They still don't get it #94

In one of no doubt several looking back pieces, the GHraun offers this essay by one Tim Adams

we examine the forces that finally pushed the UK and the EU into this momentous break

... emotional brutality of the choice... after all these years of angst and haggling, the UK will finally hear the door slam on its long-time family home and find itself suddenly alone with all its baggage in the chill air outside

In a set of imagined answers to future school questions, Adams suggests as reasons for our departure:

stubborn Euroscepticism that always characterised Britain’s relationship with the union as it inched toward federalism, just as they would note the immediate crises of the Greek financial bailout, and the migrant chaos brought on by the collapse of Syria, and examine how they coincided with long years of stagnant wages and austerity at home.

The marking scheme might look, too, for reference to the geographical inequalities of Britain – the sense that the vote against Brussels was also for many a cathartic “up yours” to London and Westminster. And examiners could also give a tick to mention of the role played by tabloid media, owned by offshore plutocrats with a vested interest in deregulation and a reliably profitable line in raucous jingoism.

The top grades might be reserved for those framing these arguments with introductory paragraphs on the rise of populism fuelled by the unchecked influence of Facebook and fake news – and perhaps the unique combination of a prime minister in David Cameron who was the opposite of a man of the people, and a throwback opposition leader in Jeremy Corbyn, seeking to hide doubts not only about the EU but also Nato, by not showing up.

Which is nearly reasonable for the Graun at first, then a bit obsessive. And, of course:

Nigel Farage, bothering asylum seekers in his union jack loafers and Arthur Daley coat; Dominic Cummings, the self-styled “disruptor” who found new ways to use social media to stoke the oldest prejudices about “foreigners”; and diehards like Bill Cash MP, the emblematic old soldier of the struggle, who spent a political lifetime seeking to “avenge” the death of a brave father killed in the Normandy landings.

There's some generational stuff  and some crap about social media memes, and inarticulacy among Leavers, and trotting out the wise cosmo EU line about sovereignty meaning shared powers. There is still denial:

The strong likelihood, after all the political trauma, is that we are leaving the EU, on terms no one imagined, with a majority of the population much preferring to stay in.

And a consoling joke:

my favourite answer to the question of how we got here came from that caller, named Mark, who contacted Farage’s LBC phone-in show last year, to thank him for everything he had done for Britain.

“I used to be an ardent remainer,” Mark said. “I believed in the European project and that staying in the union was the best thing for us, and then something monumental happened and I completely changed my opinion on all of it.”

“And what,” Farage asked, “was that monumental thing that happened, Mark?”

“I was kicked in the head by a horse.”

 They won't change. They can't change.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 We're out of the European Union. Just how did we get here? | Brexit | The Guardian

Hutton dreams of 2029

 I missed this first time around on one of the Sundays we have endured lately: This is W Hutton in the Observer:

The dream is over. On New Year’s Day, the curtain comes down on Britain’s long engagement with Europe’s noblest and greatest effort at collaboration and liberty. Our freedoms are to be slashed and an immense bureaucracy imposed on us. Next Friday Britons will lose the freedom to live, work, and trade in goods and services as they choose throughout the EU. Once natural [!] rights are to be torched.

Bloody hell! We are not rejoining are we? Hutton thinks actually we are -- in 9 years time (see below) 

Our goods exporters, previously able to treat Europe as their home market, will have their goods painstakingly checked and controlled at EU borders, and VAT and excise duties paid immediately. More than 200m customs declarations will have to be filled in as lorries wait in new vast holding pens disfiguring our land....To sell into the EU a business will have to ensure it complies with that country’s laws. Services, our banks, insurance companies and investment house – great economic strengths – will have to go cap in hand asking permission to trade where once they were welcomed

Compliance with laws is entirely new, of course. Of course, British exporters were welcomed! We did so well compared to EU exporters. I love the idea that we only trade now if we are granted permission. It gets fanciful and worse... 

