Rachel Reeves to seek ‘improved’ UK-EU trade terms

[pellinore]

Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves would seek to break down EU trade barriers and secure billions of pounds through an early international investment summit if Labour wins the general election.

Reeves, in an interview with the Financial Times, signalled an ambitious push to revisit parts of Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, including seeking closer alignment with EU rules in areas such as the chemicals sector and a better deal for workers in the City of London.

“We would look to improve our trading relationship with Europe, and do trade deals around the world,” she said, as she vowed that an incoming Labour government would “reset” Britain’s global image.

Her comments signal that Labour wants to go further than previously thought in seeking better trade terms with the EU, tackling head-on the “adversarial” Conservative post-Brexit relationship with Brussels and ditching a Tory fixation on regulatory divergence.

“I don’t think anyone voted Leave because they were not happy that chemicals regulations were the same across Europe,” Reeves said. “When my constituency voted leave it was purely because of immigration.” 

Rachel Reeves to seek ‘improved’ UK-EU trade terms if Labour wins election (archive.ph)

Edited June 17 by pellinore

[Destination Unknown]

2 hours ago, pellinore said:

Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves would seek to break down EU trade barriers and secure billions of pounds through an early international investment summit if Labour wins the general election.

There is nothing new here pellinore, the Conservative Government have been doing these annually - the last one was in November 2023. Sounds like Labour jumping on the "populism" bandwagon to me. 🤦

https://business.itn.co.uk/global-investment-summit-2023-showcasing-great-british-ideas/

 

Edited June 17 by Destination Unknown

[L.A.T.1961]

4 hours ago, pellinore said:

 

Reeves, in an interview with the Financial Times, signalled an ambitious push to revisit parts of Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, including seeking closer alignment with EU rules in areas such as the chemicals sector and a better deal for workers in the City of London.

 

Rachel Reeves to seek ‘improved’ UK-EU trade terms if Labour wins election (archive.ph)

And all of this ^ without paying for EU membership.

I think its what Juncker called cherry picking, or having your cake and eating it.

Still, the EU is now in such a state they may well have a different view on what is UK cherry picking and what is pragmatic politics.

If the UK was allowed to join these systems we would also have a say on the rules.

And did I say this is without membership cost to us. 😉

I am not sure how City of London workers can do much better given their pay cap was recently removed by Sunak.

[pellinore]

9 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

There is nothing new here pellinore, the Conservative Government have been doing these annually - the last one was in November 2023. Sounds like Labour jumping on the "populism" bandwagon to me. 🤦

https://business.itn.co.uk/global-investment-summit-2023-showcasing-great-british-ideas/

 

7 hours ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

And all of this ^ without paying for EU membership.

I think its what Juncker called cherry picking, or having your cake and eating it.

Still, the EU is now in such a state they may well have a different view on what is UK cherry picking and what is pragmatic politics.

If the UK was allowed to join these systems we would also have a say on the rules.

And did I say this is without membership cost to us. 😉

I am not sure how City of London workers can do much better given their pay cap was recently removed by Sunak.

Surprisingly, I think we are all agreed the Labour plans will boost the economy!

[Destination Unknown]

49 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Surprisingly, I think we are all agreed the Labour plans will boost the economy!

If the only thing you've taken away from my previous comment is that I agree that Labour will boost the economy then you are too far gone pellinore. For a start "Labour" and "boost the economy" don't even belong in the same sentence.

Apart from that, the UK's democratically mandated exit from the European Union has already been a boost to the economy, because we are now the 4th largest exporter on the entire planet, moving up 3 places from 7th since leaving your beloved EU, leapfrogging EU vassals France and the Netherlands in the process, as well as overtaking Japan, proving once again what 17.4 million Leave voters have been telling you Remoaners all along, that the EU has been holding us back, and it has been for decades.

https://www.export.org.uk/insights/trade-news/uk-becomes-world-s-fourth-largest-exporter-as-services-boom/

[pellinore]

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

Apart from that, the UK's democratically mandated exit from the European Union has already been a boost to the economy, because we are now the 4th largest exporter on the entire planet,

If only that were true! How can anyone imagine erecting trade barriers would boost trade? (We are 4th because of service exports, which are unaffected by Borders and would be slightly higher if professionals could travel freely once more).

