Today we’ll look at the Transition Period Trade Negotiations. Despite Lockdown there are some revealing ‘news’ in the MSM. As the country is in the grip of appeasing BLM by toppling statues right left and centre, while BAME professors tell us about how every achievement this country has had in the past 400 years was based on slavery, Remainers seem content to lurk in the shadow.
First, let’s remind ourselves about the crunch dates coming up this month. For example, the deadline to beg Brussels for an extension is June 30th. The European Council will meet on June 19th to ‘take stock’ of the trade talks so far. On some day in this month Johnson will meet Ms vdLeyen. On June 1st, the Financial Times wrote:
“British officials said they hoped Mr Johnson and Ms von der Leyen would inject “political momentum” into talks that have foundered on disputes over fishing rights and EU demands for common standards on state aid, workers’ rights and the environment. […] Brussels declined to comment on the format or the date of the “high-level” talks, but Downing Street expects Mr Johnson to speak to the commission president in late June.” (link, paywalled)
This ‘talk’ was supposed to take place this weekend, via video conferencing. As ‘Brussels isn’t commenting’, officially, we have to hope that EU ‘sources’ will give some crumbs to the MSM’s Brussels correspondents relating to that talk.
There are two other dates for your diaries. Tomorrow is the second reading of Ed Davey’s Private Members’ Bill which aims to force the government to beg Brussels for a two-year extension to the Transition Period (here). And finally: the customary rotation of the EU Council’s presidency means that it’s Germany’s turn from the 1st of July 2020. How this will influence the negotiations is anybody’s guess but I’ll note in passing that the 1st July will be Day 100 of Lockdown Britain.
Firstly, an unlikely supporter for Brexit and those talks about our fisheries has come to the fore. Today (e.g. here) we read about super-trawlers having fished in our protected waters last year – I don’t think they’ve all suddenly gone home this year. RemainCentral writes:
“Foreign supertrawlers more than doubled the amount of time they spent intensively fishing in UK marine protected areas last year, an investigation has found. The 25 supertrawlers, which are each more than 100m long and can catch hundreds of tonnes of fish a day using nets up to a mile long, collectively spent 2,963 hours in 39 protected areas in 2019, up from 1,388 hours in 2018. The Russian, Dutch and Polish vessels fished in areas that were designated to protect important species and habitats, including harbour porpoises and reefs.” (link, paywalled)
It’s Greenpeace who undertook this study. While RemainCentral dryly writes that these super trawlers were acting legally because ‘we have no protection laws’, Greenpeace
“[…] is urging the Government to work towards the creation of Highly Protected Marine Areas (HPMAs), as recommended in the Department for Environment, Fisheries and the Regions’ Highly Protected Marine Areas review.” (link)
That certainly should happen – but we know that DEFRA, like the rest of Whitehall, isn’t keen to implement anything which could conceivably come under “the EU won’t like it”. Perhaps Greenpeace might like to employ their awesome campaign initiatives to get such Law onto the Statute Books? Perhaps someone might even ask those “Extinction” activists why they haven’t demanded such legislation …
The nationalities of those super trawlers are interesting. There’s Russia – not exactly a member of the EU; Poland – not precisely situated on the North Sea Coast, and the Dutch. Are they trying to rob our waters for as long as they can, given the legal position pertaining from next year? Our friends at facts4eu have a pertinent report:
“On 31 December 2020 the UK will automatically become an independent coastal state. The UK’s 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) will then apply. […] Without an explicit agreement to the contrary, the EU has no legal right to fish in UK waters after 2020, nor to claim inflated quotas for resources that are predominantly in British waters. It will be forced under international laws and conventions to reduce the amount of fish its member states’ fleets can catch in all other waters – dramatically. The EU’s current position is that […] it wants full and unconditional access to the UK’s waters and its fish, exactly as if the United Kingdom were still an EU member state.” (link)
Do read the whole thing – and ponder if doesn’t it look as if the EU maritime member states are trying to tie the talks to fishing quota while letting the far more important issue of super trawlers stay in the shadows.
