As the transition period ends, the #BrexitDeal applies from tomorrow. But there's also a parallel significant legal change - most of the rest of the withdrawal agreement starts to apply. A thread on the legal issues in the rest of that agreement.

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.

Project fear - a media friendly term which at one stroke, mocked the expertise of those at many of the coal faces of Brexit and dismissed it with a sneer. Yet, just 9 days in, it looks very much like project fear predictions were true and should have been heeded.

Thread

Project fear was not a myth. It was the truth.

Project fear was not a myth. It was the truth.

Project fear was not a myth. It was the truth.

Project fear was not a myth. It was the truth.

"The tangible benefits of #Brexit." A thread.

For the EU, the tangible benefits of Brexit have been immense. Not just in the way it has galvanised support for the EU across the bloc, but in the way that the UK has made itself...

/1

...the least competitive advanced economy in the world. Don't forget -- we're no longer a trading partner of the EU, but its main trading rival, and considering both their population and economy is 7x bigger than ours, we don't stand a chance.

/2

(Remember Boris Johnson's famous mutterings about business...? Something that could only have been said by a man born into fabulous wealth and privilege...)

/3

But the big win for the EU has been in the sheer, gob-smacking, eye-watering amount of assets that have been stripped from the UK and moved to banks and financial institutions in Dublin, Paris, Frankfurt etc.

$1.6 trillion as of October this year.

That is an INSANE amount.

/4

I'll try to put it into perspective: $1.6 trillion is over half our entire GDP. It's 1/64th of the WORLD'S entire GDP. If you stacked it up in $100 bills, it would reach FOUR TIMES the height of the International Space Station.

/5

1/ Lots of good analysis out there on why the EU-China CAI is a bad decision in the context of Xinjiang, transatlantic partnerships, etc. But I also think that even the trade/econ benefits of the CAI look quite limited. Thread:

2/ It highlights, as a win, that China’s preservation of existing liberalizations. That’s positive, but not really a big problem; the bigger issue is stagnation, where reform pledges have failed to materialize after years/decades of promises. Great example is in the FDI openings,

3/ which are highlighted to include cloud, auto, fin services etc—all areas of EU/MNC interest. Thing is, these openings aren’t new. China has begun opening auto/finance since 2018/19, while the 50% cap on cloud services has remained unchanged since 2015 (or before if we consider

4/ WTO ascension commitments vs the 2015 Telecom Catalogue, but that’s for another day). So these are existing openings that are repackaged as “wins.” More critical issue beyond FDI caps is around licensing issuance, which still big problem. Arguably some more significance in

5/ R&D and health? Not an expert, but the FDI conditions (eg hospitals only in certain cities) are limiting, while R&D could be complicated by data/info controls. It’s also unclear how existing tech transfer prohibitions exceed existing protections in the foreign investment law,