“Full Brexit'“ is delayed yet again
There is always a certain inevitability to much of how Brexit unfolds, and this week is no exception. Word trickles down to portions of the political press that the UK government is thinking about delaying, yet again, the final portion of the customs checks to be put upon goods moving from the EU to the UK. This means “full Brexit” is once again being stalled.
First, let’s understand exactly what’s going on here in practical terms.
The customs checks that are currently due to come into play in July are the last tranche of trade barriers to erect between goods coming from the EU into Great Britain, at least as things stand. It would involve introducing compulsory health and phytosanitary certificates on any products of animal and plant origin. This might sound innocuous, but it will create a great deal more red tape to move goods from the Single Market and into Britain. It might involve having to employ vets to do portions of the paperwork, something which will be a boon to the veterinary sector but a huge drag on everyone else.
Random physical checks on lorries will go up another notch and will have to be carried out away from ports at lorry parks in Kent, some either under construction or not yet planned given it is difficult to say what volume will be required.
Prognostications on what this will mean for trade are all pretty dire. It will add to the cost of trade - and guess who pays for that? British consumers, of course - but worse than that might be that we reach a tipping point, where European exporters decide that for the most part it isn’t worth bothering with Britain any longer because of the hassle and the cost.
You see, Great Britain has a heavily service based economy in which we were able to import all the stuff we don’t make any longer from Europe cheaply while we were in the EU. Taking us out of the EU and then out of the Single Market removed this advantage.
Given all of this, there are several senior Tories who want to never apply the last of the checks on goods coming from the EU into Britain, the most notable being Jacob Rees-Mogg. I can see the Moggster’s perspective on this, at least when I don’t think about it too much - leaving the EU was about giving Britain control over what was in its best interests as a country, so why impose controls we don’t really have to impose?
Except, when you think about it in more detail, the problem with this thinking becomes obvious. At present, companies that are based in the EU who want to sell into Britain have a distinct advantage over companies that are based in Britain and want to sell into the EU. There is more paperwork and red tape getting stuff into the EU Single Market as opposed to trying to move goods from the EU into Britain, at least until the July checks come into place. This does two things. One, it disadvantages any British company that wants to export to anywhere in the Single Market, thereby hurting British businesses directly. Two, and somewhat of a logical carry on from number one, this makes Britain a far less attractive place to set up a business as compared to anywhere in the EU. If being in the EU offers you the whole Single Market while Britain gives you nothing other than Britain and besides, it’s way less difficult to export stuff from the EU into Britain compared to the other way round anyhow, why set up shop here at all?
As a result, the British government is hesitating, for the fourth time I might add, from imposing “full Brexit” on the country. The reason for this is not just to do with supply chains and the price of trade, but with doing what for them is the most scary thing imaginable: finally demonstrating to millions of people the harm that leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union really did to Great Britain. And that’s why I think they’ll delay the checks again, kicking the Brexit reality can down the road another time.
On the 7,000 lost jobs in the City and Brexit perspective
Accounting firm EY announced this week that their research had uncovered 7,000 jobs that have been lost in the City of London’s financial sector since Brexit occurred. How this has been reported - and many mainstream outlets in Britain picked up on this piece of news - is a wonderful look at how Brexit has distorted both politics and political reporting in this country.
Losing 7,000 jobs in the City sounds like a bad thing, right? Well, a lot of pro-Brexit outlets are actually trumpeting this figure as a triumph because it is a revision downwards of 12,500 the same firm forecasted in 2016, and is much, much lower than the 100,000 job losses PwC foretold back when we voted to Leave the EU.
This is one of the major problems with where the Brexit debate has ended up - because of some wild prognostications regarding a post-Brexit Britain, ie “Project Fear”, Remainers accidentally created a crutch for Brexiters. The Leavers can always say, "Brexit isn’t as bad as they said it would be”, even though that neatly gets around the fact that a). Brexit is clearly bad and they are openly admitting that and b). those who argued for Brexit in 2015/2016 and fought for it to be implemented from then until it happened never said it was going to be bad at all. In fact, they maintained for many years that there would be “no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside”.
As a result, instead of Remainers being able to say, “We have lost 7,000 jobs in the City with no upside whatsoever to put against that number, what do you have to say to that?”, they are trapped by the “Brexit isn’t as horrible as you said it was going to be” meme. It’s interesting in context to note that Brexiters are, once again, trying to change history. These days, it’s all “Well, we knew Brexit was going to cause some issues at first, but what we are experiencing is simply a transitional thing”, when again, during the Leave campaign, the offer was that we would leave the institutions of the EU but that there is “a European free trade zone from Iceland to the Russian border and we will be part of it.” I have quoted that from the Vote Leave website/campaign literature directly. So, we would be part of the Single Market, or something that did the exact same thing in practice, but not have to pay into the EU coffers and we’d get to have an independent trade policy to boot. That was the offer in 2016.
Instead, we have ended up in the lightly Orwellian world of Brexit discussion in which losing 7,000 jobs is being hailed as a triumph. And this will continue for ages to come yet, as Brexit bites hard. Sure, agricultural exports are way down from 2015, but look at how much Project Fear said they’d be down by now! We’re not doing nearly as badly as those Remoaners said we would! Brexit may have resulted in a much worse economic situation than if we’d stayed in the EU, but hey, it’s not as bad in many ways as Project Fear predicted!
Eventually people will get bored of this rubbish but the question is, how long will that take?
Michael Gove changes his mind on Brexit
I have long felt that one of the leading voices of the Vote Leave campaign would break ranks at some point and declare that Brexit was a mistake. I always figured it would be Boris Johnson. Turns out that instead, it’s Michael Gove.
This week, Gove has come out and declared that Brexit was a huge mistake.
“In 2016, I campaigned for Brexit. Sadly, I have come to realise that what I thought leaving the European Union would do for this country has not come to pass. We thought that we could leave the political structures of the EU and still trade on level terms. That did not turn out to be the case. I sincerely and humbly regret having backed something that didn’t turn out to have a leg to stand on.”
Amazing, huh? And if you think this story is real, I’d advise you to check a calendar and remind yourself what day it is today.
And on that note, thank you for reading. If you haven’t subscribed yet, please do, here’s the whole site if that helps:
nicktyrone.substack.com
And I’ll see you all next week again with the worst of Brexit.
Imagine this is 1979. Two lads, Jack and Gary, are performing stunts on their Raleigh Choppers. Gary attempts to emulate his idol, Eval Kaneival, in jumping over a very high wall on his bike. Jack looks doubtful, shakes his head, and tells Gary he'll break every bone in his body. Gary proceeds anyway but comes off his bike suffering a broken leg, a broken wrist and a cracked rib. From his hospital bed, Gary says to Jack, "Hah, I win because you said I'd break every bone in my body. I've broken less than half a dozen!"
And this is the Brexit win philosophy. Deliver zero benefits, suffer the harm, but claim a victory because it's not quite as bad as was suggested. Even though as a brexiter you were claiming the polar opposite, i.e. no downsides whatsoever. And immediately after leaving the EU mind you, not in 10, 20, 30 or 50 years time.
Brexit was a huge success after all. Not for the common Brexiter who suffers and pays more than before. But for the "haves" who can now enjoy more freely what they have and get even more of it. All thanks to Brexit