There is a sense of disbelief about the new trade problems between Great Britain and the EU / Northern Ireland. Which we need to lose. This is the new normal. And we face a difficult period of adjustment - immediate paperwork needs, and to longer term uncompetitiveness.

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.

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.

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/

“Fanatical Remainers and the FBPE cult”: a thread

The populist right seems to be intensifying its efforts to portray supporters of EU membership as some sort of lunatic fringe. (Never-knowingly-impartial @afneil and billionaires’ stooge @darrengrimes_ are among (1/20-ish)

the worst offenders.) “Fanatical Remainers,” they sneer at every opportunity. “FBPE cultists! Extremists! Ideologues!”

So what is a cult? What are the hallmarks of extremism? The Oxford Dictionary defines a cult as “a system of religious veneration and devotion /2

directed towards a particular figure or object”; “a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members”; or, in its weakest sense, “a misplaced or excessive admiration /3

for a particular thing”.

According to Janja Lalich PhD, a sociologist who specialises in cults and extremist groups, a cult is “a group or movement held together by a shared commitment to a charismatic leader or ideology. It has a belief system /4

that has the answers to all of life’s questions and offers a special solution to be gained only by following the leader’s rules”.

“Cults tend to be founded by charismatic leaders … great manipulators. They know how to read people. They come along and offer a message /5

The important difference between AstraZeneca's relationship with the UK and with the EU, and the reason it has fallen behind schedule on 50m vaccine doses promised to the EU, is that the UK agreed the deal with AZ a full three months before the EU did - which gave...

AZ an extra three months to sort out manufacturing and supply problems relating to the UK contract (there were plenty of problems). Here is the important timeline. In May AZ reached agreement with Oxford and the UK government to make and supply the vaccine. In fact Oxford...

had already started work on the supply chain. The following month AZ reached a preliminary agreement with Germany, the Netherlands, France and Italy, a group known as the Inclusive Vaccine Alliance, based on the agreement with the UK. The announcement was 13 June. BUT the EU...

insisted that the Inclusive Vaccine Alliance could not formalise the deal. The European Commission insisted it should take over the contract negotiations on behalf of the whole EU. So were another two months of talks and the contract was not signed till the end of August...

What is frustrating for AZ is that the extra talks with the European Commission led to no material changes to the contract, but wasted time on making arrangements to make the vaccine with partner sites. The yield at these partner sites has been lower than expected. The problem...

The two most irritating sentences I find myself typing over and over on this website are:
1. "There are many pathways to universal healthcare"
&
2. "No, the Democratic party would not be a center right party in European countries either in social or economic terms"

& if you're going to come at me from the economic angle, plz do some research into EU center right parties. There's a lot of btwn-country variation, but these parties typically aim towards increased privatization of public systems & deregulation of industry. Dems do the opposite.

A related area is austerity. To look at recent history, examine how many EU countries chipped away at funding their extant safety nets, esp in healthcare, during the recession. What did the US do under Dems? A massive expansion of healthcare.

Now, the ACA is far from perfect and I want a much greater public role as well as the eventual minimization/near-elimination of private insurance in the system. That said, it's simply true that the U.S. expanded our healthcare system when many EU countries were cutting theirs.

You can't just compare a party in absolute economic terms across countries. This is especially the case when you have massive generational differences in building of the social safety net/welfare state.

After Michel Barnier's briefing of EU ambassadors this afternoon, here's where things stand:

2/ There is a basic deadline of Christmas Eve to get a deal. That will give the EU's legal services time to draw up a letter to send to the UK seeking provisional application of the treaty from Jan 1

3/ It's understood officials will need four days at a minimum to draft a letter seeking provisional application of the treaty (all this is on the basis that it is pretty much too late for the European Parliament to ratify the treaty on time for Jan 1)

4/ On the prospects for a deal: diplomats say they're not ruling out a deal by Christmas eve. Michel Barnier said there had been significant progress. Member states expect to convene a meeting of the Working Party (of Brexit coordinators) every day (except Christmas Day)

5/ Acc to one diplomat Barnier will publish the text once/if it's agreed, but before it's been legally scrubbed. Member states can approve the text via written procedure (sending a formal letter) as there are no Council meetings foreseen to do it in person between now and Dec 31

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/