Author Topic: Various bits re Brexit and Economics  (Read 16340 times)

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15546
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #150 on: October 16, 2019, 06:20:26 PM »
Be nice to see the end of that awful State/Union.
1 BIG CUP and 1 Cupeen so far....

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #151 on: October 17, 2019, 01:56:22 PM »
https://www.ft.com/content/f71b1eb2-f0c2-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195

EU and UK reach agreement on Brexit deal Breakthrough leaves Boris Johnson with challenge of selling plan to political allies Boris Johnson is still struggling to win political backing for the accord from the Democratic Unionist party
 Save Sam Fleming and Jim Brunsden in Brussels and Laura Hughes in London


 EU and UK negotiators have agreed a new Brexit deal, leaving Boris Johnson with the challenge of selling the accord to political allies at home.  The agreement, announced on Thursday morning in Brussels hours before the start of an EU leader’s summit, represents a big leap forward for Mr Johnson, UK prime minister, following weeks of inconclusive talks. Jean-Claude Juncker, European Commission president, wrote on Twitter: “Where there is a will, there is a #deal — we have one! It’s a fair and balanced agreement for the EU and the UK and it is testament to our commitment to find solutions. I recommend that #EUCO endorses this deal.” The pound jumped to $1.297, up more than 1 per cent on the day and its highest since May, after news of the agreement. UK government bonds, a perceived haven for investors, sold off, pushing the 10-year yield up to 0.76 per cent. Attention is likely to shift swiftly to London, where the British parliament is set to vote on the new deal on Saturday. Mr Johnson is still struggling to win backing for the accord from the Democratic Unionist party, which said earlier on Thursday that it was not satisfied with the stance he had agreed on both customs and consent by the Northern Ireland assembly. This raises questions over the prime minister’s ability to clinch support for the deal in Westminster — an issue that is likely to hang over the leaders’ summit. To help win the vote, Mr Johnson plans to ask EU leaders not to offer any further Brexit extensions, and so force MPs to choose between the new deal and no deal. A senior British official told the Financial Times: “The prime minister will tell EU leaders that it’s this deal or no deal — but no delays. He will not ask for an extension and will not accept one if offered.” Such a move may also be an effort to dodge the Benn Act, which would force Mr Johnson to request another Brexit extension if parliament fails to pass an agreement on Saturday.

 Mr Johnson has been forced to make major concessions to the EU in recent days in search of an agreement that can win the support of the 27 other member states. In doing so he has been treading a tightrope — as did his predecessor Theresa May — as he tries to keep the DUP and Eurosceptic Tory MPs on board.  Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the House of Commons and leading Brexiter, has urged the DUP to back the new agreement. “It is a really good, exciting deal,” he said in parliament. EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier hailed the agreement, saying it would provide a “durable” and “sustainable” solution for avoiding a hard Irish border after Brexit and that it could be ratified in time for Britain to leave on October 31. Mr Johnson’s negotiating team has now accepted that, following Brexit, Northern Ireland would apply the EU’s customs and tariffs rules and have them overseen by the European Court of Justice. The agreement means there would not be major customs checks on the island and, instead, all goods will be checked in Great Britain. The plan bears similarities to the Northern Ireland-only backstop that was initially agreed by Mrs May before she shifted to the all-UK backstop idea, which was then rejected by parliament.  Under the agreement, Northern Ireland would benefit from UK trade deals with third countries — a key demand of Mr Johnson — and Northern Irish businesses would be eligible for a rebate on some tariffs. But the system still entails the creation of a significant border down the Irish Sea.  Live Brexit DUP rejects Johnson’s Brexit deal in blow to prime minister NEW 8 MINUTES AGO A key problem for the DUP remains the democratic arrangements in Northern Ireland for approving the deal. Brussels negotiators settled on a complex system that reduces one party’s ability to ditch the arrangements. It would involve the assembly having the opportunity to hold a vote on the customs and regulatory arrangements four years after the end of the UK’s post-Brexit transition period.

 If the assembly decided to continue with the regulatory and customs system, further opportunities to vote would arise in later years — but the arrangements would continue if the assembly was not sitting. Even if Northern Ireland were to vote to junk the system, a two-year cooling-off period would ensue. DUP officials said their statement about the prospective deal from earlier on Thursday still stood. The party’s leader Arlene Foster and deputy Nigel Dodds said “as things stand, we could not support what is being suggested on customs and consent issues and there is a lack of clarity on VAT”. The rejection from a party that props up Mr Johnson’s minority government represents a significant stumbling block for pushing the revised deal through parliament. Labour has also said it will vote against the deal. Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, said the new agreement was “even worse than Theresa May’s”. “This sellout deal won’t bring the country together and should be rejected. The best way to get Brexit sorted is to give the people the final say in a public vote,” he said.
Lookit

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #152 on: October 17, 2019, 02:24:30 PM »
https://www.ft.com/content/63a605e8-3180-39dd-aad0-bbfe635a3b59

Brexit: DUP rejects Boris Johnson’s deal in blow to prime minister — latest news UK and EU negotiators have struck a long-awaited Brexit pact. However numerous stumbling blocks remain, particularly at home where Boris Johnson faces opposition from key corners.