A Labour government is only too well aware that it needs to boost economic growth if it is ever to make its shaky-looking numbers add up. The trade barrier erected along the English Channel is one of the biggest impediments to that.

How big of an impediment has been made clear by the Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR), which updated its Brexit analysis at the beginning of last month.

It expects that the TCA will result in a reduction in desperately needed long-run productivity by 4 per cent when compared to remaining in the EU, citing “the increase in non-tariff barriers on UK-EU trade”. These include multiple forms, red tape, customs checks, and lots of unproductive waiting around while the slow wheels of bureaucracy turn. It thinks that both exports and imports will be around 15 per cent lower in the long run, and that new deals with non EU countries “will not have a material impact” on this.

Labour wants a new Brexit deal – here’s why business shouldn’t get its hopes up | The Independent (archive.ph)

But it is good that you are considering that the economic impact of Brexit is important now, and don't feel satisfied with your "sovereignty whatever the cost"!

Things will get better once we start rebuilding the bridges Johnson burnt.

Edited June 18 by pellinore

[Destination Unknown]

58 minutes ago, pellinore said:

If only that were true! How can anyone imagine erecting trade barriers would boost trade? (We are 4th because of service exports, which are unaffected by Borders and would be slightly higher if professionals could travel freely once more).

A Labour government is only too well aware that it needs to boost economic growth if it is ever to make its shaky-looking numbers add up. The trade barrier erected along the English Channel is one of the biggest impediments to that.

How big of an impediment has been made clear by the Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR), which updated its Brexit analysis at the beginning of last month.

It expects that the TCA will result in a reduction in desperately needed long-run productivity by 4 per cent when compared to remaining in the EU, citing “the increase in non-tariff barriers on UK-EU trade”. These include multiple forms, red tape, customs checks, and lots of unproductive waiting around while the slow wheels of bureaucracy turn. It thinks that both exports and imports will be around 15 per cent lower in the long run, and that new deals with non EU countries “will not have a material impact” on this.

Labour wants a new Brexit deal – here’s why business shouldn’t get its hopes up | The Independent (archive.ph)

But it is good that you are considering that the economic impact of Brexit is important now, and don't feel satisfied with your "sovereignty whatever the cost"!

Things will get better once we start rebuilding the bridges Johnson burnt.

You don't half talk some nonsense pellinore.

If, as you claim, "erecting trade barriers with the EU" has diminished our trade, how come trade between EU vassals within your beloved EU has diminished then?

From your beloved EU's own website, quote: "Intra-EU trade decreased by 2.4% in 2023", so explain that one then pellinore?

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240604-2

 

That 4% GDP nonsense by the OBR is a "prediction" on "future" GDP growth up until 2035, all things remaining equal, which they will not, and they have already been completely obliterated by the ONS's uprating of UK GDP in September 2023 anyway. They were only ever forecasts, not reality - and the ONS uprating proves that they were a fantasy, but as usual you Remoaners will latch onto anything negative, no matter what it is, and immediately blame it on Brexit.

A bit more on the destruction of the OBR "4% narrative", which follows the ONS revision of the UK's GDP figures from September 2023.

In their March 2019 'Economic and Fiscal Outlook' (EFO) the OBR stated that the UK's GDP growth would be 4% lower over 15 years (the "long term") than if it had stayed in the EU.

In their March 2023 EFO, they stated that their "assumption" about the impact of Brexit on the UK's trade intensity is "broadly on track", and that as a result they would not adjust their view that productivity would be 4% lower by 2035.