During the last few days the ‘reports’ from Brussels seem to be contradictory. We read that Barnier was ‘ready to compromise’ (link, paywalled), but is now being ‘urged’ by EU member states not to cave in, as in “not to break cover until British negotiators first concede ground to Brussels.” (link). Here’s an interesting titbit, not from Brussels:
“No 10 fears that Michel Barnier, the European Union’s chief Brexit negotiator, has lost control of the talks under pressure from France and other countries as a row over access to Britain’s fishing waters threatens to delay progress. David Frost, the UK’s chief negotiator, was ready to explore quotas in terms of numbers and percentages of the catch but the European Commission was unable to go into the detail because of opposition led by France.” (link, paywalled)
That’s why we’re told that Barnier is again prepared to ‘compromise’ if only Frost would meet him ‘halfway’ (link). Our friends at facts4eu have a report on this issue of ‘compromise’ which you might like to read here.
Perhaps EU members will take note of the ‘panic’ of EU farmers who fear a breakdown of the food supply chains should there be no deal at the end of this year (link). Will Macron ‘cave in’ to his farmers, or will he keep supporting his fishermen to the detriment of said farmers? Either of them is bound to protest.
Meanwhile the DT’s Brussels correspondent reports on Barnier’s speech to representatives of the European Economic and Social Committee. This paints a totally different picture which demonstrates yet again that all this talk about ‘compromise’ and ‘quota’ is just shadow boxing because Barnier’s and the EU’s punitive attitude is still at work. See for example this:
“London should lose its status as a European centre for financial and legal services after Brexit, Michel Barnier has said. The EU chief negotiator said Britain should not be allowed to become a stepping stone into the EU market or a manufacturing hub for the bloc after the end of the transition period this year. Mr Barnier [said] that Britain should also not keep its large share of the lucrative market for testing goods to ensure they meet EU standards.” (link)
All the blue-eyed Barnier-talk about quotas and compromises, about level playing fields and the rest is simply make-work when one reads what Brussels really wants. It is obvious that punishment, destruction of our economy, is still Barnier’s main agenda. He says:
“As it prepares to leave the Single Market and leave the Customs Union, we must ask ourselves whether it is really in the EU interest for the UK to retain such a prominent position.” Mr Barnier warned against allowing the UK to assemble materials and goods sourced from all over the world before exporting them to the EU tariff and quota-free as a British good once a trade deal was signed. This “would allow the UK to become a manufacturing hub for the EU”, Mr Barnier said, adding: “Do we really want the UK to remain a centre for commercial litigation for the EU when we could attract these services here?” (link)
That last question allows only one answer: ‘Non! Nein! No!’ But with no deal and with the UK trading under WTO rules, who is going to prevent the EU to start competing with us? Are they so scared of a proper ‘level playing field’, e.g. WTO rules, that they want to forbid us to become ‘a stepping stone’ into their sacred EU market? Does Barnier, does Brussels not know their own statistics according to which they export more to the UK than the UK exports to the EU?
It’s obviously still about punishing us for Brexit – and it’s also about posturing by those EU diplomats who know that after the 31st of December this year their utterances to our Brussels correspondents will become just ‘noises from the off’. Here’s a quote which shows them in their peacocking glory:
“Member states including Germany and France shared Michel Barnier’s dire assessment of the current state of EU-UK talks,” a diplomat told The Telegraph after the negotiator briefed EU ambassadors in Brussels. Ambassadors expressed the need for more realism in London and expect the UK government to honour its commitments from the political declaration on all issues including the ‘level playing field’. Cherry-picking is not an option.” (link)
Note that ‘more realism in London’ means: ‘do as we dictate’. It’s for us to compromise, not for Brussels. And if I read the phrase ‘cherry picking’ one more time I’ll make a voodoo doll of dear Michel!
Meanwhile, we’ve got to wait and see if the shambles that is the Corona-HoC will allow that despicable ‘beg for an extension Bill’ to proceed. We have to wait and see if Johnson will stand for Brexit: ‘tis hard to predict what he’ll do because his government’s catastrophic Lockdown policies show him to be a reed in the wind.
It pains me to say this but our only hope for an end to this farce on the 31st of December rests on a civil servant: David Frost. So let’s hope that Sir Mark Sedwill has his hands full undermining Johnson in the ongoing Lockdown shambles and that time works for Mr Frost.
KBO!