We will need visas to stay in the EU beyond three months. Fifteen thousand British students a year will lose the right to study with no fees in European universities under the Erasmus programme. Britain is out of the European Investment Bank, which lent billions to the depressed parts of the UK; also out of Euratom, Europol and Eurojust. We are out of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, crucial in the fight against climate change and fundamental to the economics of wind farms and new nuclear power stations alike. We are to lose all automatic [NB] access to EU databases....the capacity of the British government to turn British regulations into EU regulations and, via the EU’s heft, then global regulations, as it has done so cleverly, for example, over specialist chemicals and mobile phone networks, has disappeared. No British company will be able to follow Vodafone to global pre-eminence. Inward investment, which boomed under EU membership, and which has already fallen by four fifths since the referendum, will remain depressed.

our horizons shrink, along with our influence. Cooperation with the EU over defence, foreign policy and external security is to cease at the request of the UK government. Thus, not only is Britain outside the forum where European states construct their alliances, thereby disabling itself from the great European game of balance of power politics it has played so well, it has chosen to make itself a Little Sir Echo in a world of mighty superpowers 

Poor old Hutton still dreams of Empire as so many of them do. Of course, there has to be some balance:

[The deal] goes significantly beyond World Trade Organization terms. Even the EU concedes that this is unprecedented, if very much in its interests...The UK will win some new autonomies. It will be able to approve the use of hi-tech products – from drones to new medicines – faster, which, if used cleverly, will benefit those fast-growing industries. There will be a baby trade deal with the US. But, in the biggest irony of all, if this is to benefit British capitalism it will require a makeover – to become more high investment and stakeholder-oriented, working closely with government. It will have to look… more European.

I see no problems if it adopts those aspects of European policy, but not all the rest of it that comes as a package, of course -- that is the whole point..

Meanwhile, Hutton clearly intends to dream the next 9 years away (why 9? why not 4?)

And when the incoming Labour government of 2029, led by one of the MPs who saw the future and voted against the treaty this week [ah -- Starmer will have to be overthrown first], holds its promised referendum on EU membership [complete with joining the Euro?] , the elderly Europhobe voters will this time be outvoted.

The old P Toynbee policy --wait for the elderly to die. Why wait? Deny us the vote now. And those likely to die before 2029? And anyone suspected of Europhobe irrationalism?

Observer backs fisherfolk and Brexiteers!

Suddenly,  the Observer seems to be on the side of the gallant little fishermen of England. Not long ago, they were piddling little anachronistic hangovers from an earlier age standing in the way of progress and the glorious future of metal window frame manufacturers, a product of Johnsons' nostalgic fantasies. However,. now, it seems, some of them are prepared to find fault with the terms of the deal:

 

fishermen’s leaders accused Boris Johnson of “caving in” at the 11th hour to clinch agreement on Christmas Eve.... promises made by Leavers that they would regain control of all UK fishing waters by voting for Brexit had been broken....we’re still looking for the ‘prodigious amounts of fish’ we were promised, and for us it changes nothing.”

 

The Observer's version of the deal has it that

 

In the Christmas Eve deal the UK government and Brussels agreed that 25% of EU boats’ fishing rights in UK waters will be transferred to this country’s fishing fleet over a period of five-and-a-half years. The UK had originally demanded that the EU’s rights be cut by 80%. The UK did, however, reduce the number of years over which the change will be introduced to well under half of what the EU originally demanded...After this period, the two sides will negotiate over future fishing rights, with the deal allowing for either to impose tariffs on the other’s exports of fish in the event of serious disagreements.

I think the last bit means full (formal) control subject to annual negotiation, not permanant quotas and regulation as the EU wanted but I am no expert. We shall see.

 

A key factor in the Observer's sudden championing of the fishermen might be that:

Scotland’s first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, on Saturday complained that promises made to her country’s fishing sector had been broken, insisting this was “yet another example of Tory governments forcing Scotland in the wrong direction”...

She added that an independent Scotland could be a “bridge-builder between the UK and the EU”.

Talk about fantasy! Scotland at the heart of Europe I believe the SNP slogan is.

 

The rest of the Observer story seems to support the view held by some old Brexiteers that the deal needs further discussion. 

The Tory MP and former Brexit secretary David Davis told the Observer he wanted reassurances that the deal would not allow the EU to impose a wide range of tariffs on UK goods if there were future disagreements over fishing rights....t was premature to think Eurosceptics would give the deal unqualified backing: “It might not be white smoke. It might be black smoke.”

The Observer backing Brexiteers! Anything to avoid any possibility that the cad Johnson might get some credit after all 

Meanwhile, I wondered what the Observer cartoonist would do if a deal was signed. What would happen to the ogre/landlside/yawning chasm of no-deal Brexit? He hasn't much idea yet of what to replace them with yet except words, in a cliched setting for the change of year. What a duffer.

Will the carp cover the egg? Guradina blusters on...

It seems liike the last minute attack of nerves that produced the editorial that shrieked that it was all going to end in no-deal because Johnson was such a cad and liar has left the GHraun with a bit of egg on its face to go with the carp. Never mind, there is still covid -- and no doubt climate change, the death of Gorge Floyd, slavery and lots of other things to fall back on. A bit of repair work on the sutures first:

Britain now confronts its most serious emergency since the second world war. It faces the unprecedented challenge of coronavirus while adjusting to a new diminished status outside the European Union. The country’s health service is at breaking point, and its future as a unified state is on the line. All this goes unmentioned by Boris Johnson, perhaps because he disingenuously promised that Brexit would save the NHS.

MPs will be asked to pass into law a hard Brexit – despite scarcely having had time to read the new treaty, let alone properly consider it. Without shame, Mr Johnson seeks credit for his agreement and the freedom to run our own domestic policy unconstrained by EU law. Gloating will deepen European mistrust and our isolation. It is also insensitive, as most businesses are ill-prepared for the changes.  

Does el Gruno seriously think that Scots nattery is actually more likely now we have left the EU? That the EU will import Scottish seed potatoes again once Scotland is independent?

And residual weaselling while searching for the moral high ground:

Sir Keir is, therefore, right to back the deal, but that will not be enough. To regain trust, he will have to find a narrative that convinces the public he is fighting the next election, not the last one. It would be a rhetorical error for Sir Keir to apologise for Labour’s opposition to Tory Europhobia. Under Mr Johnson, the Conservatives may ignore their own past, but they will never say sorry for it. Britain lacks a responsible government able to construct a coherent compensating policy for either of the twin crises enveloping the country. Under Mr Johnson it is far from clear that we will ever get one.

The Times review of their cartoons of the year also serves to remind us of the imagined horrors that so plagued the luvvie mind. Brexit would mean we had no choice but to obey Trump's agenda, forgetting that he had to be re-elected. If we wanted to eat chlorinated chicken from the USA we would have to agree to impose sanctions on China. Biden, meanwhile would refuse to cooperate with us because of his Irish ancestry. Ireland would be in flames anyway. And the shortages...

For me, there is already a sense of what the fuck was all the fuss about . It seems we have agreed to abide by most of the European standards if we trade with them and to let them fish in our waters for another 5.5 years until they can adjust.We do not have 'free' movement of EU nationals.  We have more paperwork. They have managed to punish us in minor ways like banning the export of Scottish seed potatoes and tampering with haddock repatriation prices. Any arbitration will not involve the ECJ. Did it really take all that time and effort, all that leaking and threatening, all that bluffing and backdoor manouevring to achieve that? 

What a horrbile authoritarian and dogmatic bullying outfit the EC turned out to be.

 

 

Guardian sticks to carp

Very revealing item exclusive to the Graun from what I can see: 

Brexit trade deal 'disastrous' for Scottish seed potato farmers, says Sturgeon 

 Many points arise, of course. Is this some bizarrre quid pro quo or is there some reason for suddenly excluding Scottish seed potatoes from some alignment deal, any special reason for thinking our seed  potatoes will not align for some reason in the face of some imminent major EU upgrade? Is this typical of the sort of thing they have been discussing for the last 4 years? What would Sturgeon have us do -- reverse the whole thing to keep some Scottish farmers happy?

 

I also remember, although I can't find it now, another problem raised by the Graun yesterday which turned on haddock repatriation costs as another recent unresolved problem. Same issues for me -- how many hours of civil service time were expended discussing these fer Chrissake? Why would the Graun think them important enough to block the whole thing?

  

In further signs that the GHRaun's favourite fish is carp,in one of those inexplicable convergences of the right and the good, Gruan coverage (eg here), reported a comment by Barnier, ran a story 'of its own', and asked a question to Johnson at his press conference all stressing that UK students would no longer participate in Erasmus. Terrible shaming day showing what little Englanders we have become -- except that it was expensive for us, UK students participated at a low rate (probably because few spoke foreign languages well enough) and there was another scheme proposed anyway which would allow study all over the world.

The GRaun did have to report the news of the deal as well, of course, but with a certain lack of good grace as you would expect

After nine months of tortuous talks, a Brexit deal was secured at 1.44pm GMT on Christmas Eve, avoiding a no-deal exit from the transition period with just a week to go....The deal delivered on the promise of a “giant free-trade zone” characterised by “regulatory competition”, Johnson said. “We have taken back control of laws and our destiny …We have taken back control of every jot and tittle of our regulation in a way that is complete and unfettered.”...The prime minister said the UK had won the right [sic]  “set our own standards, to innovate in the way that we want” in key sectors such as biosciences and artificial intelligence. “British laws will be made solely by the British parliament; interpreted by British judges, sitting in the UK courts,” he said.

 [BUT] Boris Johnson [is] vowing to pit the country against the EU in a race for economic success [a very bad thing for the Graun, of course], [and]...the Office for Budget Responsibility... expects Brexit to shave 4% off GDP in the medium term.

Worse, still, in a demonstration of cosmopolitanism and sophistication showing exactly what we are giving up:

 The European commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, gently questioned Johnson’s understanding of sovereignty....

“For me, it is about being able to seamlessly do work, travel, study and do business in 27 countries. It is about pooling our strength and speaking together in a world full of great powers. And in a time of crisis, it is about pulling each other up. Instead of trying to get back to your feet, alone.

“And the European Union shows how this works in practice. No deal in the world can change the reality of [the] gravity in today’s economy. And in today’s world, we are one of the giants.”

Interesting use of the collective pronoun throughout and quite a few euphemisms which would amuse the poor in Greece, Italy and Spain especially. Bit of a threat at the end too?

Level means uneven in latest EU speak

Different accounts of the sticking points in the talks. To no-one's surprise, the Graun parrots (parts of)  M Barnier's view:

Michel Barnier has said the main obstacle to a deal in the final “few hours” of the post-Brexit trade negotiation is whether Brussels will be able to hit British goods with tariffs if the government closes its fishing waters to EU fishing fleets in the future.

In the future! For all time!

 

A rather different and enlarged take in the Times (subscription) though, adding a bit:

Boris Johnson had called on the European Union last night to drop its demands to allow Brussels to subsidise industries across Europe while denying the UK the same rights. Mr Barnier has called for Brussels aid to be exempt from any future subsidy control regime as part of a Brexit deal....The issue has been brought into focus by a €750 billion EU pandemic recovery fund and other payments that will be used to directly support many industries in countries that are significant rivals with the UK, such as France, Italy and Spain. While similar forms of [UK?] government aid to industry would be subjected to subsidy control scrutiny, EU payments in the next Brussels budget would be excluded.

What a marvellous Continental notion of 'level'! The UK cannot improve its playing field because that would be unfair (because the EU rules would prevent it following suit). But the EU is proposing to suspend its rules to allow it to improve its own playing fields with subsidies. So what's the problem? None -- except the EU wants [now? still?] to be more than level, and to subsidise while the UK cannot!

 

 

Normal people face annoyances when travelling in Europe with pets

After all the huffing and puffing, the Graun can only warn of this:

As well as increasing costs, there are likely to be even longer delays at ports. A trade deal would provide some “customs facilitation” to make the process smoother....the UK is demanding huge gains in catches from British waters once outside the EU’s common fisheries policy. The impact could be devastating for coastal communities in France, Belgium, Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark, among others....the UK is demanding huge gains in catches from British waters once outside the EU’s common fisheries policy. The impact could be devastating for coastal communities in France, Belgium, Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark, among others....If you already live in the EU and draw a state pension from the UK, your payments will go up each year in line with the triple lock – the rate of inflation, average earnings or 2.5%, whichever is highest. For anyone who moves to the EU after January, you will still be able to claim your UK state pension, but how much you get will depend on the outcome of the talks....The UK has applied to become a “listed country”, which will allow pets to be moved between it and the EU almost as freely as now. But if this is not approved, travelling with your pet will become harder....The big providers have all said they have no plans to introduce roaming charges, but if they wanted to charge, they could.

Pretty terrifying outcomes,especially for those likely to retire to the EU, or drive in Europe with their pets and want to do Airbnb in hte homes of French fishermen -- what the GRaun thinks of as normal people.

Boris is a cad #94

Day job intruded again. Nerves are getting really strained,obviously. The Graun delivered itself of a classic petite-bourgeois hectoring in an editorial. Nothing changes, but it feels better:

Boris Johnson got where he is today by telling lies about Europe. He made stories up as a journalist. He told fibs on an industrial scale in the referendum campaign. Now he is telling whoppers as prime minister too....Mr Johnson arrived in Brussels to tell the EU that Britain was not ready to make a fisheries agreement, would never accept the European court of justice as the arbiter on future disputes, and could not agree to any form of agreement on trading standards that tied Britain’s hands to EU rules...

But this was not sticking to his guns, dear me, no...

A prime minister who wanted a deal to continue trading with this country’s largest market would not have said any of this. The fishing industry is not so large that its needs should prevent a wider agreement. There is no overriding reason of practice or principle why an arbitration system involving the ECJ cannot be devised. Most important of all, Britain ought to agree that some regulatory alignment with the single market to ensure a level playing field is overwhelmingly in its own economic interest.

the enlightened sharing of sovereignty is involved in every trade deal that Britain or any other nation will ever strike and is fundamental to the working of international relations.

Giving in, 'enlightened sharing of sovereignty', fuck the fishermen -- who can tell the difference? Brussels...

It is entirely right for the EU to make the granting of preferential trade access conditional on at least some form of continuing alignment on subsidies, tax, labour standards, competition rules and environmental safeguards....Any other approach involves trusting Britain not to break its word. Why should the EU do that, especially in the wake of the UK’s internal market bill which, until this week, contained clauses that allow Britain to ignore international law and its own treaties?

Just for the record, it was the EU that recently increased it's demands for a ratchet, of course, and has smuggled in various other sneaky provisions. Nevertheless...

Because of him and his catastrophic cause of regaining some imaginary lost British greatness, [well, and the majority of the voting public]  this country now stands on the brink of rupture with Europe. 

'Europe' as an imaginary lost  place of harmony and civilisation is still alive then.

Meanwhile, the stalemate on the EU budget has been ended by a fudge. The details are here. The  crucial bit is in the last sentence:

“It will be crucial that commission president [Ursula] von der Leyen remains firm and is not guided by lazy and non-binding declarations of the member states.”

Nostalgia and hope for Remainers #94

Classic tension between hope and reason, commitment and analysis in the Graun today. The headline: 

For seasoned EU watchers, Brexit trade talks look uncannily like Grexit

That all ended very well for European cosmopolitanism/neo-lib repression, of course, even overturning a referendum, so maybe so will Brexit. But then, a bit of residual journalism training kicks in

Analysis: While there are similarities with the 2015 clash between Athens and Brussels, there are also key differences

Seems pretty safe if not exactly ' information that’s grounded in science and truth, and analysis rooted in authority and integrity...truth-seeking ..revealing journalism that had real-world impact...urgent, powerful reporting'. Lest we forget:

Tsipras [Greek PM] was subjected to what EU insiders called “extensive mental waterboarding”. Greece would stay in the eurozone and get a new bailout, but only after agreeing to reform the tax and pension system, to liberalise the labour market and deregulate other parts of the economy....It was clear who had come off worst. “They crucified Tsipras in there,” said one senior eurozone official who attended the summit,

I recall it well. That was one of the occasions when I really started to see through the EC.

Having reminded us of that great episode in European democracy, the Graun conclusion is actually pretty limp:

All things considered, Johnson would rather secure a trade deal than not, but trading with the EU on World Trade Organization terms would not be so nearly as momentous for the UK as leaving the euro would have been for Greece. The choice is no deal or a relatively thin deal.

Presumably, this was a last minute call to rally the Remainer troops?A pretext to remind them of earlier victories, a bit like the Scottish rugby team singing about Bannockburn? It willl probably only harden everyone else.

Tit, tat, ratchets and upskirting*

Tit has gone so tat can be revoked reports the Graun:

On Tuesday, the government said it would abandon all the Brexit clauses relating to Northern Ireland in the internal market and finance bills following in exchange for promises by the EU to minimise checks and controls due to be imposed on food and medicines going into Northern Ireland from Great Britain from 1 January.

Even Maitlis on Newsnight considered (briefly) that this might be a result for Johnson. No doubt it was really superior wisdom and cosmopolitanism by the EC, though,and they had been quite right to be reproachful and annoyed at the UK provisions.  She soon recovered and asked an NI person whether or not he had expected Johnson would betray him

 

Meanwhile, you have to hand it to the EC who never stop trying. Some assiduous UK officials have spotted a few little timebombs concealed in substantial EC position papers. So that's what they spend all that time 'discussing ! This one is the latest. In true Graunperson terms:

For Downing Street, the clause is a “ratchet”. In Brussels it is said to be about “evolution” – a provision in the Brexit treaty that will ensure that as one side develops environmental, labour and social standards, the other cannot sit tight and enjoy economic advantages without there being consequences....The EU and UK have agreed to “non-regression” clauses in the treaty, which would ensure that neither side can undercut a common baseline of standards at the end of the transition period. But Brussels wants to go further. As the EU develops its rulebook on working conditions or the environment, for example, it is seeking a mechanism to ensure that European businesses are not left at an economic disadvantage if Britain does not step up its regulatory protections. 

It's evolution. Who could possibly object.  I wonder what the 'mechanism' might involve? Just shows how far-thinking and responsible these EC people are. Next step -- legislate for the entire world! In the name of environmental standards of course.

 

In an example of vital, independent, quality journalism the Graun conclusion is just a bit different:

EU member states are ever vigilant of anything that might offer the UK a competitive advantage. British political considerations are rubbing up against vital European economic interests in a dangerous way.

Makes a change from all that stuff about civilised tolerance and freedom opposed to narrow little-Englandism. The Graun nearly gets it at last!

However, the Times has the best story:

Upskirting barrister free to practise after blaming Brexit

Now it's a shortage of Barbie dolls.

The lead story on the GHraun website is a classic example of blurring things together to make a political point. Almost the opposite of 'analysis rooted in authority and integrity' as it claims at tjhe foot of every story in its sad appeal for funds. Never one to pass up a chance for one last try, today's graun has this classically misleading headline:

Builders run short of supplies as UK port holdups raise Brexit concerns

Builders are running short of everything from power tools and screws to timber and roof tiles as the gridlock at UK ports holds up crucial deliveries and sets off alarm bells in the run-up to Brexit.

What has happened?

The UK’s ports have been grappling with a surge in freight volumes at a time when their ability to process it all is hindered by coronavirus restrictions....[Builders] have enjoyed bumper sales as locked-down Britons renovated their homes but were experiencing availability problems because they “can’t get materials in quicker”. The squeeze was also pushing up the price of goods.

So how to link all this to Brexit? Easy...

...the high level of demand has prevented the building trade from stockpiling in the run-up to Brexit....The situation was compounded by uncertainty surrounding the import taxes that will apply after Brexit, he added.

 No doubt bad weather causes a crisis too, foreign uncertainties, speculation while ships are still at sea. Which ones are the most important though? Right at the end:

The coronavirus pandemic has destroyed the equilibrium that usually exists in the maritime supply chain....UK businesses are reporting stratospheric increases in shipping costs, which are likely to add to the pressure on prices in the new year.

The consequences for DIY look bad enough, and the cost of getting a little man in to  redecorate feature walls in fashionable dark grey might increase, but the final straw is

port delays [are] already causing shortages of popular toy sets such as Barbie

When will this barbarous onsluaght on cosmpolitan values and tolerance ever end?

What a relief when it's over!

 And we won't have to see any more tired, pointless banal,endlessly repetitive  Riddell cartoons:

On and off again as Macron seeks re-election and EU remain in denial

Some excitment yesterday about the prospect of a deal. Friday's Newsnight promised that E Maitlis would be giving her views (frank at least) on Monday. Oh good.

 

The Guardian explainer is quite informative about the sticking points:

 

[There were] new EU demands resulting from French lobbying.

 

The EU was said to have started pushing for further and harder assurances over the role of a UK regulator of subsidies, or state aid...The EU wants all its funding from Brussels to be exempt from state aid rules, unlike Treasury funding....It also wants the domestic regulator to be given the power to approve or block subsidies based on shared EU-UK principles written in the treaty. A failure of the regulator to abide by the principles would give the EU the opportunity to unilaterally hit back through tariffs on British goods or even suspension of part of the trade deal.

 

Some problems here. What EU funding would remain to be exempt from UK rules -- short term stuff until our contributions finally stop altogether? What is implied exactly? The domestic regulator would be a sort of local ECJ? Haven't the EU realised yet? The EU would reserve the right to break the terms of the deal if they saw a breach in regulation -- but wouldn't that damage their international reputation for fairness and all that? No further comment from the Graun?

This seems more explicit:

France has said it will not tolerate a deal that provides a possible competitive advantage for UK businesses in the European market place....some European capitals were getting jittery about the lack of information on the most contentious parts of the deal: access to UK fishing waters and the maintenance of a level playing field through equivalent subsidy control regimes and standards over time. 

 

It seems now to be a matter of face-to-face talks between Johnson and von der Leyen, between an elected Prime Minister and an...er..."elected" President of the EU  who will then consult national leaders. France is threatening to veto.

 

Let's hear it for small shopkeepers

There is this magic that connects the new petitie bourgeoisie. I think it is the habitus at work. It produces remarkable similarlites between spokespersons. Last night E Maitlis jeering at fishing.Now the GHraun

it is possible that continuing attempts to gain a win for British fishing industry could scupper much larger parts of the UK economy....Fishing is a politically charged issue on both sides of the Channel....Brussels’ negotiators will have organised their strategy around offensive and defensive interests. That approach does not seem to have been mirrored on the UK side, with the British government giving up on securing favourable rules of origin – which decide whether cars made with imported parts will attract tariffs – while holding firm on fishing.[said] Lord Liddle, a veteran of European trade negotiations who advised Peter Mandelson when the latter was the EU’s trade commissioner

In the same year, fishing and aquaculture was worth £446m, less than 3% of the size of the under-threat car manufacturing sector alone.

Emmanuel Macron, is keen to be seen as fighting for France’s relatively poorer northern coastal communities before elections in 2022. [and is no doubt fully justified because these are poorer northern communities in France]

Meanwhile, at home

there is exasperation among executives and unions that their fortunes, and the fate of other sectors, are reliant on the government’s efforts to expand a much smaller industry.

The Graun was once a liberal paper, but it has long forgotten JS Mill on the role of the State in protecting permanent minorities from dominance by market capitalism. The GHeraun is keen to protect its own favourite ethnic or sexual minority communities, of course, but I don't suppose many of them fish. Lots of fisherfolk are suspected of voting Leave too.

JS Mill said it was actually in our interests to protect minorities, of course -- it is not just sentiment or special pleading. 'Bigger' industry seems to have a better idea of the interests of all of us, or at least of their social class, in protecting minorities

However, bigger sectors are wary of being seen to criticise a smaller counterpart. One industry insider said: “We would never go: ‘Frankly, we should give up cod for car parts.’”

Back to familiar Graun sentimental capitalism with petite bourgeois primitive accumulation in mind with this:

how are small to medium-sized businesses – the family businesses that are the backbone of the country [!] – faring? ...Philip Rowell has already upped sticks and moved his company to Barcelona....Businesswoman and TV Dragons’ Den panellist Deborah Meaden warned of disruptions to supplies deal or no deal...Sally runs a schoolwear and stationery shop selling everything from uniforms to pens but “hasn’t the faintest idea” of what to do after a German supplier told her she would have to be responsible for all customs imports procedures....Peter Qvortrup, Audionote, Brighton [said] we don’t know exactly where we will be on 1 January....“We have been totally ignoring all Brexit communications from anyone as, surprise surprise, we have more important things to worry about,” said the managing director, Mark Ormiston....[Ormiston Wire 'produces specialist cable and braid, and counts prestigious work in its portfolio including an umbrella installation in Heathrow airport and Thomas Heatherwick’s Bleigiessen sculpture in the atrium of The Wellcome Trust.']. World of Water Beds is a small family company with two main suppliers – one in Denmark and the other in Exeter....“In a deal scenario we still have customs clearance and that is going to cost £25 to £50 per pallet and that will be passed straight on to the customer,” said Tandy.

That's more like it! Someone should speak up for shopkeepers and small manufacturers against BOTH irrational and proletarianised left-overs and modern big business.

Willies plonked on the table as Maitlis heckles Mermaids

In the last knockings of the talks, it seems to have come to basic hard bargaining:

The UK is to table its long awaited finance bill next week but anticipated controversial clauses to override the Brexit withdrawal agreement are expected to be axed if a trade deal is struck beforehand...The EU has warned that trade talks will be pulled immediately if the government goes ahead with a second batch of legislation granting itself unilateral powers to renege on part of the withdrawal agreement signed in January.

Wise move by Johnson to have that ace up his sleeve really. 

Meanwhile, I can't easily look it up and reference it, so this is only what I recall and I might be being unfair, but a bit of last night's Newsnight was interesting:

 

Lord Dodds of NI pointed out that having a border betweeen NI and the mainland UK as the EU proposed would also breach the Good Friday Agreement and cause tensions -- people had just forgotten the Loyalist case. So had E Maitlis, it seemed, who was forced to insist that the EU was far too wise to take any risks like that.

 

E Maitlis then went on to expess scorn and incredulity that fishing should be an obstacle. She had looked it up, she said, (asked one of her mates?) and the industry that made metal frames for windows contributed more to the GDP. You don't get many fishermen in Islington, of course, although I am surprised they have also heard of metal window frames,(she was a bit sneery) or dreamed that someone actually made them somewhere.

 

On another story, E Maitlis was interviewing 'both sides' as in 'balance' over the recent High Court ruling regulating trans puberty-blocking treatment. She had one of the people bringing the successful case in the studio, and the CEO of Mermaids online. EM was typically one-sided, let one speak at some length with encouraging questions, and interrupted the other with hostile comment. The BBC seem to have given her a mute button so she can just override online speakers.

 

It was slightly surprising in that that it was the Mermaids CEO who got the hairdryer treatment, perhaps because the studio guest had already announced she was vulnerable, but the techniques were on show in all their glory -- scorn, scoffing, interruption, cutting across, lengthy comment, dubious appeals to common sense. There was no swearing, but if that wasn't bullying, especially by modern standards, I am M. Barnier.

 

It might be nasty of me but I do hope the trans lobby go for her and she gets Twittered for a change.