Charlotte Middlehurst, Sarah Provan, Philip Georgiadis, Adam Samson A MINUTE AGO 

Deal is 'good news', says an 'optimistic' Merkel Angela Merkel, chancellor of Germany, remains cautious but says an agreement is "good news", adding that it's important that the Irish taoiseach is happy with the revised deal, reports Guy Chazan in Berlin. "We are checking [the deal] at the moment and will form an opinion," Ms Merkel said on her arrival at the summit in Brussels. Of course we know large parts of the agreement already, and to that extent, I say it is good news. Of course the European Parliament and the British parliament must agree to it. But subject to their agreement we can say here an agreement has been negotiated which, in an extremely difficult situation, opens up the possibility of preserving the integrity of the EU single market and at the same time maintaining the Good Friday Agreement. For me it's a very important sign that the Irish prime minister is happy with (it). She thanked Michel Barnier, the EU's chief negotiator, and his team. We have shown that the EU27 have stuck together. I am feeling quite optimistic. Sarah Provan 9 MINUTES AGO Deal is 'good' and allows UK to leave in 'orderly fashion', says Ireland Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s prime minister, said he would recommend that the European Council endorse the deal, reports Michael Peel. It’s a good agreement that allows the United Kingdom to leave the European Union in an orderly fashion. The deal met Ireland’s tests of avoiding a hard border with Northern Ireland, he told reporters on arrival at the EU summit, protecting the all-Ireland economy and preserving the Good Friday Agreement. He added that the much argued-over Irish border backstop had been replaced by a “unique solution” for Northern Ireland that “takes account of the democratic wishes of the people”. It’s always the case that a compromise never has one father. We were all involved in making those compromises – Mr Johnson, the Irish government and also the European Union as well. Philip Georgiadis 14 MINUTES AGO Markets braced for more pound volatility Investors are positioning for volatility in the currency markets as they gauge the probability of the new Brexit deal passing the UK parliament. Expectations for sterling volatility over the next week have jumped today and have risen to their highest level since the aftermath of the Brexit vote in 2016, as traders moved into contracts in the options market that pay out if the currency fluctuates. Sarah Provan 19 MINUTES AGO 'Last chance' and opportunity to 'limit' damage, say Poland and Luxembourg More reaction comes in from EU member states, with Poland calling the agreement "a great success" while Luxembourg's prime minister says he is "so happy" to have a deal, FT reporters write. Konrad Szymanski, Poland's Europe minister, said that the deal was "a great success for both sides", reports James Shotter in Warsaw. The UK has guarantees of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. We have guarantees of the integrity of the EU common market. I hope the House of Commons can appreciate it and will open the doors for a good trade deal in the nearest future. It is the last chance for responsible Brexit. Xavier Bettel, Luxembourg’s prime minister who last month gave an impassioned press conference beside an empty podium intended for the visiting Boris Johnson, said he was “so happy” to have a deal, reports Michael Peel. "This is a positive way and I really hope we will be able to get a green light from Westminster on Saturday,” Mr Bettel said, referring to the expected British parliamentary vote on the accord. He added that the debate was no longer about being pro- or anti-Brexit, but about avoiding no-deal. “No deal is a lose-lose situation,” he told reporters on arrival at the EU summit in Brussels. A deal is not a win-win situation. But at least we will be able to limit [the damage]. Philip Georgiadis 28 MINUTES AGO Johnson: Deal delivers 'real Brexit' Speaking in Brussels, Boris Johnson said the new deal "representatives a very good deal both for the EU and the UK, it is a reasonable and fair outcome." "For us in the UK it means we can deliver a real Brexit that achieves our objectives…the UK leaves whole and entire on October 31st." Neither leader took questions from the press following their short statements. Philip Georgiadis 35 MINUTES AGO MPs approve Saturday sitting of parliament MPs have approved a motion for the House of Commons to sit on Saturday in order to scrutinise the new Brexit deal. MPs voted by 287 to 275 to approve the first Saturday sitting of the House of Commons for the first time since 1982. It is likely to be a decisive moment in the Brexit process as it is still unclear if the government has the votes to pass the deal. Philip Georgiadis 40 MINUTES AGO Johnson and Juncker speaking Jean-Claude Juncker and Boris Johnson are holding their first joint press statement in Brussels. Mr Juncker has said there is now "no need for any kind of prolongation" in Brexit talks and thanked the prime minister for his "excellent relationship" in recent weeks. Adam Samson 42 MINUTES AGO Draft EU communique calls for agreement to be in force on November 1 Mehreen Khan reports from Brussels: The FT has seen a draft version of the language on Brexit EU leaders will sign off on at today's summit. It says the European Council endorses today's deal and invites the European Parliament to take the steps to "ensure the agreement can enter into force on 1st November 2019 so as to provide for an orderly withdrawal". The communique thanks Michel Barnier for his "tireless efforts" as chief negotiator. Philip Georgiadis AN HOUR AGO Pound slides below $1.28 as DUP delivers blow to Johnson The news the DUP will not back the new Brexit deal has sent the pound sliding. It is now lower on the day, having shot higher in an initial burst of euphoria as news of the agreement in Brussels broke this morning. Sterling was recently 0.2 per cent lower at below $1.28, and has traded in a range of nearly 2 per cent on a volatile day. Gilts yields have also reversed their earlier rise, with the 10-year trading at 0.69 per cent.
Lookit

