PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Brexit process
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 70, 71, 72 ... 104, 105, 106  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7854

PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
The logical conclusion is a massive shrinkage of the chemical sector.

Suspect that many other industrial sectors are looking at similar.

No Deal will wreck UK manufacturing...


Given the IPCC's report on 1.5 degrees and what the cuts need to be, this 'massive shrinkage' sounds about right.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 10573
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We could do with a massive shrinkage on the agricultural chemicals sector. Even the UN says that the future is small scale organic rather than industrial agriculture.
_________________
As Steve Keen puts it: “Capital without energy is a statue; labour without energy is a corpse.” Economics ignores this which is why economics is broken.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4345
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Latest eurointelligence briefing...

How to shrink the Irish border

We are in a critical phase in the Brexit negotiations, but we are certainly not close to a deal as some reports suggested yesterday. We recall similarly statements during the Greek crisis in 2015. It is the oldest negotiation trick in the book, aimed to put pressure on the other side in the final stages of a long and hard negotiation. 

We still don’t see the UK parliamentary math stacking up in favour of an agreed Brexit deal, at least not yet. It will invariably shift, but until that happens we don’t see much room for manouevre.

The biggest news yesterday were reports suggesting the possible beginnings of such a shift. But it goes in two directions. The DUP has hardened its position after Arlene Foster's meetings in Brussels, and is now threatening to vote against the budget thus effectively ending its support for Theresa May’s minority government. We discount that threat because it would trigger new elections - not immediately but certainly in 2019. But the statement is also telling us that the DUP is not yet on board for a Brexit deal - to put this mildly.

On the other side May is talking to some 20-30 Labour MPs who are considering to support an agreement as they prefer any deal to a hard Brexit. Sebastian Payne argues in the FT that the parliamentary arithmetic is beginning to shift in May’s favour. The 20-30 Labour MPs are not beholden to Jeremy Corbyn, who is expected to impose a three-line whip on his MPs to reject the deal. All of these 20-30 MPs are willing, in principle, to break the whip. Payne also argues that the much-threatened Tory rebellion is likely to shrink to a small group of hardcore Brexiteers. Payne’s rule of thumb is that parliamentary rebellions usually shrink to a quarter by the time it comes to a vote. We also believe that the rebellion will weaken in the coming weeks and months, but to secure agreement May needs two things to happen at the same time: the number of Tory rebels must not be much larger than the number of Labour rebels; and the DUP needs to support her. May can hardly afford to lose the 10 DUP votes without securing off-setting support either from Labour or her own ranks. What complicates the matter further is that the demands of the Labour MPs and those of the Brexiteers are diametrically opposed. Whatever direction May moves towards, she will lose some support.

In his statement in the European Parliament yesterday Michel Barnierindirectly alluded to the big decision that has yet to be made, which is one between a customs union as the end state of Brexit and a free-trade agreement. If May pivots towards a customs union, she may gain more support from Labour MPs and the DUP. But that would maximise the Tory rebellion. We doubt this is the way she will go. If she moves towards an FTA, she might placate some her own rebels, but she may find it harder to keep the Labour MPs and the DUP on board.

Barnier gave details on some of the technical discussions that are currently taking place. We note that some UK newspapers are very confused about the three stages of Brexit - the transition period, a very likely interim period that involves membership of a customs union, and the yet undecided final state. The technical discussions on the Irish border relate to the latter. Barnier said the EU was willing to consider technical solutions to shift some of the border control formalities into companies. We very much agree with him when he talks about the need to de-dramatise the Irish border issue. It is of the kind of issues that appear to be huge in political discussions, but then disappear as you approach them. We believe that even in a scenario of a transitional phase ending in a WTO regime, the border can be substantially softened. Many of the technical points Barnier talked about like barcode scanning or veterinary controls can be carried out away from the border under any regime. 

Both the end state and the transition modalities towards it are the big outstanding political problems - both for the UK and the EU. May will today gather her inner cabinet for a briefing on the latest development, another sign that there is movement in the debate ahead of next week’s summit.   
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4345
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regarding the economic impact of a no deal/wto brexit I'm with eurointelligence on this one... the economic impacts are real but not remotely as bad as forecast in the UK media. The political impact will be far bigger then the economic impact.

P.s. eurointelligence are pro European and certainly not brexiteer!
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
stumuz1



Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 136
Location: Anglesey

PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:

Don't worry, there will be a massive cost to No Deal Brexit.....


That really depends on your point of view or if you are a doomer or optimist.

I attended the first stakeholder event at the Hilton Hotel in Liverpool in August.

As for REACH, the HSE will carry across existing REACH registrations held by UK-based companies directly into the UK’s replacement for REACH, legally ‘grandfathering’ the registrations into the UK regime.

Set up a transitional light-touch notification process for UK companies importing chemicals from the European Economic Area (EEA) before the UK leaves the EU that don’t hold a REACH registration.
This would reduce the risk of interruption in supply chains for companies currently relying on a registration held by an EEA-based company. This would mean that those UK companies could continue to buy those chemicals from the EEA without any break.

