Dear fellow musicians, performers, technicians etc. Here’s a thread about how our lives are going to change re touring/working in the EU in 50 days time. Think of it as a kind of Bad News Advent calendar. Here goes 1/

First things first, you’ll need a passport with at least 6 months left on it. And you’ll need full travel/third party/health insurance, since if you get ill or have an accident every penny of your care will have to be paid for 2/

To work or do a gig you’re going to need a work visa, just like you do for the USA. But here’s the thing. Work permits & visas and the conditions attached are a matter not for the EU but for the member states themselves 3/

Yes, every member state controls who comes in and who doesn’t and what the rules will be for work and residency. It’s almost as if the Brexiters have been lying about this ALL ALONG. EU members CONTROL THEIR OWN BORDERS 4/

So you’ll need to get a work permit for every country you’re intending to work or gig in and the rules are often different, as are the rules on eg taxation of that work (eg Spain has a withholding tax, France does not) 5/

1/7 My thoughts on what could happen within a decade after #Brexit with the formation of the #UnitedCelticNation as a new country:

2/7 After the #Brexit transition period ends on 31 Dec 2020, the Scottish Parliament will announce a new independent referendum (under a Section 30 order which the PM has to agree to - he won't - they will change their laws to enable them not to need his approval).

3/7 This new Scottish independent referendum will happen within the first 6/9 months of 2021 and result in the decision to leave the UK.

4/7 An application to rejoin the EU will happen immediately after the Scottish referendum result and within months the EU will accept Scotland back in (justified as 'the will of the people' plus how recent their exit was).

5/7 Within 3-5 years of #Brexit, Wales will also hold its own referendum on independence (fuelled by the decline in economy plus the example set by Scotland) and will also be successful. EU membership will also be sought and gained with an accelerated timescale within a year.

Many Brits live under the false impression that the UK has a Special Relationship with the US. In reality, it's far more transactional, especially for the Americans. This delusion is especially dangerous as post-Brexit UK seeks a new place in the world

While the two do have a very close relationship on security and defence built on post-war efforts, it would be foolhardy to expect any US president to place much emphasis on the UK's economic interests over any other third country

The problem Boris Johnson has is that a close relationship with the White House is more important than any time since the war, given the UK's new status outside the EU. What a headache, then, that the US is having an election with 2 v different candidates

On one hand: Trump likes Brexit, dislikes the EU and might see benefit in disrupting the EU by teaming up with the UK in a way that helps the UK economically. However, Trump is wildly unpopular in the UK and Boris does not want to be seen as his best mate

On the other: Brits are generally more pro-Democrat & more pro-America when a Dem is in the White House. However, Biden clearly does not support the UK's Brexit position, especially when it comes to Northern Ireland.

One of the root causes of the Govt's Brexit difficulties is that it has overpromised.

We can, it is said, reclaim our sovereignty, with the freedom to make our own rules, and, at the same time, retain many of the advantages of EU membership. 1/14

The reality is that we cannot.

Unless we agree to certain standards and rules (and there is scope to argue about which rules), there will be borders, and checks, and tariffs. 2/

There will always be a relationship between rights (eg tariff free access to EU/UK markets) and responsibilities (eg abiding by level-playing field commitments). 3/

A 'good' outcome for the UK, in the Govt's view, would involve access gains (eg fewer border checks) without corresponding obligations (or with weak, or difficult-to-enforce obligations). 4/

The chances of this sort of 'good' outcome are low. The EU looks likely, in the face of the threats in the Internal Market Bill and now the Finance Bill, to insist on rigorous governance provisions. [Also, such provisions are the foundation of the single market.] 5/

Ireland's foreign min @SimonCoveney says there will be no breakthru at the #euco this wk, that EU fishermen will not be "sold out" in order to secure a future relationship deal, and that if there is a deal it will not be ratified unless the UK "remove" Internal Mkt Bill clauses

2/ Speaking at the General Affairs Council Mr Coveney said: “We value fishermen, we value their contribution across the EU and cerainly EU fishermen are not going to be sold out in an effort to get an agreement on a future relationship with the UK on trade.”

3/ He said that while there had been some progress on the level playing field area, there had been “little or no” movement on fisheries. Both sides, he said, had legitimate concerns on the issue.

4/ Mr Coveney had bilateral meetings with both @MichelBarnier and @MarosSefcovic

5/ “There was a very clear message that if we do manage to negotiate a deal on a future relationship agreement that involves many different areas, before that deal can be ratified or finalised, the domestic legislation that the UK has introduced...

Brexit. UK-EU talks. Let's try to explain why we're in such a state, of increased risk of no deal, moving away from the fish and playing fields which are the detail but not the answer, to differing philosophies and divorce parallels that might just help... 1/

First, with apologies to those concerned, we need to go beyond those saying this is the inevitable path to deal / no-deal. Half of them will be right and I'll definitely be wrong (don't worry, I'm hedged in wine bets), but it wasn't inevitable, typical, or necessary. 2/

I'll also ignore the content of any deal, which has been clear for months, the UK compromises on level playing field, the EU on fish. Something so obvious really isn't the fundamental issue. Could, as some not noted for their perspicacity have said, be done in an afternoon. 3/

Some truth in the idea that flounces and playing the tough cop are a part of trade negotiations. But equally as we're in about the 5th pass of these, I think it has ceased to be helpful. Either side could already have cut the deal having shown their toughness. 4/