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #153 on: October 17, 2019, 02:42:11 PM »

   https://www.ft.com/content/f917b2ac-f0cc-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

   The Boris Johnson Brexit deal dissected
Achieving Commons approval for the agreement is a tough challenge for the UK prime minister
ROBERT SHRIMSLEY Add to myFT


Boris Johnson and Arlene Foster. The prime minister has secured a democratic escape mechanism from the backstop for Northern Ireland © FT montage
Share on Twitter (opens new window)
Share on Facebook (opens new window)
Share on LinkedIn (opens new window)
Share
Save
Robert Shrimsley 2 HOURS AGOPrint this page89
Boris Johnson finally has a Brexit withdrawal deal. The legal text has just landed, so any first judgments are contingent upon more rigorous examination of the detail. But here are a few preliminary thoughts.

• The prime minister still has to get this deal through the House of Commons, and the votes are not guaranteed. The Democratic Unionist party has said the doubts it had overnight have not yet been eased. If Mr Johnson is trying to bounce the DUP, he is taking a big risk. The party is known for its intransigence. But DUP opposition goes beyond its 10 votes, since the objections of this handful of MPs may pull some Tory hardliners into voting against the deal. However, there is a desire within the Conservative party to unify around a deal, so Mr Johnson will hope any rebellion stays small scale. He will have to rely on the moderate Tories he expelled from the party and up to 20 Labour MPs ready to back a deal. That is quite a risk. Official Labour opposition to this deal may well whittle that number down. A more realistic number of pro-deal Labour rebels may be closer to single figures.

• Remain-minded MPs will still try to attach a referendum to the deal. Some of the expelled Tories may also now support such a move. This may be voted on at the special sitting of the Commons on Saturday, or later, in the committee stages of the legislation required by the deal. Some pro-referendum MPs worry that attaching a second vote to the deal on Saturday would persuade Tory hardliners to vote the whole plan down.

• If it passes, the new agreement will represent a significant political success for Mr Johnson, who always maintained the EU would move once things went down to the wire. The EU had said it would not reopen the withdrawal agreement or reimagine the Irish backstop. Mr Johnson forced them to do so and has secured changes. He has replaced the UK-wide backstop, so hated by Conservative MPs because it had no unilateral escape mechanism, with one specific to Northern Ireland only. Great Britain (the UK minus Northern Ireland) will be free to strike trade deals.

• However, in reality Mr Johnson has largely swapped Theresa May’s UK-wide backstop, which was part of the withdrawal agreement she failed to get through the Commons three times, for a Northern Ireland-only backstop. The EU originally offered this solution two years ago. That said, there are some changes. The prime minister has secured a democratic escape mechanism from the backstop for Northern Ireland — a withdrawal of consent by the devolved Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont — but its nature makes it hard to envisage it ever being used. So this arrangement is not designed to be temporary; this is a settled status for Northern Ireland. The price is a customs border in the Irish Sea, something many unionists were determined to avoid.

• While unionists may not like the deal, it represents a pretty advantageous outcome for the people of Northern Ireland, who will enjoy the benefits of effectively being in both the EU and UK customs unions and of avoiding a hard border with the Irish Republic.

• Mr Johnson has also conceded language in the political declaration, the non-binding preliminary text, on maintaining a “level playing field” for standards and regulations in future competition. This will not please Brexit hardliners, with their vision of the UK competing with the EU by offering lower taxes and lighter regulation. Because this does not carry full legal force, Brexiters may feel they have enough wriggle room to trust the prime minister. It could help to reassure a few of the Labour rebels, too.