However, the September 2023 revision of the UK's GDP figures by the ONS, which put the UK's GDP 1.8% higher than they had thought it to be when the OBR had made their statement, means that the trade intensity is significantly higher than being "broadly on track" with the OBR forecasts, and so these OBR forecasts need to go directly into the bin.

In summary: The previous statements by the OBR have been completely obliterated by the ONS uprating of the UK's GDP of 1.8% higher than previously thought, making these OBR "assumptions" complete garbage. They were only ever forecasts, not reality - and the ONS uprating of the UK's GDP in September 2023 just proves that the OBR's "predictions" were nothing more than sheer fantasy, but seeing as you are obviously into hypotheticals that cannot possibly be answered one way or another with any degree of certainty, how much better would a post-Brexit UK's economy have been had Covid/Ukraine/energy crisis/global events etc. never happened? 🤔

Edited June 18 by Destination Unknown

[pellinore]

18 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

You don't half talk some nonsense pellinore.

If, as you claim, "erecting trade barriers with the EU" has diminished our trade, how come trade between EU vassals within your beloved EU has diminished then?

From your beloved EU's own website, quote: "Intra-EU trade decreased by 2.4% in 2023", so explain that one then pellinore?

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240604-2

 

That 4% GDP nonsense by the OBR is a "prediction" on "future" GDP growth up until 2035, all things remaining equal, which they will not, and they have already been completely obliterated by the ONS's uprating of UK GDP in September 2023 anyway. They were only ever forecasts, not reality - and the ONS uprating proves that they were a fantasy, but as usual you Remoaners will latch onto anything negative, no matter what it is, and immediately blame it on Brexit.

A bit more on the destruction of the OBR "4% narrative", which follows the ONS revision of the UK's GDP figures from September 2023.

In their March 2019 'Economic and Fiscal Outlook' (EFO) the OBR stated that the UK's GDP growth would be 4% lower over 15 years (the "long term") than if it had stayed in the EU.

In their March 2023 EFO, they stated that their "assumption" about the impact of Brexit on the UK's trade intensity is "broadly on track", and that as a result they would not adjust their view that productivity would be 4% lower by 2035.

However, the September 2023 revision of the UK's GDP figures by the ONS, which put the UK's GDP 1.8% higher than they had thought it to be when the OBR had made their statement, means that the trade intensity is significantly higher than being "broadly on track" with the OBR forecasts, and so these OBR forecasts need to go directly into the bin.

In summary: The previous statements by the OBR have been completely obliterated by the ONS uprating of the UK's GDP of 1.8% higher than previously thought, making these OBR "assumptions" complete garbage. They were only ever forecasts, not reality - and the ONS uprating of the UK's GDP in September 2023 just proves that the OBR's "predictions" were nothing more than sheer fantasy, but seeing as you are obviously into hypotheticals that cannot possibly be answered one way or another with any degree of certainty, how much better would a post-Brexit UK's economy have been had Covid/Ukraine/energy crisis/global events etc. never happened? 🤔

Don't be silly. Even you don't really believe Brexit hasn't damaged the UK's economy. Even Sunak and Hunt know that it has (Sunak once told the NI assembly that they had the best of both worlds, free access to the EU and the UK single markets; and Hunt would be banging on about Brexit benefits every day if there were any). Who cares how the separate sovereign countries in the EU are doing? They each have their unique problems, we have our, which are exacerbated by our pointless self-harm.

It's pointless discussing this, because you just regurgitate nonsense that no one believes, not even you.

[Destination Unknown]

2 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Who cares how the separate sovereign countries in the EU are doing? They each have their unique problems.

For a start they're not sovereign, and even your beloved EU is blaming outside factors for diminished trade, but as we all know, when it comes to double standards, it's obviously Remoaner law that the EU gets a free pass.

Again, from your beloved EU's own website, quote: "When looking at the long-term evolution by month, exports of goods within the EU showed significant fluctuations during the financial and COVID-19 crises."

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240604-2