THREAD
1. Anyone who thinks English exceptionalism, nationalism and ‘regulatory realignment’ - the root drivers of Brexit - would have ended with a ‘soft brexit’ ie a customs union or a Norwegian style deal, misunderstands what brexit has always been about.

Scoop...Britain faces dearer electricity and occasional black-outs if it bans EU fishing boats from its waters after 2026. This de facto power over the UK power market is handed to the EU in the post-Brexit deal which MP’s will wave almost unread through parliament today. 1/10

The trade deal enshrines a link between continued EU access to British waters and UK frictionless access to the EU power grid and gas network. This has scarcely been noticed though it was mentioned and brushed aside by last night’s statement by the ultra-Brexiteer ERG. 2/10

The link – drawn to my attention by a senior EU source – is spelled out in dates, not words. The fisheries part of the deal grants EU boats continued access with a 25% cut in quotas over five and a half years until 30 June 2026. After that there are “annual negotiations” 3/10

The energy part of the agreement allows the UK virtually unchanged access to the continental electricity and gas markets. But that expires on exactly the same date as the fish deal - 30 June, 2026. After that (guess what?) there are “annual negotiations". 4/10

Coincidence? Not at all, my source says. The link is “more than implicit”. The energy deal “ends by default” unless both sides agree to extend it.
If the UK bans, or severely restricts, EU boats in British waters from June 30, 2026….easy access to EU energy will also end. 5/10

Japanese companies in the UK who have moved their product distribution hub to the EU in anticipation of what is now happening. One in a long thread, just to make a point that *some* companies have been preparing for worst case Brexit for years 1/13

Allegro MicroSystems Europe, semiconductors and ICs, owned by Sanken Denki, now importing into EU via Netherlands rather than UK. Amano Enzyme Europe transferred EU stock to warehouse in EU 2/13

Anritsu EMEA (sales and service of testing and measuring solutions to communications industry) all EU deliveries now go to second transport hub in Netherlands. Audio Technica established European Distribution Centre in Netherlands for Brexit (bit of a 🇳🇱theme here) 3/13

Eisai Europe (manufactures pharmaceuticals in Hatfield) transferred centralised marketing authorizations to Frankfurt, established testing and storage facilities in Antwerp. Electric Glass Fiber holding stock in EU for Brexit 4/13

Enplas Europe (semiconductors) acquired warehousing in NL for Brexit. Fujichem Sonneborn opened warehouse in Spain for Brexit. Furukawa Electric Europe shifted warehouse and distribution to Germany. 5/13

As @michaelgove admitted yesterday we are expecting significant disruption in our #trade flows with the EU in coming days. The fact he is willing to say this confirms what most of us feel, that problems are building. This thread is a summary of what I have learnt in the past week

DISCLAIMER I run a trade body and spent the week in my back bedroom on the phone to members, reading the media and on zoom calls. I’m not on the ground and I am not in the operation rooms. So my info is second hand and partial. No one has a complete view. IT IS HIDEOUSLY COMPLEX

The first obvious problem is the number of different actors involved. On the commercial side - within 1 exporter there are multiple depts. There is also the buying company and the logistics company. They all have to sync. 1 load of goods involves multiple commercial actors.

On the government side its even more complex. In UK there are dozens of departments and agencies involved, and the same if not more in every member state of the EU. there are hundreds of thousands of decision makers involved.

They all have the same rule book though - YES true but its 1200 pages long and it's 15 days old - also - here's the thing with red tape, it's open to interpretation. (It's why lawyers tend to drive nice cars) and so being BORDER READY means different things to different actors.

On March 17, the Netherlands will have general elections.

Two parties - PVV & FVD - want a Nexit, a departure from the EU, in line with Brexit.

As the reality of the EU-UK trade agreement kicks in, let's take a look at what these parties

Firstly, good to note, here is their recent polling,

PVV: 14% - 23 seats (currently 20 seats)
FVD: 2.5% - 4 seats (currently 2 seats)

A government needs 76 seats to govern.

Give or take, these parties appeal to about 20% of the electorate.

/2

FVD wants a so-called "intelligent Nexit" because - arguably - they think the UK's departure was not-so-intelligent.

"Intelligent" Nexit. Lots of nodding

But FVD doesn't want to leave the EU, they want an end to the EU.

/3

They want a "different cooperation model among sovereign states" based around free trade, conveniently assuming that the EU will automatically cease to exist once the Dutch vote 'Leave'.

And EFTA should be the basis for the new model.

/4

It's full-on 'magical thinking'.

If you want to join EFTA, sure, make the case.

But be truthful about what it means.

The FVD decides to disregard the EEA agreement, which governs trade between the EFTA-4 and the EU27, and the EU rules and regs that EFTA countries follow.

/5

1. It surprises me that on the whole pro Europeans on Twitter view themselves as pragmatists, who rely on evidence to form their opinion.
In fact a long running joke in our 'group' is that Brexit will be a roaring success, if we all just believe hard it will be a roaring success.

2. The last couple of weeks have made it clearer than ever that blind belief that is impervious to evidence and facts is not a leave/remain thing. It's a human thing

3. I was accused of lying and hounding a 'vulnerable' person off Twitter. When the victims of that 'vulnerable' got the same treatment, it became necessary to take action.

4. So I gathered evidence (not all, but enough) and wrote a blog with contributions from several others. Then the blog was checked by experts to ensure that it was neither libellous (to protect authors) or a risk to any possible legal action (to protect victims).

5. I naively thought that would put an end to the false accusations and trolling.
Since publishing I've been accused of having called the "vulnerable' person and threatened members of their family, forcing them to confess to the police