• Mr Johnson is likely to press the EU to rule out a further extension by October 31 as a way to force MPs into backing his deal. That would be quite a step for the EU to take.

• The expected special sitting on Saturday for MPs to approve this withdrawal agreement will now be a huge moment for Mr Johnson. If he succeeds in securing his deal it will be a significant victory and will vindicate those Tory moderates who backed him on the grounds that he would break the deadlock. It may still be a stretch to reach the October 31 deadline — there is still legislation to secure — but if the deal is approved, then exit on that date looks more likely than not.

• Britain will be set on course, however, for a hard Brexit with an awful lot of its future still up for negotiation. The clock will start ticking again to a new deadline on securing a trade deal. Mr Johnson will claim to have met his pledge to “get Brexit done”. In fact, Brexit will only just be getting started.
Lookit

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #154 on: October 17, 2019, 04:41:54 PM »
https://www.ft.com/content/2f5c92a2-f0d6-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

Will the Brexit deal pass the Commons? The consensus at Westminster at this moment is that Boris Johnson doesn’t have the numbers James Blitz

Boris Johnson has agreed a Brexit deal with the EU, leading to a surge in sterling and much excitement at Westminster. The question now is whether the pact will be approved in the key Commons vote on Saturday. The consensus at Westminster at this moment is that Mr Johnson doesn’t have the numbers. The Democratic Unionist party has made clear it won’t back the deal “as it stands”. Without its support, it’s hard to see how it gets through the Commons. James Forsyth in The Spectator has a good assessment of where the problem lies. He says Mark Spencer, the Conservative chief whip, calculated last night that if the DUP backs Mr Johnson, the government will win on Saturday with a majority of just one. That majority would be made up of all Tory MPs, 15 independent Conservatives, the DUP plus nine Labour rebels in Leave constituencies who would be defying their own party whip. But without the DUP, Mr Johnson needs 19 Labour MPs to back him. My FT colleague Jim Pickard says that getting that many Labour MPs to back a Johnson deal would be very hard indeed. How could the dynamics change in the next 48 hours? One possibility, which Downing Street is actively pursuing, is that the European Council should declare tonight that if the deal doesn’t go through it won’t give the UK the three-month extension demanded by the Benn Act. Can Brexit breakthrough really bring resolution? Subtitles unavailable If the EU did that, it would mean that failure to pass the vote on Saturday would plunge the UK into a no-deal Brexit on October 31. That would certainly concentrate minds at Westminster. It might push the DUP over the line, as well as attracting more Labour MPs towards the Johnson deal. But this would be an extraordinarily high-risk strategy for the EU to adopt. I find it hard to believe it would go down that road. It might be that Mr Johnson has resigned himself to losing on Saturday. He may take the view that, in that situation, he can go into a general election brandishing the deal he has signed and saying he would have taken the UK out of the EU on October 31 if only parliament had allowed him. He would then call on voters to give him the parliamentary support he needs to get the pact through. The other possibility, of course, is that the DUP caves at the last minute. Right now, it is hard to see what can possibly change the DUP’s minds, given that the Brexit deal is now signed and sealed. But after three-and-a-half years, parliament, the EU and much of the British public are utterly fatigued by the Brexit process and want Britain to move on. There is something about the atmosphere in British politics that makes one think that — somehow — Mr Johnson will get what he wants on Saturday
Lookit

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15546
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #155 on: October 17, 2019, 04:46:07 PM »
I'd say the EU are pretty fed up of the Brits at this stage!!
1 BIG CUP and 1 Cupeen so far....

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #156 on: October 17, 2019, 04:48:10 PM »
I'd say the EU are pretty fed up of the Brits at this stage!!
It does look like that
Lookit

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #157 on: October 17, 2019, 06:03:09 PM »
Martin Wolf
The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

   
   https://www.ft.com/content/a513c33c-f02a-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195

   The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

Britons must agree to become significantly poorer and accept the illusion of greater sovereignty

Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by 50-70%
Martin Wolf

Theresa May was wrong: a bad deal is far better than no deal. So sensible people should prefer Boris Johnson’s new deal to the lunacy of no deal. But the right thing to do now is to give the public the choice they did not have in 2016, between defined alternatives. That is perfectly democratic. It is also wise: the public need to consent to what will be a very costly outcome.

Mr Johnson argues that the new deal should be ratified by parliament at once, in order to allow the country to move on to other priorities: the cost of living, the National Health Service, violent crime and the environment. This is twaddle. All these things and more — education, housing, infrastructure, defence, welfare and almost every aspect of taxation — have always been within the control of the UK. Nothing but incompetence prevented UK governments from tackling them effectively while the country was in the EU.

