Brexit Thread VIII: Taking a penalty kick-ing

[really]

For extra fun - food safety is a devolved responsibility of the Scottish Parliament, all of which was subject to overarching EU rules.
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/uk-food-standards-row-edinburgh-18560543

Now that the UK has left the EU are food standards something Westminster can freely negotiate on without Scottish agreement?

 

[Arakhor]

Because under current EU rules that apply during this transition, it is illegal for me to dirtectly import American chicken.

Do you actually want to eat US chicken or is this a devil's advocate stance because the EU said no?

 

[EnglishEdward]

For extra fun - food safety is a devolved responsibility of the Scottish Parliament, all of which was subject to overarching EU rules.
https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/uk-food-standards-row-edinburgh-18560543

Now that the UK has left the EU are food standards something Westminster can freely negotiate on without Scottish agreement?

An interesting legal and constitutional question. Best dealt with by not including any restriction on the ability of the the UK or the Scottish governments
to mandate food standards and food labelling standards for their peoples, in any international treaty whether the Donald or with outer Mongolia.

Logically, for imports to the UK, UK goverment has the perogatve, but for consumption in Scotland, the Scottish goverment also has a perogative.
So for consumption of US chicken or Philippine whatever in Scotland, the food would have to compy with both UK and Scotish regulations.
UK government could change the devolution arrangement to simplify that. I believe in democracy, only works with locality, so do not recommend that.

 

[Hrothbern]

With Brexit negotiations still in limbo... and not much news from heated discussions of fishermen... it's getting too hot for the fish.... and the cod and herring are fleeing the battlefield in the direction of the North Pole.

The North and Baltic Sea are heating up quickly
The North Sea and the Baltic Sea have warmed considerably in recent decades, reports the German Ministry of Transport to questions from Steffi Lemke, leader of the Greens. The average surface temperature of the North Sea rose by an average of 1.3 degrees Celsius between 1969 and 2017. Temperatures in the Western Baltic have risen by an average of 0.6 degrees per decade since 1982.

"The North and Baltic Sea are heating up at a worrying pace," said Lemke. She fears huge changes if the temperature rise continues. "Herring and cod are already fleeing to cooler waters towards the Arctic. That is dramatic for small-scale coastal fishing and for the complex ecological cycles in our oceans. "

Rising water temperatures cause disease-causing bacteria to spread more easily in the Baltic Sea. Researchers therefore expect more infections from vibriobacteria this year. At low temperatures, these carnivorous bacteria live in the seabed, but when the water warms up to 20 degrees, they spread. They are particularly dangerous for people with a weakened immune system or certain chronic conditions.

From https://fd.nl/weekend/1350714/de-wereld-deze-week-het-beste-uit-de-internationale-pers from https://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft...waermt-a-52d1c3f7-e0ab-43e8-984b-71bea1c86e4a

 

[Takhisis]

Relevant to the above:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-53320065

The UK government has submitted applications to the EU to create Border Control Posts (BCPs) at Northern Ireland's ports.

Something no prime minister could ever agree to according to Teresa May.

The BCPs are specifically for food and agriculture as far as I know.

This wouldn't have been necessary if the Irish had followed suit and exited the EU as well.

Do you actually want to eat US chicken or is this a devil's advocate stance because the EU said no?

Take a guess.

 

[EnglishEdward]

With Brexit negotiations still in limbo... and not much news from heated discussions of fishermen... it's getting too hot for the fish.... and the cod and herring are fleeing the battlefield in the direction of the North Pole.

Well I suppose that is good news for the people of Iceland.

 

[Hrothbern]

Well I suppose that is good news for the people of Iceland.

Giving up Spitsbergen was a stupid mistake of the Dutch.
We had until the end of the 17th century whale trane (whale oil) factories there. But the winters were too cold to have a really permanent base.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I can see there being an argument about Rockall.

Just in:

Brexit: Britain's border checks to get £705m boost

Plans include new border control posts and 500 extra Border Force staff.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53375713

 

[Arakhor]

Meanwhile, Andrea Leadsom (the Tory MP who failed to become leader before May got the job) has given an interview in which she stated job losses in the event of a No-Deal Brexit "was made very, very clear". Now, I've aged at least four years since this fiasco happened, but I'm certain that such a negative forecast would never have been made by the Leave side, as that would be part of the oft-quoted Project Fear.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Meanwhile, Andrea Leadsom (the Tory MP who failed to become leader before May got the job) has given an interview in which she stated job losses in the event of a No-Deal Brexit "was made very, very clear". Now, I've aged at least four years since this fiasco happened, but I'm certain that such a negative forecast would never have been made by the Leave side, as that would be part of the oft-quoted Project Fear.

I watched the video 6 times, and that is not what she said.

The "risk of losing jobs" is the interviewers' words not hers;
and a risk "is losing jobs" is NOT the same as "job losses".

Besides which job losses occur all the time and the concept
that one can not make changes because there may be job
losses neither prevents changes nor prevents job losses.

 

[Arakhor]

You can argue semantics about the difference between "losing jobs" and "the risk of losing jobs", but the fact remains that nothing of the sort was ever "made very, very clear", except by those people you yourself have written off as Project Fear many times within these threads.

 

[Hrothbern]

From that article in BBC

Customs checks on EU goods will be delayed until July 2021.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53375713

Signalling to the EU that the UK needs an "implementation" period of half a year after 31 Dec 2020 ?
Meaning another half year in the EU rules,
meaning as well postponing the Brexit hit with another half year until Covid is perhaps better under control and/or more clarity on a vaccin.

