Br’er Boris

But they don’t take into account one key option available to the UK: that of reverting to our historic position and declaring unilateral free trade by abolishing all tariffs. This would, as Patrick Minford has been telling us all this past decade and more, be hugely beneficial to us all.

If we do that, the worst that can happen to the UK would be that we get to buy, as we wish, from the finest and most economic producers of everything around the world without restriction or limitation. The Prime Minister is therefore in a rather handy position when he discusses who sends who a cheque in the near future – please don’t force me into that thicket of free trade to the nation’s great benefit.

And if Johnson can’t win a negotiation playing such a hand then we’ve still got a few people left who haven’t had the opportunity to be Prime Minister yet, haven’t we?

29 thoughts on “Br’er Boris”

  1. There are some cons to the position in terms of bargaining power, surely? Didn’t the Canadians say they weren’t going to negotiate a new deal with the UK as they preferred the look of the UK’s proposed tariff schedules – but this deprives the UK of the possibility of bargaining with Canada to take more UK exports. Minford would say this is an act of self-harm by the Canadian government of course, but the lack of leverage is also clearly bad news for British exporters and their employees.

  2. @MBE – it might be harder for UK exporters but it means that we need to make something worth the hassle of importing *despite* the tariffs… once they want our products they will lower tariffs / duties or the end customer will pay the extra regardless.

    or at least that’s my view on it anyway

  3. @MBE
    “Didn’t the Canadians say they weren’t going to negotiate a new deal with the UK as they preferred the look of the UK’s proposed tariff schedules …”

    The way I heard it, the Canucks were talking about not rolling over their agreement with the EU as they preferred etc

    Never understood the UK negotiating position under May. In any negotiation it’s the money does the talking. The capital account stuff can be said to negate the 39b. EU runs a healthy export surplus with the UK so the rest of it’s “What are you offering to let that continue?

  4. I’ve always thought that the way to square the circle is to have no tariffs immediately, but to give “forward guidance” that they will gradually be phased in in 3-5 years’ time. This gives countries that are under the mercantile delusion a good reason to get underway with a trade deal without actually having to impoverish ourselves with tariffs.

  5. Yeah the Canadians said they didn’t want to roll over CETA because the UKs provisional WTO terms were better.

    If the EU gave the Canadians such a shit FTA then it’s safe to assume it goes the other way too. And that’s the problem with Eu FTAs. People say that a block of 27 countries has much more leverage… maybe true. However, it also means they have to keep 28 countries (plus every hamlet in Belgium) happy and thus make a ton of concessions. When we are free we won’t need to take in to account the protectionist instincts of those other 27 countries and give concessions in return. We can make FTAs with others that are completely specific to our own economy.

    Given places like HK and S’pore have fuck all import duties but still sign FTA’s shows that they’re not all about tariffs.

  6. Dongguan John

    “……shows that they’re not all about tariffs.”

    True. They are mostly about standards and regulations.

  7. When the UK joined it had a ramp on for contributions which graduated up to 100% to fit with the multi year accounting of the EU . Allowing for the scaling up since that look like roughly £39 billion and I imagine it is by some such calculation this figure has been arrived at.
    The House of Lords concluded there was no legal way by which the moneys owed could be extracted by recourse to any International court
    This fact has been used to imply that the UK does not owe amounts in question.
    it may not but not because there is no jurisdiction in this matter , when you are discussing a country the question of whether or not there is some court which by treaty we have submitted ourselves in a given circumstance is of chiefly academic interest .
    There was no legal way to extract Ronnie Biggs form Brazil and so he stayed there in his smelly slum with his unfortunate wife
    The UK is not , despite the efforts of its quasi Fascist vermin , as yet a low grade criminal with delusions of grandeur .
    We cannot hide
    If we seek to steal form our neighbours there are numerous methods by which they may retaliate the most obvious being a trade blockade
    No-one voted for that
    No one voted for no deal
    No-one wants it which is why Parliament , which reflects that fact , is being sent home by the fat bloviating Trump plus thesaurus lying wank

    ,

  8. I also am No Deal.

    Losing your shite Facepainter? Don’t worry. The hate and rage traitorous scum like you have created in the decent folk of the UK isn’t going away. It won’t until middle class Marxist shite like you are destroyed. Along with your EU masters and their globo elite masters. All turned to shite. Well you already are symbolic shite but literal shite would be a welcome transformation for you.

  9. No deal here, too.

    I voted to leave and Cameron, Clegg et al made it clear that meant leaving single market, customs union, CAP & CFP

    Any FTA would be a bonus.

  10. Johnson needs to listen to Trump and other positive thinkers, not his woke green GF

    Brexit is not about damage limitation, Boris – it’s a golden opportunity

    …Brexit is a huge economic and business opportunity, not a damage-limitation exercise. Who in government is putting this case? Not Chancellor Javid. Not the PM. If they believed it, if they understood it, the only logical course would be to promote a ‘clean break Brexit’, not a ‘no-deal cliff edge’.

    Only a clean break will deliver a major boost for the UK economy, the thing that the EU fear most. And it is entirely independent of trade deals, which are nice to have, but not essential

    The redeployment of the net contribution to the EU of £9billion p.a. provides a golden opportunity for tax cuts, and the better use of the balance of the gross contribution, a further £5billion p.a., would be itself a major stimulus. If combined as the Brexit Party has suggested, with a halving of overseas aid, a further £6billion p.a., it would be even more potent. This would, by the way, still leave the UK as one of the major aid countries as a percentage of GDP ahead of Germany and the USA.
    ..
    When combined with our freedom to have smarter regulation, to reduce or remove external tariffs, this provides a powerful economic policy set to the government on which to build world average growth of 3 per cent p.a. rather than the paltry 1.2 per cent of terminal decline which our establishment appear to be happy with (so long as they get a big slice of the EU cake).