With the principal exception of immigration, leaving the EU will give the UK the illusion, not the reality, of greater control. Its ability to transform its opportunities in trade and other aspects of international commerce, which are where EU membership does indeed matter, will turn out to be negligible. The UK on its own is merely a big minnow, generating just 3 per cent of world output. Only as part of the EU does it have the clout needed for transformative international deals. Even then, these are hard to do with the big powers.


Far worse, leaving on Mr Johnson’s terms is going to make the country substantially poorer than it would otherwise be. That is not only bad in itself. It is also going to reduce the resources available to any future government to deliver on domestic policy promises. Indeed, this is already the case. The latest Green Budget from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Citi argues that: “Gross domestic product is roughly 2.5-3.0 per cent (£55bn-£66bn) below where we think it would have been without Brexit.” This is quite likely to be a permanent loss. It would imply an equally permanent reduction in fiscal revenue of a little over 1 per cent of GDP.

With this deal, which implies a very hard Brexit, things will get worse. A recent analysis, The economic impact of Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals, from The UK in a Changing Europe think-tank, concludes that, other things being equal, GDP per head could be between 5.8 and 7 per cent lower, in the long run, under Mr Johnson’s deal compared to staying in the EU. This is even worse than the 5.5 per cent loss estimated under the May deal, although better than the 8.7 per cent loss under “WTO terms”.

Such estimates are highly uncertain. But they are based on standard economic models and not on questionable assumptions about short-term macroeconomic behaviour. The component elements are the direct trade effects (a loss of 2.3 to 2.7 percentage points of GDP) and an induced effect on productivity, as the UK economy becomes less open to trade. The ranges are determined by the severity of controls on immigration.

The implied impact on future prosperity is dramatic. At present, a modestly optimistic assumption, given the UK’s recent dire productivity performance, is that prospective GDP per head will rise at 1 per cent a year. If so, Mr Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by between 50 and 70 per cent!

Fiscally, the UK would benefit from not having to continue its contributions to the EU. But the impact of reduced GDP growth would far more than offset this gain. The analysis concludes that, without the productivity adjustment, the long-term fiscal position would be worse by between 0.7 and 0.9 per cent of GDP and, with it, by between 1.9 and 2.2 per cent of GDP (£41bn-49bn in current prices). If so, this would severely curtail any government’s ability to deliver in the areas Mr Johnson favours.

Nor, of course, is this all. In addition to the likely economic costs come the dire political ones, notably the radically increased likelihood of a break up of the UK and the painful separation from our closest neighbours and partners.

Yes, this deal is far better than no deal. But it is a terrible deal and also one that is far indeed from the “having our cake and eating it” promised by Mr Johnson in the referendum campaign. It is, simply, a monstrous act of national self harm. It is not good enough to let an exhausted parliament wave it through.

Despite all the obvious risks, the people should be asked whether this deal is what they truly want for their future and that of their children and children’s children. The right thing to do is to put it to the people. They now know what choices lie in front of them and their country. If they choose this one knowingly, so be it.

martin.wolf@ft.com
Lookit

tyrone08

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #158 on: October 17, 2019, 06:26:22 PM »
Martin Wolf
The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

   
   https://www.ft.com/content/a513c33c-f02a-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195

   The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

Britons must agree to become significantly poorer and accept the illusion of greater sovereignty

Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by 50-70%
Martin Wolf

Theresa May was wrong: a bad deal is far better than no deal. So sensible people should prefer Boris Johnson’s new deal to the lunacy of no deal. But the right thing to do now is to give the public the choice they did not have in 2016, between defined alternatives. That is perfectly democratic. It is also wise: the public need to consent to what will be a very costly outcome.

Mr Johnson argues that the new deal should be ratified by parliament at once, in order to allow the country to move on to other priorities: the cost of living, the National Health Service, violent crime and the environment. This is twaddle. All these things and more — education, housing, infrastructure, defence, welfare and almost every aspect of taxation — have always been within the control of the UK. Nothing but incompetence prevented UK governments from tackling them effectively while the country was in the EU.

With the principal exception of immigration, leaving the EU will give the UK the illusion, not the reality, of greater control. Its ability to transform its opportunities in trade and other aspects of international commerce, which are where EU membership does indeed matter, will turn out to be negligible. The UK on its own is merely a big minnow, generating just 3 per cent of world output. Only as part of the EU does it have the clout needed for transformative international deals. Even then, these are hard to do with the big powers.


Far worse, leaving on Mr Johnson’s terms is going to make the country substantially poorer than it would otherwise be. That is not only bad in itself. It is also going to reduce the resources available to any future government to deliver on domestic policy promises. Indeed, this is already the case. The latest Green Budget from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Citi argues that: “Gross domestic product is roughly 2.5-3.0 per cent (£55bn-£66bn) below where we think it would have been without Brexit.” This is quite likely to be a permanent loss. It would imply an equally permanent reduction in fiscal revenue of a little over 1 per cent of GDP.

