Britain outside the EU

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, it does. If we don’t connect cause and effect, how will we ever learn?

Haha, quite!

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Surely, the obvious solution is for the UK to agree veterinary equivalence. The US says this won't stand in the way of a trade deal.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...er-ni-protocol

Just checking your terminology here … do you mean equivalence, or alignment? They’re not the same. Agreed equivalence is a fairly standard aspect of an international trade deal in which both sides agree to accept each other’s standards as equally high even if they differ on the details. Alignment is when one or both sides insist that products imported into their market must comply with their market’s rules.

The reason I’m asking is, Euphiles and remainiacs generally advocate for alignment, because they see it as a way of keeping the UK close to the EU (presumably with the long-term aim of rejoining). Brexiteers oppose alignment, because the whole point of Brexit was to give us freedom to set our own market rules. Alignment with the EU requires us to implement directives set in Brussels, without any longer having the ability to influence the way those rules are formulated. That clearly is a worse democratic position than before.

Mutual acceptance of standards as equivalent, however, is something that neither the UK nor the EU should have any problems with, if they are motivated by willingness to deal and pragmatism as to solutions. In fact I believe mutual acceptance is what the UK has advocated for, not just with regards to NI but broadly in our futures arrangement with the EU. I suspect that this has not been reciprocated and it is the EU that is exhibiting a lack of pragmatism in refusing to allow chilled, processed meats to enter the single market from the UK.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chris

Just checking your terminology here … do you mean equivalence, or alignment? They’re not the same. Agreed equivalence is a fairly standard aspect of an international trade deal in which both sides agree to accept each other’s standards as equally high even if they differ on the details. Alignment is when one or both sides insist that products imported into their market must comply with their market’s rules.

The reason I’m asking is, Euphiles and remainiacs generally advocate for alignment, because they see it as a way of keeping the UK close to the EU (presumably with the long-term aim of rejoining). Brexiteers oppose alignment, because the whole point of Brexit was to give us freedom to set our own market rules. Alignment with the EU requires us to implement directives set in Brussels, without any longer having the ability to influence the way those rules are formulated. That clearly is a worse democratic position than before.

Mutual acceptance of standards as equivalent, however, is something that neither the UK nor the EU should have any problems with, if they are motivated by willingness to deal and pragmatism as to solutions. In fact I believe mutual acceptance is what the UK has advocated for, not just with regards to NI but broadly in our futures arrangement with the EU. I suspect that this has not been reciprocated and it is the EU that is exhibiting a lack of pragmatism in refusing to allow chilled, processed meats to enter the single market from the UK.

Pierre clearly exposes the Teashop's weasel worded (perfidious?) hypocrisy. The Teashop extols the magnanimity of the EU -whereas that "magnanimity" is no more than kicking the dispute can down the road. The Teashop demands reciprocity of goodwill from the UK but provides no hint of what ground the EU might give. They'll simply accuse us of intransigence in the face of their generosity.

Alignment is a MUST NOT. Equivalence is what they viciously withold because they are punishing the UK.

Today marks 245 years, American Independence Day, when the United States of America, left Britain without a deal.

[jfman]

And look what a hellhole it has become.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by jfman

And look what a hellhole it has become.

look at the idiot in charge.

Originally Posted by jfman

And look what a hellhole it has become.

Yep, especially in Democrat run States.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

look at the idiot in charge.

Better than the idiot before.

Originally Posted by pip08456

Better than the idiot before.

It’s debatable when Democrats run around officially boasting about saving Americans $0.16 (Yes, they actually did this http://www.nypost.com/2021/07/01/whi...4-cookout/amp/ ) buying barbecue stuff for the 4th July celebrations, compared to last years prices. But gas (Petrol) ⛽️ prices through roof over there and they’re rising steadily over here too.

Meanwhile Nissan isn’t leaving the UK like the Remain maniacs, said they would. £1 Billion investment, kerching.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

Today marks 245 years, American Independence Day, when the United States of America, left Britain without a deal.

Don't give Scotland any ideas, Mick!

[noel43]

Originally Posted by Mick

It’s debatable when Democrats run around officially boasting about saving Americans $0.16 (Yes, they actually did this http://www.nypost.com/2021/07/01/whi...4-cookout/amp/ ) buying barbecue stuff for the 4th July celebrations, compared to last years prices. But gas (Petrol) ⛽️ prices through roof over there and they’re rising steadily over here too.

Meanwhile Nissan isn’t leaving the UK like the Remain maniacs, said they would. £1 Billion investment, kerching.

no they got 1 billion of tax payers money to stay

[jfman]

Or a "DUP bribe" as it's called in modern parlance.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by noel43

no they got 1 billion of tax payers money to stay

I hope so. That's what governments are for - protect and develop the economy.

[1andrew1]

British produce to rot in the fields, with demands filled by imports. How can this situation be turned around? Mechanisation? A campaign to get people to work in agriculture? Or should we focus on more value-added industries?

For the past 38 years Tim Clarke has relied on seasonal pickers from eastern Europe to harvest peas and other vegetables he grows on his farm near Chichester.

This year, however, he has been able to hire only 75 per cent of the 50 workers he needs, meaning tonnes of vegetables are being left to rot. “The whole thing is ludicrous,” said Clarke. “We’ve sold this product to supermarkets and they’re complaining because they’re not getting it.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...tead-dxsmbg2rw [subscription]

I highly doubt he was relying on Eastern European labour in 1983. The Cold War was a little fraught around then.

Regardless, one of the many dodgy consequences of free movement has been the ready availability of cheap, mobile, flexible labour from unaligned, less advanced economies that workers whose livelihoods are rooted in the UK simply cannot compete with. Some British businesses have become hooked on it, and frankly Mr Clarke’s complaints ought to be viewed in a similar way to those of a smackhead moaning that he can’t get his next fix. The solution for our economy is a combination of economic methodone or cold turkey, as befits each case. But he and others need to understand that the exploitable labour tap has been turned off.

Those who survive will be those who find ways to mechanise, or to create sustainable work patterns for primarily British workers, with seasonal migrants plugging gaps, not undercutting locals.