More importantly for the chemical sector they can carry into the UK system all existing authorisations to continue using higher-risk chemicals held by UK companies.

Mark wrote:


They basically mapped out the consequence of Deal and No Deal Scenarios..., covering the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) and various major pieces if chemical legislation such as REACh, CLP, BPR, PPP etc....
To summarise No Deal, the UK would set up near identical regulatory systems which would to add to costs massively but give no visible benefit


Nope. They have stated that chemicals will need to register with UK REACH. UK companies will have their data sets grandfathered. EU companies will need to pay the extra costs.

Also remember CLP is a global regulation not a EU regulation. CLP merely gives effect to GHS(globally harmonised system)

Mark wrote:

even without considering the skill shortages to implement and the disruption involved... The logical conclusion is a massive shrinkage of the chemical sector.


Or expansion. The UK is the worlds leading provider of chemical legal services. This is not going to change since most chemical regulation is global.

Mark wrote:
No Deal will wreck UK manufacturing far worse than Maggie ever managed to....


I'll put you in the doomer camp!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4345
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In other words, more scaremongering bullshit!
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 10573
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Because of the hysterical outpourings of many Remainers I am beginning to think that they have a mental illness that shows as these hysterical doomer rants.

I am a doomer as far as climate change/resource depletion, a much more serious problem, is concerned but I am approaching that problem in a positive way, planning for the future. I think that I would jump off a cliff if I felt the way that these Remainers do! I almost feel sorry for them.
_________________
As Steve Keen puts it: “Capital without energy is a statue; labour without energy is a corpse.” Economics ignores this which is why economics is broken.


Last edited by kenneal - lagger on Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 10573
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Listening to the news this evening it looks like the world economy is on the way down again with the US stock markets down 2 % or more. I suppose that any downturn in the UK markets will be blamed on Brexit.

They will be saying that we should try to hide from this downturn in the EU. If we do that we will be taken down even further by the crumbling edifice that is the EU. The instability of the Mediterranean countries is likely to be the destruction of the EU any way.
_________________
As Steve Keen puts it: “Capital without energy is a statue; labour without energy is a corpse.” Economics ignores this which is why economics is broken.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 974
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stumuz1 wrote:
As for REACH, the HSE will carry across existing REACH registrations held by UK-based companies directly into the UK’s replacement for REACH, legally ‘grandfathering’ the registrations into the UK regime.

Set up a transitional light-touch notification process for UK companies importing chemicals from the European Economic Area (EEA) before the UK leaves the EU that don’t hold a REACH registration.
This would reduce the risk of interruption in supply chains for companies currently relying on a registration held by an EEA-based company. This would mean that those UK companies could continue to buy those chemicals from the EEA without any break.

More importantly for the chemical sector they can carry into the UK system all existing authorisations to continue using higher-risk chemicals held by UK companies.


You make it all sound so easy......,
Setting up a UK equivalent to ECHA/REACh would cost £££££££
Replicating the IT systems IUCLID5/6....£££££
What about all the SIEFs and shared Data Sets submitted under EU REACh..... access to these would need to be negotiated (bought) for UK REACh which would require cooperation and cost ££££££
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 974
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stumuz1 wrote:
Nope. They have stated that chemicals will need to register with UK REACH. UK companies will have their data sets grandfathered. EU companies will need to pay the extra costs.

Remember CLP is a global regulation not a EU regulation. CLP merely gives effect to GHS(globally harmonised system)


Regarding grandfathering - manageable if you're the lead registrant, but what about SIEFs....???
Are you confident that all small volume chemicals imported from the EU would be registered and continue to be available.....???
Also, they're talking about a new database for UK CLP - more £££££££
& BPR....., & PPP...... - more £££££
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 974
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stumuz1 wrote:
Or expansion. The UK is the worlds leading provider of chemical legal services. This is not going to change since most chemical regulation is global.


There may well be a boom in chemical legal services, but I didn't say that.
Call me a 'doomer' if you wish, but I stick to by my belief that a No Deal Brexit would add massive costs to the UK Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
I'm not alone in that belief, but I guess we'll see how it pans out soon enough.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4345
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eurointelligence latest...

A deal so close, and yet so far

The FT reports this morning that the EU and the UK were close to a Brexit deal. We reserve judgement on this specific issue, but note the more important point that the parliamentary math is - as of yet - not conducive to approval, and indeed has become less so over the last few days. It is interesting that the Times has no Brexit news at all among its lead stories this morning, while the Guardian reports on a Kent motorway being turned into a car park as part of the no-deal preparations. And this despite the fact that Theresa May has invited her inner war cabinet to a meeting yesterday to update them on the state of the talks. The Telegraph notes that there is unhappiness among eurosceptic ministers about the lack of an end-date for what we call the second of three stages of Brexit. 