With this deal, which implies a very hard Brexit, things will get worse. A recent analysis, The economic impact of Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals, from The UK in a Changing Europe think-tank, concludes that, other things being equal, GDP per head could be between 5.8 and 7 per cent lower, in the long run, under Mr Johnson’s deal compared to staying in the EU. This is even worse than the 5.5 per cent loss estimated under the May deal, although better than the 8.7 per cent loss under “WTO terms”.

Such estimates are highly uncertain. But they are based on standard economic models and not on questionable assumptions about short-term macroeconomic behaviour. The component elements are the direct trade effects (a loss of 2.3 to 2.7 percentage points of GDP) and an induced effect on productivity, as the UK economy becomes less open to trade. The ranges are determined by the severity of controls on immigration.

The implied impact on future prosperity is dramatic. At present, a modestly optimistic assumption, given the UK’s recent dire productivity performance, is that prospective GDP per head will rise at 1 per cent a year. If so, Mr Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by between 50 and 70 per cent!

Fiscally, the UK would benefit from not having to continue its contributions to the EU. But the impact of reduced GDP growth would far more than offset this gain. The analysis concludes that, without the productivity adjustment, the long-term fiscal position would be worse by between 0.7 and 0.9 per cent of GDP and, with it, by between 1.9 and 2.2 per cent of GDP (£41bn-49bn in current prices). If so, this would severely curtail any government’s ability to deliver in the areas Mr Johnson favours.

Nor, of course, is this all. In addition to the likely economic costs come the dire political ones, notably the radically increased likelihood of a break up of the UK and the painful separation from our closest neighbours and partners.

Yes, this deal is far better than no deal. But it is a terrible deal and also one that is far indeed from the “having our cake and eating it” promised by Mr Johnson in the referendum campaign. It is, simply, a monstrous act of national self harm. It is not good enough to let an exhausted parliament wave it through.

Despite all the obvious risks, the people should be asked whether this deal is what they truly want for their future and that of their children and children’s children. The right thing to do is to put it to the people. They now know what choices lie in front of them and their country. If they choose this one knowingly, so be it.

martin.wolf@ft.com

Wouldn't believe the predictions. Before the election it was widely stated that a vote to leave would bring thousands of job losses and an immediate recession. Reality was that unemployed fell. Most economists are no better than mystic Meg.

Sat is lining for up a cracker day. 1 channel the rugby while the news on the other

armaghniac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12868
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #159 on: October 17, 2019, 08:36:37 PM »
Wouldn't believe the predictions. Before the election it was widely stated that a vote to leave would bring thousands of job losses and an immediate recession. Reality was that unemployed fell. Most economists are no better than mystic Meg.

This is nonsense on a par with my old "my granny is smoking 60 a day and isn' t dead yet, them doctors know nothing".
If you make business more difficult then growth will suffer. It may be more or less, but damage there will be.
One reason there wasn't as much damage so far was that there is still doubt about what exactly will happen, after Saturday there could be another referendum and even Boris might discover after the next election that he does not want quite such an isolated UK in the final agreement.
If at first you don't succeed, then goto Plan B

lenny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #160 on: October 18, 2019, 07:25:20 AM »
Martin Wolf
The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

   
   https://www.ft.com/content/a513c33c-f02a-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195

   The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

Britons must agree to become significantly poorer and accept the illusion of greater sovereignty

Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by 50-70%
Martin Wolf

Theresa May was wrong: a bad deal is far better than no deal. So sensible people should prefer Boris Johnson’s new deal to the lunacy of no deal. But the right thing to do now is to give the public the choice they did not have in 2016, between defined alternatives. That is perfectly democratic. It is also wise: the public need to consent to what will be a very costly outcome.

Mr Johnson argues that the new deal should be ratified by parliament at once, in order to allow the country to move on to other priorities: the cost of living, the National Health Service, violent crime and the environment. This is twaddle. All these things and more — education, housing, infrastructure, defence, welfare and almost every aspect of taxation — have always been within the control of the UK. Nothing but incompetence prevented UK governments from tackling them effectively while the country was in the EU.

With the principal exception of immigration, leaving the EU will give the UK the illusion, not the reality, of greater control. Its ability to transform its opportunities in trade and other aspects of international commerce, which are where EU membership does indeed matter, will turn out to be negligible. The UK on its own is merely a big minnow, generating just 3 per cent of world output. Only as part of the EU does it have the clout needed for transformative international deals. Even then, these are hard to do with the big powers.


