Just bringing together my various bits and pieces on the UK-EU. The first reactions - a significant agreement...

Ten days in and it seems the government's post-Brexit economic policy is to ignore reality, priority and choice, and just claim with no evidence that everything is going to be great. This, needless to say, is dangerous territory. Exhibit 1... 1/

Here's a good example of what is currently passing for UK economic policy. The theory the UK can be 'nimble' in regulations has been present since 2016. In 5 years nobody has found the detail. We presume others might have a similar idea. And trade needs regulations to align 2/

There will of course always be someone to blame. Usually the EU. Because they do indeed want to compete with the UK. This is not exactly surprising. A vague UK idea versus the bigger next door market (or indeed a big one over the pond). Who's going to win? 3/

Next, 'Global Britain' and specifically the Liz Truss speech in the Commons yesterday. To summarise, we are going to do trade deals on everything with everyone while still protecting UK industry and poor countries. Yup, more warm words and no priorities.

Useful example here. The long running EU-US trade battle over food, one claiming to be about quality, the other science. The UK solution. We'll do both! Fabulous, why did nobody think of this before? Unless they did, and found they still had to choose. Note other warm words 5/

Plenty of talk this morning about how UK sovereignty is what is stopping an EU deal, that the EU want to impinge on this.

Sorry, the argument is totally bogus. It is a combination of EU hatred and cakeism dressed up in respectable clothing. 1/ n

How do we define sovereignty in trade deals? Complex question, so let's just look at this government. It believes in trade deals and membership of the WTO. These contain binding rules. Therefore for this government sovereignty and binding rules are compatible. 2/

Therefore sovereignty in terms of trade rules for this government is a relative concept either in content or partner terms. So when they say the EU proposals go too far is that because of what is proposed, or who it is proposed with? 3/

We haven't been told the detail. But with regard to the level playing field it is suggested that no country could sign up to a situation where not following the rules leads to tariffs being imposed. However we agree to this in the WTO and FTAs. So that is untrue. 4/

Fish is a slightly different matter, and it is being said that the EU proposal would deny the UK control of our waters. But definitionally that can't be true. We're showing our control through the discussion. We don't have to do a deal. 5/

Breathless accounts of brilliant negotiating are oddly unaccompanied by statements of UK wins.

Twice the PM has signed up to deals he previously said no PM could sign up for. The level of self-deception in turning these into triumphs is off the scale.

A wise man has suggested that Johnson's self delusions are good for the UK in the way he folds under EU pressure but denies it - that this actually delivers the best result.

But it doesn't do much for the country's politcal debate to have such delusions at the heart of the most important economic relationship. And they don't have such delusions in Belfast.

Perhaps it is the way of UK politics that no leader can be seen to be pro-EU, that the UK must be seen to be bigger than the EU, even though the UK is obviously smaller and needs the EU for trade.

Today's UK-EU trade deal reflection - what is rarely stated in discussions about the deal's shortcomings is that they reflect UK government policy choices - in particular that control of immigration and a US trade deal are a higher priority than an EU deal.

Thus, why was it not a UK government priority to secure for UK musicians the rights to tour the EU? Because that would probably have required a reciprocal right to be given to those in the EU, which we didn't want to give. Choice.

Meanwhile why did the UK government not seek or secure a reduction in food inspections for GB products going to the EU? Because that would probably have required fixing food regulations in a way that might have been an obstacle to a US trade deal.

Works the other way as well. Why did the EU refuse UK requests on mutual recognition of industrial testing? In part at least because of UK lack of commitment on maintaining the previous EU system of standards and conformity assessment which might be a problem in a US deal.

One of the strangest opinions in the London politics bubble is that the UK government isn't that bothered about a US trade deal, as it so obviously goes against the evidence. There might be domestic opposition, but this was to be Brexit Dividend Number 1.

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.

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

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

Ten days in and it seems the government's post-Brexit economic policy is to ignore reality, priority and choice, and just claim with no evidence that everything is going to be great. This, needless to say, is dangerous territory. Exhibit 1... 1/

Here's a good example of what is currently passing for UK economic policy. The theory the UK can be 'nimble' in regulations has been present since 2016. In 5 years nobody has found the detail. We presume others might have a similar idea. And trade needs regulations to align 2/

There will of course always be someone to blame. Usually the EU. Because they do indeed want to compete with the UK. This is not exactly surprising. A vague UK idea versus the bigger next door market (or indeed a big one over the pond). Who's going to win? 3/

Next, 'Global Britain' and specifically the Liz Truss speech in the Commons yesterday. To summarise, we are going to do trade deals on everything with everyone while still protecting UK industry and poor countries. Yup, more warm words and no priorities.

Useful example here. The long running EU-US trade battle over food, one claiming to be about quality, the other science. The UK solution. We'll do both! Fabulous, why did nobody think of this before? Unless they did, and found they still had to choose. Note other warm words 5/