 

[uppi]

From that article in BBC


Signalling to the EU that the UK needs an "implementation" period of half a year after 31 Dec 2020 ?
Meaning another half year in the EU rules,
meaning as well postponing the Brexit hit with another half year until Covid is perhaps better under control and/or more clarity on a vaccin.

The article makes it sound like this is unilateral:

But, in response, the EU said it would implement full checks on UK exports at the start of 2021.

Which would mean that there is no need to follow EU rules. It would just be impossible to enforce any new UK rules on imports.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

This wouldn't have been necessary if the Irish had followed suit and exited the EU as well.

I've heard that more than once, followed by then rejoining the UK.

 

[Hrothbern]

I've heard that more than once, followed by then rejoining the UK.

chapter wet dreams

The article makes it sound like this is unilateral:

Triggering Article 50 is unilateral as well

But, in response, the EU said it would implement full checks on UK exports at the start of 2021.

Which would mean that there is no need to follow EU rules. It would just be impossible to enforce any new UK rules on imports.

yes
But it will become a mess for the companies involved.

 

[EnglishEdward]

You can argue semantics about the difference between "losing jobs" and "the risk of losing jobs", but the fact remains that nothing of the sort was ever "made very, very clear", except by those people you yourself have written off as Project Fear many times within these threads.

What Andrea Leadson made very clear in that interview
was actually that there would be "winners and losers".

I do not hear her "very clear" as being a response to the interviewer's
persistent interruption, but as a simple follow on of her previous sentence.

From that article in BBC

Signalling to the EU that the UK needs an "implementation" period of half a year after 31 Dec 2020 ?

Not necessarily.

I think that things have moved beyond signalling to implementation of no further deal for now.

Customs checks on EU goods will be delayed until July 2021.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53375713

There is a customs check and a customs duty. They are quite separate things.

As I understand it Customs duties will start from 1 January 2021, and import tariffs will
be applied to car imports and lorryloads of wine etc by supplier declarations from then.

It would just be impossible to enforce any new UK rules on imports.

While the delaying of the physical infrastructure for the corresponding physical checks
on goods until 1 July 2021 will certainly create a risk of evasion, how significant is that?

I think that the Pareto principle 80:20 applies here. If anything it applies in overtime.
I.e. 10% of the business names will undertake 90% of the bulk car/wine shipments.
HM Customs know who those businesses are, and those businesses know that HMCR
can always retro-audit and fine them heavily so HMRC may expect honest declarations.

Yes, a number of small cowboys may play the system and not declare or under declare
in the first six months, but if that totals to 10% of the value, the loss may be accepted.

At the moment, HMG gets no customs duty on imports from the EU.
If it only gets 90% for the first six months, well that is an improvement on 0%.

Strangely enough I think that the real drive for the physical checks will come from
the larger importers not wishing to be undercut by the cowboy smugglers.

 

[Hrothbern]

Strangely enough I think that the real drive for the physical checks will come from
the larger importers not wishing to be undercut by the cowboy smugglers.

You mean they will sue the UK ?

 

[EnglishEdward]

You mean they will sue the UK ?

Well, in much the same way, that if one's son/daughter becomes an addict/
junkie, one can try suing the state for failing to stop illegal drug smuggling.
Or corporates owning IPR can try to sue governments for failing to stop piracy.
Or tax drivers suing HMG because it lets unregulated UBER cars take their customers.

It rarely works.

Nevertheless I dare say aggrieved car/wine importers may threaten to do so.

But the fact that a state fails to eliminate smuggling of one kind
or another is rarely grounds for much in the way of damages.
The UK government would merely argue that circumstances had
resulted in delays in introducing a more rigorous checking system.

We have noted the EU's approach to suing the UK because it failed to
stop chinese importers from importing goods with a dubious breakdown
of value by textile and by other added value factors; but we see that as
just the EU punishment bashing the UK as usual, not the international norm.
It just makes us keener to be outside EU Commission/law/judiciary's grip.

 

[Hrothbern]

Well, in much the same way, that if one's son/daughter becomes an addict/
junkie, one can try suing the state for failing to stop illegal drug smuggling.
Or corporates owning IPR can try to sue governments for failing to stop piracy.
Or tax drivers suing HMG because it lets unregulated UBER cars take their customers.

It rarely works.

Nevertheless I dare say aggrieved car/wine importers may threaten to do so.

But the fact that a state fails to eliminate smuggling of one kind
or another is rarely grounds for much in the way of damages.
The UK government would merely argue that circumstances had
resulted in delays in introducing a more rigorous checking system.

We have noted the EU's approach to suing the UK because it failed to
stop chinese importers from importing goods with a dubious breakdown
of value by textile and by other added value factors; but we see that as
just the EU punishment bashing the UK as usual, not the international norm.
It just makes us keener to be outside EU Commission/law/judiciary's grip.

I understand your arguments.

I also guess it will become a bigger mess than needed.

 

[Arakhor]

We have noted the EU's approach to suing the UK because it failed to stop chinese importers from importing goods with a dubious breakdown of value by textile and by other added value factors; but we see that as just the EU punishment bashing the UK as usual, not the international norm.
It just makes us keener to be outside EU Commission/law/judiciary's grip.

Who is "we"? You haven't suddenly developed blue blood, have you?