Some fundamentals then, that we've forgotten. First, the trade deal that will lead to much less free trade than before. The incentive structures, the ability to create a win-win, are inevitably going to be different to a normal deal. 5/

EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier has briefed Europe Ministers from EU member states that progress continues to be made in negotiations with the UK but not significantly when it comes to key sticking points: level playing field, fish, governance of deal /1

This briefing comes ahead of the EU leaders summit in Brussels end of this week, where Brexit will be discussed most likely I’m told on Friday morning. Both Michel Barnier and the PM once described this summit mid October as cut off point by which time a deal had to be agreed /2

This clearly will not be the case and each side predictably blames the other for that. Today a UK government source said: „The EU have been using the old playbook in which they thought running down the clock would work against the UK“ /3

„They have assumed that the UK would be more willing to compromise the longer the process ran, but in fact all these tactics have achieved is to get us to the middle of October with lots of work that could have been done left undone.“ /4

Both sides say they still want a deal and think it entirely possible to reach a deal this year, infact v soon, if only the OTHER side would just be „more realistic“ (ie make the big compromises) /5

Amid all the announcements today, it's easy to overlook that the OBR has updated its scenario on a no-deal Brexit. It exposes an undeniably hard reality for the Govt that claims that the UK would "prosper mightily" under no-deal next year.

(Short thread)

1. Key chart: a no-deal/WTO/Australia-style Brexit would delay the point at which econ output regains its pre-virus peak by "almost a year to the third quarter of 2023."

In the upside scenario, this cross-over point could be at the start of 2022; in the downside, in 2025. Grim.

2. Next year, a no deal Brexit would reduce real GDP by around a further 2% - as a result of immediate disruption to the border and uncertainty facing businesses. That's on top of the Covid-related contraction.

3. While there's some short-term border disruption, most of the costs come in the medium term: from lost employment; productivity losses; lower business investment.

Exactly the opposite of what the Chancellor said to @AndrewMarr9 on Sunday.

4. Underneath these numbers, output would fall *below* the Covid levels for several key sectors: Manufacturing, professional services, financial services, retail, energy.

All trade intensive sectors that have been spared the same drop in output as the non-tradables this year.

EXCLUSIVE. "We want a Brexit deal with the UK. But the EU is ready for No Deal"

I interviewed Joao @ValedeAlmeidaEU, EU’s first ambassador to the UK. He expressed many interesting comments on the ongoing #Brexit negotiations

THREAD with some

1. Ambassador Vale de Almeida:

the aim is a "fruitful, ambitious, forward-looking relationship between the EU and the UK after Brexit". BUT "it is very important to make sure that the Withdrawal Agreement is fully and completely implemented".

#Brexit

2. Then he said:

Another challenge is "to engage with the British authorities, [...] Whitehall, No10, FCDO and beyond, but also with the DEVOLVED UK nations. This country is a union. It's not only the government in London, BUT ALSO the governments in the 3 devolved nations".

3. But we'll talk later about this.

Then the Ambassador said that #Brexit "is a moment of sadness because we're losing one member of the family, but also we [the EU] need to reflect, draw lessons from it" and "to be humble as well about Europe and the project itself".

4. Which lessons?

Amb: "We [EU] need to connect better with people, understand better what are people's concerns, accept that there are national situations that need to be given full attention. We need to be humble and question ourselves: "Are we doing the right thing"

#Brexit

Some compelling evidence at the NI Affairs Committee this morning on Brexit, the risks of smuggling, organised crime, the "soft underbelly" of the Irish border, the loss of the European Arrest Warrant and what might replace it

2/ Giving evidence were Simon Byrne, chief constable of the PSNI, Mark McEwan, assistant chief constable, Steve Rodhouse, of the UK National Crime Agency, and Steve Tracey, of HMRC. Here's the gist of what I've just filed for @rtenews online:

3/ A UK law officer has raised the prospect of intl organised criminals trafficking drugs, people + firearms into the UK via Ireland because of tighter controls at GB ports thanks to Brexit. He also suggested that Ireland may have to tighten security at its ports accordingly.

4/ Steve Rodhouse, DG of Operations with the UK National Crime Agency, said organised criminals would be making a “fundamental choice” as to whether they continue to traffic drugs, people and firearms into the UK via English ports...

5/ ...or whether they might decide to switch routes into the UK through Northern Ireland via the Irish Republic.
Mr Rodhouse told a House of Commons committee that such trafficking was already underway through what could be termed the “soft underbelly” of the Irish border.

1/ Brexit politics is built on fear. Frightened people tend to seek security in the tribe. Once that tribe might have been the Labour movement, but now in a fragmented post-industrial society it is the nation. Tribal identification is emotional, not rational.

2/ A tribe that feels under threat wants to control its borders, and who enters into its territory. It demands loyalty and solidarity, and its prime virtue is self-sacrifice - economic arguments won't persuade tribalists. Its members want to feel it is strong and powerful.

3/ Tribalism at a time of crisis is intolerant of dissent. The tribe must pull together against its enemies. Dissent and questioning cause division and disrupt the collective effort. Criticism is seen as treason. The Brexit right have ruthlessly exploited tribal psychology.

4/ To understand Brexit politics it is necessary to understand that the working and middle classes are dead as coherent political forces and that frightened and insecure people are now clinging to the only available powerful tribe, the nation-tribe.

5/ The Brexit right understands and ruthlessly exploits basic social emotions. In contrast the centre and centre-left mostly can see no further than the blinkered logic of rational individualism, from which perspective everything else is irrational and incomprehensible.