Far worse, leaving on Mr Johnson’s terms is going to make the country substantially poorer than it would otherwise be. That is not only bad in itself. It is also going to reduce the resources available to any future government to deliver on domestic policy promises. Indeed, this is already the case. The latest Green Budget from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Citi argues that: “Gross domestic product is roughly 2.5-3.0 per cent (£55bn-£66bn) below where we think it would have been without Brexit.” This is quite likely to be a permanent loss. It would imply an equally permanent reduction in fiscal revenue of a little over 1 per cent of GDP.

With this deal, which implies a very hard Brexit, things will get worse. A recent analysis, The economic impact of Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals, from The UK in a Changing Europe think-tank, concludes that, other things being equal, GDP per head could be between 5.8 and 7 per cent lower, in the long run, under Mr Johnson’s deal compared to staying in the EU. This is even worse than the 5.5 per cent loss estimated under the May deal, although better than the 8.7 per cent loss under “WTO terms”.

Such estimates are highly uncertain. But they are based on standard economic models and not on questionable assumptions about short-term macroeconomic behaviour. The component elements are the direct trade effects (a loss of 2.3 to 2.7 percentage points of GDP) and an induced effect on productivity, as the UK economy becomes less open to trade. The ranges are determined by the severity of controls on immigration.

The implied impact on future prosperity is dramatic. At present, a modestly optimistic assumption, given the UK’s recent dire productivity performance, is that prospective GDP per head will rise at 1 per cent a year. If so, Mr Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by between 50 and 70 per cent!

Fiscally, the UK would benefit from not having to continue its contributions to the EU. But the impact of reduced GDP growth would far more than offset this gain. The analysis concludes that, without the productivity adjustment, the long-term fiscal position would be worse by between 0.7 and 0.9 per cent of GDP and, with it, by between 1.9 and 2.2 per cent of GDP (£41bn-49bn in current prices). If so, this would severely curtail any government’s ability to deliver in the areas Mr Johnson favours.

Nor, of course, is this all. In addition to the likely economic costs come the dire political ones, notably the radically increased likelihood of a break up of the UK and the painful separation from our closest neighbours and partners.

Yes, this deal is far better than no deal. But it is a terrible deal and also one that is far indeed from the “having our cake and eating it” promised by Mr Johnson in the referendum campaign. It is, simply, a monstrous act of national self harm. It is not good enough to let an exhausted parliament wave it through.

Despite all the obvious risks, the people should be asked whether this deal is what they truly want for their future and that of their children and children’s children. The right thing to do is to put it to the people. They now know what choices lie in front of them and their country. If they choose this one knowingly, so be it.

martin.wolf@ft.com

Wouldn't believe the predictions. Before the election it was widely stated that a vote to leave would bring thousands of job losses and an immediate recession. Reality was that unemployed fell. Most economists are no better than mystic Meg.

Sat is lining for up a cracker day. 1 channel the rugby while the news on the other

Just because you read the sun or the express doesn’t make you an expert on this. Most of the disastrous effects of the vote in 2016 were mitigated by the bank of england introducing quantitative easing which totally devalued the pound. If you’ve gone on holiday in the last 3 years you’ll be aware it has become much more expensive. Also figures released in the last few weeks show that the uk economy has missed out between 60 and 80 billion of projected gdp in the last 3 years because of the vote. That amounts to a minimum of 400million a week, way more than the amount used on the bus by dominic cummings et al which swung the referendum vote. There was also a report in the guardian yesterday which shows the unemployment figures should be 3 million higher ie there are hidden unemployed. With huge numbers on zero hours contracts the emplyment situation isn’t even close to being as good as the governments massaged figures indicate.

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #161 on: October 18, 2019, 12:04:42 PM »
Martin Wolf
The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

   
   https://www.ft.com/content/a513c33c-f02a-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195

   The UK must have a public vote on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal

Britons must agree to become significantly poorer and accept the illusion of greater sovereignty

Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by 50-70%
Martin Wolf

Theresa May was wrong: a bad deal is far better than no deal. So sensible people should prefer Boris Johnson’s new deal to the lunacy of no deal. But the right thing to do now is to give the public the choice they did not have in 2016, between defined alternatives. That is perfectly democratic. It is also wise: the public need to consent to what will be a very costly outcome.

Mr Johnson argues that the new deal should be ratified by parliament at once, in order to allow the country to move on to other priorities: the cost of living, the National Health Service, violent crime and the environment. This is twaddle. All these things and more — education, housing, infrastructure, defence, welfare and almost every aspect of taxation — have always been within the control of the UK. Nothing but incompetence prevented UK governments from tackling them effectively while the country was in the EU.