( reply to Pauline Baxter at the bottom end of Comments) : –
Hello Pauline,
Britain could have left the EU in the autumn of 2016, by unconditionally declaring its independence of the EU. We could do that because national self-determination is a fundamental right of sovereign states in international law. But Theresa May instead drafted her Withdrawal Agreement with the EU to turn Britain into an EU colony.
The Withdrawal Agreement voted into law by Westminster in January 2020 differs little from Mrs May’s, and like hers only allows the UK to appeal to the EU against EU decisions, not to any international tribunals. That makes it possible to claim that the WA is part of EU law but not international law, as the WA cannot be subject to any international adjudication.
The WA & PD contradict the fundamental right in international law of Britain to self-government as a sovereign state. The entire British establishment – Whitehall, Westminster, the BBC, the universities – have chosen colonial rule by the EU as their response to the vote for British Home Rule on 23rd June 2016.
With the Corona crash who would want to be locked in with either the EU or the UK ?
Big comment : during all previous plagues it was the sick and those who tended to the sick who were isolated.
Why did we isolate the whole of society , letting public sector unions and the BBC to roam free ?
they carry another vile virus as well as corona
Flagrant over fishing should exclude any foreign boats in our territorial waters, even to the fact of having to cut back on our own boats, in order for fish stocks to recover. – Clearly the foreign fishers have no interest in this ecology requirement !
Many years ago, (because I wouldn’t dream of doing it today), some friends and I had permission for rough shooting from a local farmer. – His large farm was overrun with rabbits ! – A mate with money brought in a Remington shotgun, with an eight cartridge magazine, – When the farmer saw it, my mate was told to go home, and not bring that gun back again ! – ”I want rid of the rabbits, but I draw the line on that” ! ….. You see, double or single barrel shot guns were ‘sport’, whereas an eight shot repeater was anything but ‘sport’ !
The same attitude of that farmer, should be our attitude to the huge ‘factory’ fishing vessels that we have in our waters today. – From the start of 2021, there should be no fishing but our own, and even that should be limited !
I caught bits of Robert Peston show last night.
First off he completely rehabilitated Ferguson, stressing his previous good record and then apparently quoting Ferguson slagging off the government (Boris?) by saying they acted in imposing the lock down a week too late ( presumably not taking his advice) and maintaining an earlier decision would have halved the number of deaths
Has this blatant fake news been exposed elsewhere?
A second item was a discussion with milly Molly Nandy and ex negotiating supremo David Davis, apparently she said Labour were not going to challenge the extension of the year end as it was law and an agreement would be negotiated but, but but………
.
Meanwhile Davis was of the opinion that there would be a successful negotiation, sealed in the usual EU fashion at the eleventh hour, may be even at the last second of the 11th hour, possibly at seconds beyond the termination of the eleventh hour
Which of these two was faking the newsagent?
I’d say both of them!
Where on earth did my supposed literary aid get newsagent from?
I’m fairly certain I typed news
This “aid” is generally of no help to me and in fact a source of constant irritation -is it possible to get rid of it?
Roger. I totally agree with you. When my husband ended up in hospital in January this year having fallen off a step ladder I sent an e-mail to the family to let them know he was about to have an ECG. but somehow or other the message they got was that he was having an EGG.
I realise this is off the main topic, but it is very important.
Toby Young at Lockdown Sceptics posted this link.
https://pastebin.com/WBzAFDgA
A black (yes, black) US history professor utterly trashing the BLM narrative and the craven submission of all and sundry.
Absolute must read.
His letter includes this essential knowledge, and so much more, eloquently put:
“George Floyd was a multiple felon who once held a pregnant black woman at gunpoint. He broke into her home with a gang of men and pointed a gun at her pregnant stomach. He terrorized the women in his community. He sired and abandoned multiple children, playing no part in their support or upbringing, failing one of the most basic tests of decency for a human being. He was a drug-addict and sometime drug-dealer, a swindler who preyed upon his honest and hard-working neighbors.
“And yet … celebrating this violent criminal, elevating his name to virtual sainthood. A man who hurt women. A man who hurt black women.”
Well done the black professor. It is important to remember that white Europeans generally did not take slaves. They bought them from mostly African and Arab traders who had already raided villages and enslaved the inhabitants. Of course, this does not excuse the crimes of slave purchasers, but if they are guilty, so are the African and Arab traders, if not more so.
