The US will impose higher tariffs on the rest of the world as the President seeks to onshore more investment, The EU is a protective Customs Union imposing high tariffs to keep out foreign food and other items, imposing large non tariff barriers on overseas goods and services. China makes it difficult for foreigners to invest and sell into their market. These large players will end up with more barriers as they act out their trade war.

In these conditions it is unlikely the UK  can grow faster by promoting more goods exports. It is made impossible if the government perseveres with dear energy and bans on oil, gas, petrol and diesel cars which have been important exports for us.

So what we should do as part of  a Growth  strategy is concentrate on import substitution. There some very easy big wins:

1 Lift the ban on discovering and producing more North Sea oil. Cut our oil imports.

2. Lift the ban on new gas production. Slash LNG imports.

3.Require all new military vehicles and ships to be made in the UK.

4.Rescue oil refining by cutting taxes on oil and home production.

5Reclaim our fish and offer support to expand our fishing fleet

6. End  the progressive ban and high taxes on making and selling petrol and diesel cars

7. Require anyone putting in solar and wind farms with subsidies to meet a minimum  UK  content for buying the equipment

8. Exempt new homes built  with 90% UK materials and components from Stamp duty on sale

9. Require all public bodies and the Motability  charity to only buy UK made vehicles

10. Require the electricity industry to cover an average 100% of UK demand over a year . This is vital to national security as well as lowering the import bill.

 

 

Our membership of the ICJ   is a model of how to belong to an international body if you want to. We joined by unilateral declaration. It made clear the ICJ has no power over us in disputes between the UK and the Commonwealth. At any time we can amend our Declaration unilaterally . In 2017 we strengthened the omission of certain nuclear matters. We could cancel our membership any time.

The government’s idea that we were about to lose a case in this court was odd, as for years there has been no such move. Not only does the ICJ not apply here but how could Mauritius or the Court enforce any such ruling as the Diego Garcia base is a key US military asset?

This deal is another example of the government giving in needlessly in international negotiations and sending a big bill to the taxpayer. Every time the PM negotiates the UK loses.

I did point out well in advance of the surrender the legal position and showed the relevant document on GB News.

In the government battle between Angela and Rachel I am with Rachel in saying No to more damaging tax rises and Yes to the need to curb public spending. I am against both of them for signing up to some very bad ideas for increased spending. It seems as if you need to be a foreign government or an illegal migrant to qualify for increased state spending.

Why are we paying large sums to Mauritius to give away islands we legally own?

Why are we allowing a big increase in the numbers of illegal migrants coming by small boat?

Why will we pay money to the EU to impose regulations on us?

Why are we considering joining the expensive Erasmus scheme so UK taxpayers can pay for foreign students to come here?

Why are we signing  up to a more powerful and expensive World Health Organisation?

Why might we give money to the EU for their defence?

Why are the government still recruiting civil servants when productivity is so weak?

Why is paying avoidable Bank of England losses such a spending priority?

 

 

 

 

Even the Bank of England and Treasury saw this latest inflation surge coming. They should have as government caused most of it. They put up regulated prices of energy and water. They put up business costs with the tax on jobs. They allowed a large rise in Council tax.

Worse is to come for energy users. The EU is about to expand its emissions trading scheme to cover homes and personal transport as well as power generation and big energy using businesses currently covered. That means UK consumers of gas for central heating and of petrol for their cars will face higher bills when the carbon tax is added. Now the UK wants to merge our scheme with the EU it could well mean extra taxes for UK homeowners and drivers.

On top of this comes the tariff or carbon border tax. This is a levy on imports. The government’s twin passions of stopping us using fossil fuels and putting us under EU control are reinforcing each other.They will  make us poorer, with higher inflation and less growth.

Reform  and the Conservatives oppose these carbon taxes and the high  energy price strategy. It will be damaging for UK business and consumers.

 

The UK is seeking to join the EU emissions trading scheme. The UK set up a similar one on its own when we left the EU. Our scheme was less penal on power generation and industry than the EU one, giving us a lower carbon price. Our carbon price is now going up to get closer to the EU’s, meaning more costs for the industrial and energy businesses that have  to pay  it.

The UK also wishes to impose a carbon based tariff or border tax on imports just like the EU. That is a tax on UK consumers and businesses. Often we have to import  as so much industry has been closed by high energy prices and taxes. The UK and EU may agree not to levy the new tariff on each other. The UK should make clear to the  EU any attempt by them to levy it would be taken by the UK as a violation of our UK/EU tariff free trade Agreement. There is no need to submit to their carbon schemes to see off the threat of a new charge. The carbon border tax or tariff may well be challenged by other countries through the WTO and may be seen as a provocation by the US.

The UK’s insistence on high energy costs and prices is a main cause of the collapse of petrochemicals, steel, ceramics and other energy intensive industry. Far from boosting growth joining the EU  carbon schemes would hit our industry further.

 

There were precious few wins in the hype. None of them are yet delivered.

