's one go at being a host. He appears to have completely blown it in failing to listen.
Of course it may all have been focus grouped. That what would really go down well in the Red Wall is inviting the new US President plus EU leaders, and then picking a fight with all of them in the name of sovereignty.