    The removal or reduction of tariffs will not just reduce the cost of living, benefiting the many, but boost the economy – truly for the many.

    The question is, do the government understand any of this? If not, they are destined to repeat the fundamental errors of the May/Hammond administration…

    Yep
    .
    Yes, there would be some losers from No Deal. We can easily afford to compensate them

    “We can easily afford to compensate them” – but should not; as she points out they are insignificant exports.

    imo rather muddled article.

  11. I voted to be half in and half out – the Norway option is closest to this – but to get there had to vote Leave.
    The scum in our Parliament could not work out that 52%-48% is close enough to indicate it’s desirable to be out of the worst institutions and programmes such as the EC, EP, CAP and centralised regional development policy (almost a contradiction in terms, but it’s the 2nd biggest budget item). We should stay in the better institutions and programmes. But the vermin in the HoC couldn’t work that out, especially the LDems of whom I expected better who could have usurped the power of the DUP wood burning filth if adopting a Norway stance. The UK is relatively non-racist and open to free movement of immigrants subject to NRTPF. But lots of MPs still think that being mostly in is best, and that NOR, Lie, ICE etc are schitholes on balance.
    So fuck ’em. Let’s go full Jefferson on their arses, ‘Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none.’

  12. “No one voted for no deal.

    No-one wants it”

    Current polls would suggest you know not what you say, and bigly.

  13. You need to be very careful with the ” quasi Fascist vermin ” taunts, Mr Newmania. Because the vermin you refer to might take you seriously & think being non-quasi Fascists isn’t such a bad idea after all. And you might find yourself being neckshot in a ditch or on a one way helicopter ride.
    Don’t suppose Mr Ecks would ride to your rescue.

  14. I not only voted to Leave the EU, I actively campaigned for it as part of “Vote Leave” (so yes, Dominic Cummings was my boss)

    I didn’t vote for any “Deal”

    The whole reason I voted to Leave was to get rid of the entire Brussels apparatus of bribery and corruption. Any “Deal” that the EU offers us will be a BRINO type trap.

    No Deal = Best Deal.

    Let’s leave already. It’s been more than 3 years!!!!

  15. Newmania,

    I didn’t vote because I wasn’t eligible but had I been I would have voted Leave with no deal in mind.

    Regarding the £39bn:

    1) About £15bn to £20bn was for membership fees during the two year transition to the end of the budget cycle. No transition, no fees. Unless we signed a contract saying we’d honour our contributions until 2020 then how do we owe anything? Where in article 50 does it say that a member state leaving has to continue funding the budget until the next one? If a net beneficary left would they continue to recieve payments until the end of the budget cycle.

    2) Reste à liquider. Commitments agreed but not begun yet. So cancel them. Did we sign a contract saying we’d provide these funds? If a net beneficary left would they still get these projects built?

    3) Liabilities (pensions etc). Eh? Aren’t pensions supposed to be invested? What’s that? The EU comission runs its pensions like a fucking Ponzi scheme you say? They can fuck off. Not only are they grossly irresponsible but these people worked for the EU not the UK and as we’ve learned over the past few years the EU is openly hostile to the UK.

    4) Contingent Liabilities. The EU wants these up front and claim they’ll pay us back if and when they aren’t needed. They don’t trust us to pay up if required. Why the fuck should we trust them to give the money back if necessary? They’ve the irresponsible untrustworthy fucks who can’t even get their own auditors to sign them off with an unmodified opinion.

  16. By passing the European Withdrawal Act and then thricely rejecting the tentative deal between the EU and the UK government, Parliament itself has been voting for no deal. Repeatedly.

  17. By passing the European Withdrawal Act and then thricely rejecting the tentative deal between the EU and the UK government, Parliament itself has been voting for no deal. Repeatedly.

    In fairness, they passed the Article 50 act thinking the UK would get a reasonable trade deal. The problem was that Treason May cooked up a deal with the EU which is so egregious that it is closer to a capitulation treaty that you would serve upon a nation you had defeated in war than anything else. It makes the UK a vassal state of the EU with no rights and no say, just a cash cow to be milked and implement the EU’s regulations.

    We’re actually lucky that there hasn’t been a majority in Parliament to vote for this pile of fetid dingo’s kidney’s.

    It’s not over yet either. I’m still not convinced that Boris won’t try and get parliament to vote for Treason May’s WA less the backstop.

  18. Bloke in North Dorset

    WTO is OK as a last resort but judging by the number of trade deals around the world it was sent ideal. I’d have preferred something like EFTA but I’d rather start with no deal rather than BRINO.

  19. Like the sound chaps above, I too want a clean break Brexit. Leaving day can’t come soon enough.

  20. Another ‘no deal’ voter, here. As for the £39 billion, like any initial demand, it’s based on roughly ⅓ stuff we genuinely owe (and ought to pay, if we’re feeling in a sufficiently generous mood); ⅓ stuff that’s debatable and needs to be settled by independent (i.e. not the ECJ) arbitration; and ⅓ “You’re ‘avin’ a giraffe, mate”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *