Monthly Archives: June 2020

LONDON The coronavirus epidemic in Britain has killed more than 40,000 people, sickened hundreds of thousands more, including Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and paralyzed the economy. Now it may claim another casualty: a trade agreement between Britain and the European Union.

On Friday, the two sides announced that they had made little headway in their efforts to strike a post-Brexit trade deal. With a deadline at the end of the year, and the last chance to ask for an extension looming this month, Mr. Johnsons government argues that it would rather walk away without a deal than prolong the talks.

While that may be posturing and, indeed, Britain now says it wants to step up the pace of negotiations next month, the pandemic has scrambled the governments economic and political calculations. A no-deal outcome, which once seemed all but impossible, now seems entirely plausible.

Far from pressuring Mr. Johnson to plead for more time, the pandemic is reordering the global economy in ways that have led some to question whether an agreement with Europe even makes sense for Britain anymore. With Mr. Johnson under fire for his chaotic handling of the virus, the compromises he would have to make with Brussels might be too great for his embattled government.

Covid-19, in the eyes of the government, has further reduced the value of a deal, said Mujtaba Rahman, a former European Commission economist now at the political risk consulting firm, Eurasia Group. The economy after the crisis is going to look fundamentally different than before the crisis, and the government wants a freer hand in reshaping that economy.

Britain formally left the European Union at the end of January, but it is staying under the blocs rules until the end of the year, as the two sides try to hammer out permanent arrangements on everything from fisheries to finance.

Mr. Rahman once argued that an extension to this transition period was likely. But he now predicts a slightly better-than-even chance that the negotiators will fail to come to terms, meaning that Britain would default to trading with the European Union on World Trade Organization terms in 2021 what is commonly called a no-deal Brexit.

Such an outcome would shock the British economy analysts have revived scenarios of trucks lined up for miles at the English Channel that loomed over previous rounds of Brexit brinkmanship but others argue that the disruption would be washed away in the epochal upheaval of the pandemic.

As high as the economic stakes are, the politics are even more important for Mr. Johnson, after three months in which he has faced a drumbeat of criticism over his handling of the pandemic.

By contrast, Mr. Johnson is back in his comfort zone when rehearsing the arguments that he used to win the referendum on leaving the European Union in 2016 and an election three years later.

Mr. Johnsons overriding objective, analysts said, is to be seen to take a much tougher negotiating position than his predecessor, Theresa May. Some key differences with the European Union are on points of principle ones that British officials doubt would be resolved with extra negotiating time. And staying in Europes trading regime for longer would mean paying it billions of pounds more, a politically poisonous outcome for Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Johnsons government escalated tensions with the European Union over the last month through the exchange of antagonistic letters, though on Friday, it took a more modulated tone.

The U.K.s ultimate red line is to be able to say We have beaten up the European Union, regardless of what is in any trade deal, said David Henig, director of the U.K. Trade Policy Project at the European Center for International Political Economy, a research institute in Brussels, who added this was achieved by the sharp exchange of letters.

While Mr. Henig said Mr. Johnson would probably prefer a deal and indeed used similar brinkmanship to retain Brexit hard-liners support in the previous phase of negotiations some around him would be happier without one. The decisions about whether, or how much, to compromise have yet to be made. With crunchtime approaching, political considerations are pulling Mr. Johnson toward obduracy rather than flexibility.

Inside his Conservative Party, Brexit remains a touchstone issue. Some of the critics of Mr. Johnsons coronavirus response, including his cautious relaxation of lockdown and belated plans to quarantine arriving travelers for 14 days, also happen to be hard-line Brexit supporters. For Mr. Johnson, it makes little sense to alienate them now by compromising over post-Brexit trade arrangements.

Much of the governments Brexit rhetoric seems directed more at a British audience than a continental European one, said Joachim Fritz-Vannahme, a senior adviser at the Bertelsmann Foundation in Germany. It is clear that there is infighting among Brexiteers and among the Conservatives in general, he said.

On the European side, the likelihood of failure has grown, too, simply because the trade talks have fallen down the list of priorities, dwarfed by the ramifications of Europes response to the pandemic.

The focus has completely changed, Mr. Fritz-Vannahme said. There are only 24 hours in a day, and leaders are already negotiating almost permanently, so I could imagine them saying, This is a minor problem in comparison to the coming recession and the pandemic.

Although the working-level negotiations have proceeded relatively smoothly by teleconference, David Frost, the chief British negotiator, said, we are close to the limits of what we can achieve in that format. British officials are seeking face-to-face negotiations in July but say they do not want uncertainty for business to linger into the fall.

The European Unions chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, said, I dont think we can go on like this forever. If anything, his tone was harsher than Mr. Frosts. He accused Mr. Johnson of reneging on commitments he made in the political declaration that set the stage for Britains exit.

Updated June 5, 2020

The unemployment rate fell to 13.3 percent in May, the Labor Department said on June 5, an unexpected improvement in the nations job market as hiring rebounded faster than economists expected. Economists had forecast the unemployment rate to increase to as much as 20 percent, after it hit 14.7 percent in April, which was the highest since the government began keeping official statistics after World War II. But the unemployment rate dipped instead, with employers adding 2.5 million jobs, after more than 20 million jobs were lost in April.

Mass protests against police brutality that have brought thousands of people onto the streets in cities across America are raising the specter of new coronavirus outbreaks, prompting political leaders, physicians and public health experts to warn that the crowds could cause a surge in cases. While many political leaders affirmed the right of protesters to express themselves, they urged the demonstrators to wear face masks and maintain social distancing, both to protect themselves and to prevent further community spread of the virus. Some infectious disease experts were reassured by the fact that the protests were held outdoors, saying the open air settings could mitigate the risk of transmission.

Exercise researchers and physicians have some blunt advice for those of us aiming to return to regular exercise now: Start slowly and then rev up your workouts, also slowly. American adults tended to be about 12 percent less active after the stay-at-home mandates began in March than they were in January. But there are steps you can take to ease your way back into regular exercise safely. First, start at no more than 50 percent of the exercise you were doing before Covid, says Dr. Monica Rho, the chief of musculoskeletal medicine at the Shirley Ryan AbilityLab in Chicago. Thread in some preparatory squats, too, she advises. When you havent been exercising, you lose muscle mass. Expect some muscle twinges after these preliminary, post-lockdown sessions, especially a day or two later. But sudden or increasing pain during exercise is a clarion call to stop and return home.

States are reopening bit by bit. This means that more public spaces are available for use and more and more businesses are being allowed to open again. The federal government is largely leaving the decision up to states, and some state leaders are leaving the decision up to local authorities. Even if you arent being told to stay at home, its still a good idea to limit trips outside and your interaction with other people.

Touching contaminated objects and then infecting ourselves with the germs is not typically how the virus spreads. But it can happen. A number of studies of flu, rhinovirus, coronavirus and other microbes have shown that respiratory illnesses, including the new coronavirus, can spread by touching contaminated surfaces, particularly in places like day care centers, offices and hospitals. But a long chain of events has to happen for the disease to spread that way. The best way to protect yourself from coronavirus whether its surface transmission or close human contact is still social distancing, washing your hands, not touching your face and wearing masks.

Common symptoms include fever, a dry cough, fatigue and difficulty breathing or shortness of breath. Some of these symptoms overlap with those of the flu, making detection difficult, but runny noses and stuffy sinuses are less common. The C.D.C. has also added chills, muscle pain, sore throat, headache and a new loss of the sense of taste or smell as symptoms to look out for. Most people fall ill five to seven days after exposure, but symptoms may appear in as few as two days or as many as 14 days.

If air travel is unavoidable, there are some steps you can take to protect yourself. Most important: Wash your hands often, and stop touching your face. If possible, choose a window seat. A study from Emory University found that during flu season, the safest place to sit on a plane is by a window, as people sitting in window seats had less contact with potentially sick people. Disinfect hard surfaces. When you get to your seat and your hands are clean, use disinfecting wipes to clean the hard surfaces at your seat like the head and arm rest, the seatbelt buckle, the remote, screen, seat back pocket and the tray table. If the seat is hard and nonporous or leather or pleather, you can wipe that down, too. (Using wipes on upholstered seats could lead to a wet seat and spreading of germs rather than killing them.)

The C.D.C. has recommended that all Americans wear cloth masks if they go out in public. This is a shift in federal guidance reflecting new concerns that the coronavirus is being spread by infected people who have no symptoms. Until now, the C.D.C., like the W.H.O., has advised that ordinary people dont need to wear masks unless they are sick and coughing. Part of the reason was to preserve medical-grade masks for health care workers who desperately need them at a time when they are in continuously short supply. Masks dont replace hand washing and social distancing.

If youve been exposed to the coronavirus or think you have, and have a fever or symptoms like a cough or difficulty breathing, call a doctor. They should give you advice on whether you should be tested, how to get tested, and how to seek medical treatment without potentially infecting or exposing others.

Moreover, there are tensions over new checks on trade with Northern Ireland, a part of the United Kingdom that shares a border with Ireland, which remains in the European Union.

For now, European political leaders show little sign of wanting to get involved in the talks. The next critical discussion for which no date has been set yet will be between Mr. Johnson and Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, the European Unions executive body.

Some analysts argue that the pandemic will drive Britain and other countries to bring manufacturing home to reduce their dependence on global supply chains. That, in turn, will lessen the need for an agreement with Brussels.

But while Brexit supporters argue that the effects of leaving without a trade deal could be buried beneath the economic losses wrought by the coronavirus, analysts think there would be visible damage.

Ports could clog and supply chains may seize up. The Japanese carmaker Nissan said this week that its factory in Sunderland, in the depressed northeast of England, would not be economically viable without a tariff-free trade agreement.

For companies already reeling under a collapse of demand and furloughed employees because of the pandemic, the prospect of another shock in January could be too much to bear, according to business lobbyists.

If youre in new levels of debt as a result of coronavirus, you cannot afford to deal with Brexit, Nicole Sykes, head of European Union negotiations at the Confederation of British Industry, wrote on Twitter. Just because the house is on fire doesnt mean also setting fire to the shed is chill.

Some analysts said the consequences of a disruptive break with the European Union would become more obvious after the summer, and that these arguments about burying Brexit in the pandemic would evaporate.

Its quite foolhardy to say that because the economic impact of coronavirus will be large that no one will notice the difference, said Sam Lowe, a trade expert at the Center for European Reform in London. Its a sophistic argument that because weve been thrown to the floor, we wont feel another kick.

Originally posted here:

How the Coronavirus Makes a No-Deal Brexit More Likely - The New York Times

The European Union fears that the UK government is deliberately stalling on Brexit trade-deal negotiations and may secretly be aiming to exit European trade arrangements without first agreeing to a new deal.

The UK is due to exit Europe's trade and customs arrangements at the end of 2020 despite growing pressure from business groups and opposition political parties to extend the Brexit transition period.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government insists the country will leave regardless of whether a new trade deal is negotiated.

The hardline stance, in which few concessions are being offered to the EU, has led some in Brussels to wonder whether the UK government even wants to sign a new trade deal before 2021.

"The chasm is both broad and deep," an EU source close to negotiations told Business Insider.

"Increasing numbers here" in Brussels "wonder if the British government wants a deal at all."

This chasm was illustrated recently by a novel exchange of letters between the UK's chief negotiator, David Frost, and his EU counterpart, Michel Barnier.

Frost, chosen by Johnson to lead the UK side, said that the UK was "perplexed" by the EU's approach, which he recently branded "ideological," and Brussels was offering an unfair trade deal.

Barnier over the weekend told the Sunday Times newspaper that the UK needed to show "more realism" in talks, and he accused Johnson of rowing back on commitments he signed up to during the Article 50 negotiations.

"There is a big gap on level playing field, governance, and fisheries, and the talks are not going awfully well," Hilary Benn, the chair of the House of Commons' Future Relationship with the EU committee, told Business Insider.

Anand Menon, the director at the UK in a Changing Europe think tank, said he didn't think there would be a breakthrough during this week's talks, despite it being the last full round scheduled before a crunch meeting later this month, where both sides are to take stock of progress.

"Neither side is ready to give concessions this week," he told Business Insider. "Both sides are reconciled to a 'meh' sort of summit where everyone is unhappy, but nobody wants to walk."

Raoul Ruparel, who served as chief Europe adviser to Johnson's predecessor, Theresa May, said a failure to make significant progress by the end of this week's round of talks could put the entire negotiation in jeopardy.

"It looks like we're heading to some sort of bust-up over the big issues," he told Business Insider.

"And the question is, what is the path back to the table and getting things back on track?

"If there is a falling out, the path back looks quite challenging."

This standoff is fueling concerns that the UK is set to walk away without a deal when the transition period ends in December, creating more chaos for supply chains and businesses being pushed to the limit by the COVID-19 outbreak.

UK opposition parties have urged Johnson to avoid this outcome by extending the transition period, which is scheduled to end December 31. The deadline for doing so is just a few weeks away, on June 31. The two sides can jointly agree to extend transition by up to two years, under the terms of the withdrawal agreement.

Major business groups have issued the same plea. The logistics industry has warned the UK government that British hauliers cannot prepare for January while dealing with the effects of the novel coronavirus. Other business groups are waiting for the outcome of this month's crunch meeting before deciding whether to also go public.

Yet despite warnings about the damage a crashing out on January 1 would do, the UK government is insistent that it will neither request nor accept an extension to the transition period and this message has been heard loud and clear in EU capitals. Johnson's government says extending the transition would only create more uncertainty for business and delay the UK's sovereign decision to detach itself from the EU's core institutions.

The UK's hardline opposition to extending the transition period has created suspicion in Brussels that Johnson's government is actually aiming to leave without a deal.

Phil Hogan, the EU's trade chief, last month said the UK was not approaching negotiations seriously and planned to blame the economic woe caused by leaving the EU without a trade deal on the devastating impact of COVID-19.

One member of Johnson's Cabinet recently told The Spectator that "the costs of an Australian-style deal have dropped massively" because the pandemic had already done massive damage to UK businesses and supply chains.

Menon said he believed that while Johnson would prefer a deal he was not averse to leaving without one.

"There's no doubt they are serious about their red lines," he said. "They are absolutely serious about not being under EU law. The UK is perfectly willing not to have a deal, but they're preference is to have a deal."

He said part of the UK's thinking was that there would be significant disruption for businesses whatever happens, given Johnson is not seeking a close relationship with the EU of the sort pursued by his predecessor, May.

"The gap between deal and no deal is thinner than it's ever been before," Menon said. "They have the argument that businesses are going to have to adapt anyway, so they might as well adapt to all the changes at once."

Labour MP Hilary Benn, who has chaired the Brexit committee since 2017, agreed with Menon, pointing to what he said was a relatively relaxed UK government approach to securing a new trading relationship with the UK's biggest trading partner.

"It's extraordinary that the government has not done an updated economic assessment of the kind of deal it's looking for with the EU, whereas on the US trade deal there were 50 to 60 pages of assessment," Benn told Business Insider.

"I cannot for the life of me understand why our most important relationship is treated in that way."

A detailed new report by the Social Market Foundation for the Best For Britain campaign group says that the combined impact of COVID-19 and leaving the transition period without a trade deal would create pockets of economic damage nationwide, with the northwest and the West Midlands being the most severely affected.

The UK's chief negotiator, David Frost. REUTERS/Francois Lenoir/File Photo

While the prospects of this week's talks producing a breakthrough appear remote, some observers point out that neither side is likely to make key concessions until later in the year anyway.

"The UK and EU only expect real movement towards the end of summer and beginning of autumn," Georgina Wright of the Institute for Government think tank told Business Insider.

"It's completely normal at the start of negotiations for there to be little movement and for both sides sticking rigidly to their positions. They want to get a sense of the full spectrum and what trade-offs are possible."

Wright said a likely outcome of this week's talks was "both sides saying there hasn't been sufficient progress, but they are confident that there will be in the coming weeks," paving the way for talks to continue over the summer.

Menon agreed. "The breakthrough probably won't be until September or October. It'll be late in the day," he said.

Johnson has previously threatened to walk away from negotiations and prepare the UK to trade with the EU on costly World Trade Organization rules if there isn't enough progress in talks by the crunch meeting in June.

Both sides are expected to continue negotiating into the summer, however, even if there is a bust-up this week.

Wright said that while recent exchanges between London and Brussels had been frosty, the UK's decision to publish its draft negotiating text could be key to unlocking negotiations if, as expected, they continued beyond this month.

"That's possibly the best way to try to get the EU member states to move from their position," she said.

"Now member states can reflect on the UK's text, and get a better sense of where the UK is coming from."

If a breakthrough does eventually arrive, what could it look like?

The former UK government official Ruparel said it would "involve a bit of give-and-take on both sides," with the EU making concessions on the emotive issue of fisheries and the UK on what the EU calls the level playing field a set of rules meant to prevent businesses in the UK from undercutting the EU and vice versa.

"In most areas there is a landing zone that would seem reasonable to both sides," Ruparel told Business Insider.

Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Ruparel warned, however, that the toughest issue to resolve would be state aid, on which "the gap is huge."

"The area I find hardest to see a landing zone is state aid," he said. "It's politically and technically complex."

Even if UK and EU negotiators do overcome their differences and reach an agreement, the December deadline for implementation is much tighter than in normal trade negotiations.

"The problem here is we don't have the luxury of time," the Institute for Government's Wright told Business Insider. "You can't take the talks to the wire in December in the same way you did with the Article 50 negotiations."

Compared with talks over the Brexit withdrawal agreement, which concluded late last year, the EU's process for ratifying a trade deal is more complex and will require several weeks before December 31.

This means, in reality, the two sides have just a few months to strike a deal. In total, UK and EU negotiators have less than a year to negotiate a free-trade agreement, while most deals take a few years to be thrashed out and put into law.

"If there is a breakthrough, it can begin to move quite quickly, potentially," Ruparel told Business Insider. "If there is a big breakthrough, the rest can fall into place. But the absolute latest would have to be the end of October or start of November. That's when you'd have to get things pushed towards ratification."

The Institute for Government on Saturday released a paper setting out other ways both sides could create more time for talks while extending transition remains off the table. Both the UK and the EU have already ruled out one option, which is attaching to a trade deal an implementation period for businesses to prepare for new trading arrangements.

The UK in a Changing Europe's Menon said that while a major breakthrough in negotiations was more likely in the autumn, so was Johnson taking the nuclear option and deciding to walk away from talks altogether.

"Politically, a lot of it is about the blame game," Menon said.

"I don't think politically it makes much sense for the UK to walk away now. It makes more sense to continue to negotiate, to look reasonable, and then turn around in the autumn and say, 'Well, look the EU screwed us.'"

Read more:

The EU is beginning to believe the UK actually wants the Brexit trade deal talks to fail - Business Insider - Business Insider

Most of us who have followed Brexit closely believed coronavirus would soften the governments stance in trade talks with Europe. The economic shock triggered by the pandemic, and the fact Whitehall is so overwhelmed managing it, made it more likely the government would extend the transition period, due to expire at the end of this year, or strike a deal. It turns out that the opposite is true. Rather than encouraging a more flexible and pragmatic approach, Covid-19 has instead reinforced the case for no deal at the very top of government.

Perhaps the most important driver is the belief among ministers that the UK economy will be permanently reshaped by the crisis, as companies create new supply chains and reshore production to provide greater resilience in the future, not least in case of another pandemic. The government wants a free hand to facilitate this change, one that it believes would be constrained by the EUs demand that the UK remain tied to its labour and environmental standards and state aid rules.

On the other side of the same coin, there are growing fears in cabinet that maintaining close EU ties would lock the UK into the EUs post-Covid-19 economic measures designed for its 27 member states, with little regard for the UKs interests.This is nonsense, as theEUs rescue package unveiled last Wednesday assumes no UK financial contribution. But it is a powerful argument on the Eurosceptic backbenches and has scared many in cabinet.

Anotherargument popular with backbench Brexiteers, but now more prominent among ministers, is the belief that coronavirus presents the government with an opportunity to bury theloss of growth from no trade deal under the cover of the much more dramatic drop in GDP caused by coronavirus.

The politics of this are very juicy for the Vote Leave team in the driving seat in government. Not least because it is only really a no deal that fully delivers on their substantive divergence agenda, while anyversion of a deal with the EU, no matter how distant, will ultimately tie the UK into EU rules and regulations in some way, an idea they hate and are loth to accept.No deal alsofacilitates a trade deal with the US, and the symbolism of Global Britain is key for ministers far more important than the limited economic benefit a UK-US trade pact would bring.

Time is also running out. Despite three rounds of talks so far, no progress has been made and negotiators on both sides are downbeat about the likelihood of a breakthrough this week.Big gaps remain in the UK over whether and how far to align to EU standards, the role of the European court of justice and the EUs demands to fish in UK waters. Butthe government wont extend the transition period. Boris Johnson believes he would struggle to sell to voters the extra 10bn in financial contributions and further spell of EU control of UK laws that this would bring.

A political intervention on both sides will therefore be needed to move beyond the current stage. There will l be an opportunity this month, when Johnson meets the European commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, virtually, around the time of a long-planned EU leaders session in June to review progress.But the EU is unlikely to change its mandate and absent progress, ministers plan to make a judgment in September so they can give business clarity about the trading arrangements from 1 January. They may switch to assuming and preparing for no deal then.

Finally, the survival of Dominic Cummings, Johnsons closest adviser, despite allegations he broke the lockdown rules, also enhances the prospect of no deal. One reason why Brexiteer ministers and aides rallied behind him is that he sees it as his personal mission to prevent Johnson extending the transition period in June, and delivering a version of Brexit that lets the UK take back control. It would be wrong to underestimate his impact on the outcome of these negotiations.

Of course, this could all be tactics and bluster. Johnsonand his cheerleaders on the backbenches have convinced themselves that such brinkmanship worked during the withdrawal agreement talks, so it is no real surprise they intend to repeat the trick now. Especially as they believe, wrongly, that coronavirus will make the EU more desperate to conclude a deal and buckle at the last moment. But Downing Street is right that December is the real deadline.

Germanys role will be key. I say this not as a naive Brit, believing that Angela Merkel will ride to Britains rescue, but as someone who has spent more than two decades studying and working on EU affairs. With Germany at the head of Europes rotating presidency, and Merkel in the final throes of her chancellorship, she will find it very hard to sign off on no deal. Of all of the EUs member states, Germany has been the most focused on the longer-term, geopolitical risk of no deal, and the necessity for the UK and EU to maintain constructive ties.

But even Merkel cant and wont save the UK from itself, and will not agree to a deal at any price.If the net effect of Covid-19 is that ministers see more benefit than cost from no deal, with the dominant view in cabinet now opposed to extending the transitional period, then that will indeed be the outcome at the end of this year.

Mujtaba Rahman is the managing director for Europe at Eurasia Group, a political risk research and consulting firm

View original post here:

The pandemic is being used as cover for a no-deal Brexit - The Guardian

Get Brexit done! Majority AGAINST Brexit transition extension in close poll

Daily Express, 17 May 2020

Britains faces 380billion bill if Brexit is delayed beyond December

Sun, 17 May 2020

Extension to Brexit bill could cost 378bn

Mail Online, 17 May 2020

After the UK left the EU on 31 January, it entered a transition period lasting until the end of this year. During this period, the UK remains in the customs union and single market, meaning that things like trade, travel and regulations continue to work as they did before the UK left.

As part of its Withdrawal Agreement with the EU, the UK can extend the transition period for up to two years provided it agrees this with the EU before 1 July 2020. The UK government has said it will not apply for any extension.

A report published recently by the Centre for Brexit Policy (CBP) warned that the public did not want to see an extension, and that it could cost 378 billion.

Neither of these claims is based on credible evidence. The report presents a one-sided viewpoint on the costs of transition, and most studies into the economic impacts of Brexit show leaving the customs union and single market will mean the UK economy is smaller compared to remaining.

The study also reports findings from an opinion poll selectively, which does not fairly reflect what we know about the UK publics views on the transition period.

The CBP commissioned ComRes to poll public opinion on the transition period. The CBP reported that: The public wants the Government to either shorten the transition period or stick to its current timetable by a small margin (44 per cent to 40 per cent)

The Express incorrectly reported this as showing that a majority of the public were against extending the transition period.

In any case, the CBPs summary isnt a fair reflection of all of the polls findings.

The question thats being referred to was: As a result of the Coronavirus pandemic, there have been some suggestions that the transition period for the UK to leave the EU should be extended beyond 31 December 2020, into 2021 or beyond. Others say that the transition period should remain as already agreed between the UK and the EU, and end 31 December 2020, while others say that the transition period should be shortened so that it ends sooner than 31 December 2020. Any change to the transition period would require Parliament to agree. Which of the following statements best represents your view on the length of the transition period?

35% of respondents said the period should stay as it is, 40% said it should be extended, and 8% said it should be shortened (with the remainder saying they didnt know). This rounds to 44% either wanting the period to remain the same or being shortened.

On its own, this might suggest, by a narrow margin, that more people are opposed to extending the transition period than support it, as the CBP said. However findings from other questions in the same poll muddy those waters:

In other words, people agreed to pretty much every question that was put to them, regardless of whether it implied support or opposition to extending the transition period. So reporting the results of one question alone paints a misleading picture of public opinion. Weve discussed this hazard when reading opinion polls before.

Other polls that have been conducted in recent months have consistently shown that more adults in Great Britain are in favour of extending the transition period than are in favour of sticking to the timetable or shortening the transition period, whether or not the context of the coronavirus pandemic is mentioned. These are all older than the ComRes poll used by the CBP, so we cant say definitively what the public currently thinks.

We dont seek to fact check the CBP reports findings in their entirety, but we can set their figures in context.

The report is largely based on assumptions that sit at the extreme end of those which have been made by studies into the economic impacts of Brexit.

By far the largest components of the CBPs estimate are the potential for economic loss which stem from delaying better regulation outside of the single market and customs union (176 billion) and delaying free trade agreements with non-EU countries (132 billion).

Its true that leaving the single market and customs union open up new options in terms of reaching trade agreements with non-EU countries, and of allowing the UK more choice over regulations for businesses. But both figures offered by the CBP appear unrealistic in the context of the weight of evidence provided by other studies.

The CBPs figure on savings from deregulation is based on an assumed boost of 4% of GDP just below the middle of a range from studies it features in the reportbut well above what most estimates have been in the past.

In its own analysis of the economic impacts of several Brexit scenarios in 2018, the Treasury found that there is significant uncertainty around the potential impacts of regulatory flexibility. It highlighted that external studies had produced a wide range of estimates, ranging from a negative or zero impact, to a benefit of 1.3% of GDP.

That higher figure assumed scaling back regulations that might not be politically feasible (for example, scrapping regulations in a way that was at odds with the governments commitments on climate change).

The CBP also estimates economic benefit from new free trade agreements which would be delayed if the transition period was extended. Featuring studies showing impacts ranging from no change to GDP up to an 8% increase, the report arbitrarily assumed a 3% increase to GDP.

Again, this sits in contrast to the bulk of studies which have tried to estimate this.

According to the Institute for Government in 2018: Much has been made of the UKs ability to offset losses in trade with the EU with new FTAs with other countries. But all the studies that have attempted to quantify the benefits of such deals conclude that they are likely to be relatively modest.

It also said that: Most economic analyses of Brexit predict that leaving the EU will result in higher trade barriers. Based on past evidence on the relationship between trade barriers and economic growth, the studies predict that this increase in tariff and non-tariff barriers would lead to lower economic growth.

The analysis by CBP also does not mention any potential gains from extending the transition period that would come from retaining free trade with the EU. Its highly likely the UK will face additional barriers to trading with EU countries after leaving the single market and customs union.

Also, the CBP says that extending the transition period by two years would mean the UK loses out on two years of tariff revenue from EU imports, amounting to 26 billion. Thats because the CBP assumes the UK would leave the transition period without a free trade agreement with the EU, and so both sides would impose tariffs on each others imports.

But it doesnt try to estimate any direct economic gain from keeping tariffs on imports from non-EU countries for an additional two years. While the UK was an EU member, and during the transition period, the UK gets some income from tariffs (like taxes) the EU places on imports from countries from the rest of the world. This tariff income would be lost if, as the CBP advocates, the transition period ends as scheduled and the UK signs free trade agreements with other countries sooner.

Ultimately its still unclear what kinds of trade barriers the UK will face whenever the transition period ends, as the UK and EU have not agreed the terms of their future relationship. That alone means we should place limited trust in specific numbers that represent the supposed cost of remaining in the transition period.

Read the rest here:

Claim that extending the Brexit transition period could cost 380 billion is not credible - Full Fact

LONDON: Britain has applied to become a dialogue partner of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), the government said on Friday, as it seeks to boost post-Brexit ties in the region.

Asean has 10 existing dialogue partners including the European Union, which Britain left at the end of January, as well as Australia, Canada, Japan and the United States.

Britain said it hoped partnership status with the 10-member Asean, which seeks to accelerate economic growth, social progress and collaboration in the region, would lead to new opportunities across trade, education, science and security.

"As Asia grows in importance, global Britain will cooperate even more closely with our friends in the region," British Foreign Minister Dominic Raab said in a statement.

"By becoming one of Asean's Dialogue Partners, we can strengthen our ability to cooperate across the Indo-Pacific region, as a force for good, on everything from climate change to regional stability."

Britain already has an ambassador to Asean, whose members include Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam, and said being a dialogue partner would allow Britain to attend annual Asean summits and ministerial meetings.

Read the rest here:

UK seeks to boost post-Brexit ties with Asean partnership - Bangkok Post

The Northern Ireland assembly has unexpectedly voted in favour of calling for an extension to the Brexit transition period, arguing that the UK government cannot impose complex border checks down the Irish Sea while Britain is occupied with the coronavirus crisis.

In a surprise development, nationalist, green and social democratic parties held sway in Stormont, saying business cannot prepare for a no-deal Brexit in the middle of a pandemic.

The motion proposed Matthew OToole, the SDLPs Brexit spokesman, had not been expected to carry after opposition was expressed by the Democratic Unionist and the Ulster Unionist parties.

OToole, a former Downing Street adviser, said London would have to take the vote seriously as the assembly was uniquely recognised as a named party in the withdrawal agreement and Stormont had a substantial role in the implementation of the Ireland and Northern Ireland protocol.

He said: This is not about rerunning the referendum, its about accepting that we are in the middle of the most serious public health crisis in living memory. We are also facing a significant economic recession that will put businesses and jobs at risk. This is not the moment to attempt to rupture and renegotiate our largest trading relationship.

OToole added that the Stormont vote would send a powerful message to Boris Johnson in relation to his implacable opposition to extending the transition period without consent from Northern Ireland.

The special protocol on Northern Ireland was agreed in January after a deal struck by the prime minister and his Irish counterpart, Leo Varadkar, to avoid a border on the island of Ireland.

It involves checks on trade crossing the Irish Sea which will come into effect as soon as the transition period ends, whether there is a trade deal or not. Under the withdrawal agreement, these checks would hold for at least six years.

Businesses have said there is simply not enough time to put IT systems for new customs arrangements, VAT and regulatory checks in place.

Both the DUP and the UUP voted against the motion, having argued on Monday that it would be better to postpone such a move until the outcome of this weeks Brexit talks between Brussels and London was known.

Green party MLA Rachel Woods said businesses were already facing survival issues with the Bank of England foreseeing the worst recession in 300 years.

The government must take account of the shockwaves the Covid-19 crisis has sent throughout our entire society and the fact that Northern Ireland as a whole is not ready or adequately prepared for the protocol [Brexit arrangements] coming into effect in January, she said.

The EU and the UK embarked on the fourth round of talks on Tuesday but few expect any breakthrough with both sides sticking to their rpositions.

Johnson has already made it plain that he will not seek an extension to the transition period by the legal 1 July deadline for such a request, raising the possibility of no deal at the end of the year.

Go here to see the original:

Stormont backs calling for extension to Brexit transition period - The Guardian