With the principal exception of immigration, leaving the EU will give the UK the illusion, not the reality, of greater control. Its ability to transform its opportunities in trade and other aspects of international commerce, which are where EU membership does indeed matter, will turn out to be negligible. The UK on its own is merely a big minnow, generating just 3 per cent of world output. Only as part of the EU does it have the clout needed for transformative international deals. Even then, these are hard to do with the big powers.


Far worse, leaving on Mr Johnson’s terms is going to make the country substantially poorer than it would otherwise be. That is not only bad in itself. It is also going to reduce the resources available to any future government to deliver on domestic policy promises. Indeed, this is already the case. The latest Green Budget from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Citi argues that: “Gross domestic product is roughly 2.5-3.0 per cent (£55bn-£66bn) below where we think it would have been without Brexit.” This is quite likely to be a permanent loss. It would imply an equally permanent reduction in fiscal revenue of a little over 1 per cent of GDP.

With this deal, which implies a very hard Brexit, things will get worse. A recent analysis, The economic impact of Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals, from The UK in a Changing Europe think-tank, concludes that, other things being equal, GDP per head could be between 5.8 and 7 per cent lower, in the long run, under Mr Johnson’s deal compared to staying in the EU. This is even worse than the 5.5 per cent loss estimated under the May deal, although better than the 8.7 per cent loss under “WTO terms”.

Such estimates are highly uncertain. But they are based on standard economic models and not on questionable assumptions about short-term macroeconomic behaviour. The component elements are the direct trade effects (a loss of 2.3 to 2.7 percentage points of GDP) and an induced effect on productivity, as the UK economy becomes less open to trade. The ranges are determined by the severity of controls on immigration.

The implied impact on future prosperity is dramatic. At present, a modestly optimistic assumption, given the UK’s recent dire productivity performance, is that prospective GDP per head will rise at 1 per cent a year. If so, Mr Johnson’s hard Brexit might reduce the total increase in GDP per head over a decade by between 50 and 70 per cent!

Fiscally, the UK would benefit from not having to continue its contributions to the EU. But the impact of reduced GDP growth would far more than offset this gain. The analysis concludes that, without the productivity adjustment, the long-term fiscal position would be worse by between 0.7 and 0.9 per cent of GDP and, with it, by between 1.9 and 2.2 per cent of GDP (£41bn-49bn in current prices). If so, this would severely curtail any government’s ability to deliver in the areas Mr Johnson favours.

Nor, of course, is this all. In addition to the likely economic costs come the dire political ones, notably the radically increased likelihood of a break up of the UK and the painful separation from our closest neighbours and partners.

Yes, this deal is far better than no deal. But it is a terrible deal and also one that is far indeed from the “having our cake and eating it” promised by Mr Johnson in the referendum campaign. It is, simply, a monstrous act of national self harm. It is not good enough to let an exhausted parliament wave it through.

Despite all the obvious risks, the people should be asked whether this deal is what they truly want for their future and that of their children and children’s children. The right thing to do is to put it to the people. They now know what choices lie in front of them and their country. If they choose this one knowingly, so be it.

martin.wolf@ft.com

Wouldn't believe the predictions. Before the election it was widely stated that a vote to leave would bring thousands of job losses and an immediate recession. Reality was that unemployed fell. Most economists are no better than mystic Meg.

Sat is lining for up a cracker day. 1 channel the rugby while the news on the other
https://www.ft.com/content/a513c33c-f02a-11e9-ad1e-4367d8281195
The latest Green Budget from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Citi argues that: “Gross domestic product is roughly 2.5-3.0 per cent (£55bn-£66bn) below where we think it would have been without Brexit.”

So it's in line with pre referendum predictions
Lookit

Jell 0 Biafra

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #162 on: October 18, 2019, 04:33:07 PM »
From this one:   https://www.ft.com/content/f917b2ac-f0cc-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

"the prime minister has secured a democratic escape mechanism from the backstop for Northern Ireland — a withdrawal of consent by the devolved Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont — but its nature makes it hard to envisage it ever being used. "

What's the nature of the "escape mechanism" and why does it make it hard to envisage it ever being used?

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15546
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #163 on: October 18, 2019, 04:52:00 PM »
After 4 years the Assembly by a simple majority can vote to terminate the current proposed arrangements.
Then 2 years have to be spent to seek an alternative arrangement that would prevent a hard border  customs, regulatory divergence etc etc
1 BIG CUP and 1 Cupeen so far....

Jell 0 Biafra

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
    • View Profile
Re: Various bits re Brexit and Economics
« Reply #164 on: October 18, 2019, 07:04:00 PM »
Thanks. 

Not sure that those arrangements are so arduous that the DUP, wouldn't try to use the escape mechanism, but I guess the hope is they won't carry enough numbers along with them to be in a position to do so.