Does anyone know anyone – friend or relation – who has ever owned a slave? No? Then why are we supposed to take the knee? We must not let bleeding heart liberals and softies let the side down. It was this country that first banned slavery and then enforced it world wide through our navy.
Well said.
I see the prof’s email has been taken down. Even if it was concocted, rather than genuine, the sentiments and description of Berkley left authoritarianism were authentic.
“What does taking the knee mean, when you have to kneel to save your job”. That is the chilling modern message.
Hasn’t this Ed Davey inspired pile of garbage private members bill been kicked into touch yet. I thought in the past the majority private members bills were rail roaded into the buffers quite smartly, so what is so different about this particular one. Surely, surely with a parliamentary majority of 80 seats, the Conservatives will defeat this nonsense resoundingly. Or is there a chance that it might just succeed, and will come to the rescue of Boris Johnson who didn’t really want to leave after all.
Yes I wondered how the hell that Bill was still ‘alive’. But I’m not sufficiently ‘educated’ in parliamentary procedure to know. Are HoC now actually meeting? Did the ‘virtual’ HoC let this bill pass a first reading?
Fingers crossed it gets killed pronto.
I think it will be interesting to see how many Tory MPs do not support the Govt. Perhaps we can have names please Vivian. Would not surprise me if Mrs May was top of the list
“This “would allow the UK to become a manufacturing hub for the EU”, Mr Barnier said.”
But, but, but! It’s a perfect win-win! Don’t they see? We buy in product then remanufacture to meet the EU’s ludicrously byzantine specifications and regulations or ‘negotiate’ with corrupt officials. What a lovely business! All that delicious wining and dining! Everybody makes money!
A bit rough on the EU countries who have to pay, of course but hey. Couldn’t have the EU cleaning up on their side or, heaven forbid, adopting the British Standards a whole Empire once ran on, now could we? (I did buying for a living when young. Those were the days!)
Derrr . . .my brain hurts. Seriously, I really did get confused on this. Surely what Barnier has exposed is that made in EU/exported from EU is a complete fraud. Or something.
We have less ‘actual’ trade with EU than with rest of world and what we do have with EU is more imports than exports. That’s what I’m hanging on to.
Pauline Agreed. What I can’t fathom out is that, as the EU export more to the UK than the other way round,why Barnier fails to realise the UK can also put up hurdles in import controls to make it just as difficult for EU products to be imported as he is threatening the UK
Thanks Grahame. That is clearer now.
And that compromise is cowardice of the beaten..
TGS Now that I do understand.
Thanks, CM
It is my considered position that Boris and Dominic, under enormous and ignorant pressure, have done as good a job as humanly possible..
If Boris Johnson really wants to leave the EU, then what is the point of these negotiations for an FTA (free trade deal) with the European Union? We all know that the EU will not agree to Britain really leaving, so any FTA with the EU will involve a BRINO, a Brexit in name only.
Any trade deal with the EU will include Britain giving up self-government and independence by remaining in “close regulatory alignment” with the EU. That will mean that British regulations and laws will be dictated by the EU, and we will effectively remain part of the EU.
The only purpose of attempting to reach a deal with the EU is to avoid a real Brexit and to get a BRINO instead. There is no point to these Transition Period Trade negotiations whatsoever, unless you don’t want a real Brexit.
Ah but Ralph T May has gone.
But the EU hasn’t gone, unfortunately. It will never agree to a true Brexit, only a BRINO.
So we Crash Out. Yipee!
So far TGS. Otherwise he is a dead duck. What the hell will we do then?
Sorry Pauline I dunno.
I’ve just written a huge comment which boiled down to. ” I dunno ” so I’ve deleted it.. But I’m terrifified. But certain things will happen. Our course is largely already fixed.
.
TGS, you’re right to be terrified. When most state banks in the EU are swallowed in the Eurozone’s one trillion euro black hole Britain will have to bail them out. The Withdrawal Treaty’s BRINO has made sure of that.
Perhaps I’m beginning to see the light Ralph. Are you saying we can still be caught in that trap? Because of the transition period we can be stung for these trillions?
If so, what happens if we refuse to pay?
Does it make a difference if we end ‘trade’ talks – like now, instead of waiting to 31/12?