The already-agreed 21-month transitional period is to be followed by a further phase during which the whole of the UK remains in a customs union with the EU. The UK is to stay there until a free-trade agreement is negotiated, including an agreement for its provisional application prior to full ratification. The end date is an important issue for the eurosceptics, but what many in the UK fail to realise is that it is also an important issue for Michel Barnier. There is no appetite in the European Commission, or in France, to keep the UK locked in a provisional customs union that becomes permanent over time. The row over the end date is a red herring: the EU side will want to move to a permanent arrangement just as much as the eurosceptics do. Businesses prefer planning clarity, and so will politicians in this case.

The FT noted that two eurosceptic ministers, Andrea Leadsom and Esther McVey, were last night on the verge of quitting. The paper says that May agrees to the European Commission’s principal ideas for the Northern Irish backstop. This would involve minimal checks on goods travelling across the Irish Sea once the FTA takes effect, while Barnier is happy to include the whole of the UK in the customs union until it does. This means there will be no controls in Ireland during that period, followed by minimal controls in the Irish channel afterwards.

The current wording of the drafts that are circulating means that there would be no firm end date to the second period, but what the FT quotes amounts to a clear pathway towards an FTA. We believe that the nature of this transition is the key political issue in the UK, and it is possible that May could seek ways to firm up the path towards an FTA even if it does not include a specific date. 

Polly Toynbee, the political commentator of the Guardian, writes that it is not always easy to separate signal and noise when it comes to Northern Irish politics. But her sources are suggesting that this time the DUP is not bluffing. They already started boycotting the government this week, by supporting an opposition amendment on the agriculture bill. She writes that the absence of a border between Northern Ireland and the UK constitutes the fundamental rationale for the DUP's existence.

"That’s who its MPs are, what they eat and fire-breathe, their only purpose on Earth. Do they care what happens on the Irish border? Not as much as the holy UK bond across the Irish Sea."

She also noted a poll among Tory party members showing a majority supporting the idea that a breakdown in the peace process was a price worth paying for Brexit. She further reports that the Labour leadership is very confident that the vast majority of Labour MPs will follow Jeremy Corbyn in his rejection of Theresa May’s deal - whatever it will be. She herself concludes that it is hard to see more than a trickle of Labour MPs responding to any appeals to patriotism in support of May’s deal. So this would beg the question: where should parliamentary support for the deal come from? An open-ended customs union may satisfy the Tory Remainers, who themselves plotted to convene a caucus to vote down the deal. But it will energise the European Research Group of Tory eurosceptics. Toynbee suggests, probably correctly, that the opposition from the hard Brexiteers might be smaller than initial estimates suggested. But if the Labour Party sticks with Corbyn and the DUP votes no, the game is up under any scenario.

There is one caveat. The Labour Party’s opposition to the deal is based on the illusion that there are still alternatives. The British debate has not yet entered the world of deal versus cliff-edge. A no vote would throw up a whole number of alternatives, including a second ratification vote closer to the Brexit deadline, new elections, or a second referendum though not necessarily with a Remain option. The fact that May appears to be seeking an early deal suggests that she might already be working on a plan B, in case of a failure to assemble a parliamentary majority for her deal. She seems to have decided against the other strategic option - to procrastinate and strike a deal at the last minute, so as to avoid any uncertainty about the dire consequences of a failure to ratify.
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
UndercoverElephant



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 8961
Location: south east England

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What is her "plan B" then? A no-deal, presumably.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark



Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 974
Location: NW England

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
Given the IPCC's report on 1.5 degrees and what the cuts need to be, this 'massive shrinkage' sounds about right.


Agree that we need to cut consumption of everything - chemicals included
However, as we are structured today, society still 'needs' paints, paper, adhesives, water treatment, flea killer, hair dye, etc. etc. etc.
These materials will still be manufactured - if not in the UK, then elsewhere and imported - which is actually worse for CO2.
Getting the whole world to agree to having less is the key, but also extremely difficult as it goes against most peoples' natural instincts for 'more'...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stumuz1



Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 136
Location: Anglesey

PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:


You make it all sound so easy.....


It's not that difficult!

Mark wrote:

Setting up a UK equivalent to ECHA/REACh would cost £££££££
Replicating the IT systems IUCLID5/6....£££££


This is no bigee, ECHA/REACh is just a doomsday book for chemicals. All hazardous information is publicly available. That's it raison d'etre.

So, the UK will cut and paste the hazardous info over.

Cheers EU! And no contributions to ECHA. Although i will miss the trips to Helsinki.

Mark wrote:

What about all the SIEFs and shared Data Sets submitted under EU REACh..... access to these would need to be negotiated (bought) for UK REACh which would require cooperation and cost ££££££


No. The UK firm will have the data set already. So no cost. If they are in a transnational sief, then they will have IP'd the data set or submitted only their part. Therefore the EU side of the sief will have to buy the data from UK firm or stop using it.

The only cost to the UK manufacturers is they will become a importer, so will need an only representative in any of the EU 27. I have chosen Tenerife. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 70, 71, 72 ... 104, 105, 106  Next
Page 71 of 106

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group