Use of egates to speed Uk travellers. Nothing changes before EU technology changes, which will not happen this summer. UK would then have to negotiate egate use with every member state individually!

More exports of UK food products. The UK  has conceded taking EU laws but there is no text saying what will be cut out or when. The UK exports so little meat  and dairy potential wins would be small even if they do make genuine reductions in requirements. Meanwhile  farmers would lose other freedoms to innovate and trade elsewhere.

Youth Experience Scheme. No agreement on limit on numbers or duration of visas. No clear statement on how to prevent it  becoming another entry route for migrants.

Access to bid for defence contracts. Nothing agreed about how many or about a possible charge for allowing this.

Common emissions trading and new carbon tax regime. No text. Just a threat of higher energy taxes and more imports, with EU calling the shots.

Freedom of movement

How many people under  30 will come? Is there any limit?

Where will they all find homes? What increases will there be in public service provision for them?

How will the government make sure they return home at the end of their permitted stay?

What if they become unemployed? Will the UK state assist them? Will they be sent home if they commit a crime?

Erasmus and Turing

How much would  rejoining  Erasmus cost per year? How much of the  money and uni places goes to EU students coming to UK?

Will Turing be scrapped to pay for Erasmus? Will that mean no more help for UK students to go to good US or Commonwealth unis?

Fish

Why does the government give any fish away?

Shouldn’t the  UK with rich fishing waters run its own marine and fish conservation policy, cancelling big quotas to EU boats and banning their environment damaging supertrawlers?

Why not help rebuild a bigger UK fleet, encouraging onshore  food processing.

Food rules

The UK and other advanced countries we trade with has high safety and quality standards  for food. The Uk has been lifting standards of animal welfare since Brexit. Why make us follow EU standards which might impede  innovation and better trade with non EU countries?

The EU sells us more than 3 times as much food and drink as we sell them. Extra sales of meat and dairy to the  EU would be small, and might be more than offset by bigger imports from the EU

The UK voted to be an independent country.EU dictating laws  to us takes away our independence.

UK contributing to EU defence

Isnt this best done through NATO which has command structures and procedures to construct coalitions of the willing and capable?

Surely UK companies that are part of multinational consortia as with the Typhoon programme are free to bid to see to EU governments when they buy weapons?

Why wouldn’t  the EU buy from the UK if we have the best product at the best price. It would self harm not to.

Energy and carbon taxes

How much extra will we have to pay in emissions and carbon costs on our energy?

Why out a big extra  carbon border  tax on to make consumers poorer and companies less competitive?

Why make us more rely  on importing energy with more sub sea pipes and wires? Why not go for greater energy security?

Economic impact

How much do the total give aways cost UK taxpayers? How much will this boost imports?

How can this silly surrender boost UK growth given the costs and risks involved?

 

Years of being in the Common Fishery Policy saw the UK move from being self sufficient and a net exporter of fish to being an importer. Our fushing fleet was greatly reduced and a majority of the quotas to catch the main controlled species were given to continental boats.

There was no agreement over fishing post Brexit so the two lartiesagreed to a so called Transition guaranteeing continental boats the rights to fish they enjoyed in the EU. The idea was transition to the UK taking control in 2026, presumably to restore a good sized Uk fishing industry. Coastal states who are no members of EU have yearly discussion when awarding quota and rights to fish to foreign fleets.

The UK should now take back control of our waters. The government should back a big expansion of our fleet with grants and loans for people to buy boats. It should  promote industrial use in coastal town to process fish and add value to food.

The pro EU lobby say the fish in our waters are nit our fish as they can swim to EU waters. In that case why doesn’t the EU catch them closer to home instead of wanting to come into our fishing grounds?

The UK has a large coastline , generous fishing grounds and a long tradition of seafaring.It us crazy to give away our fish on such a huge scale and end up importing.

Our food trade with the EU is tariff free. This helps EU exporters compete in our market. They sell us 3.4 times as much as we sell them in the wider food and drink category. Whisky is our biggest export. Our sales of meat, dairy, fruit, vegetables and cereals are low. Years in the CAP with small milk quotas, beef bans and grants to remove orchards led to substantial reductions in UK farms home market share. We cannot now produce nearly enough temperate food to meet our own needs.

Some now argue we need to adopt again all the rules and controls the EU places on farms and food producers so we could export more to the EU without some of the border frictions the EU imposes . So what could we produce more and what would they buy?  Our sales did not fall post Brexit.

The main reason the EU wants more controls over UK farming is  their wish to keep out cheaper non EU food from competing with their exports to the UK.They also want to block innovation in the UK that could lead the UK to cheaper and better food at home. They veto genetic modification.

The EU has been pressing the UK to accept a Youth Mobility Scheme. They want anyone under the age of 30 in any  of the 27 member states to have a right to come to the UK for up to four years  to work, study or travel. The UK would automatically grant them a visa for entry.

The UK so far has turned this down, pointing out that is effectively freedom of movement for a large number of people. It is not clear how the UK could force people to leave at the end of the four years. It is suggested they would not be entitled to benefits but they would presumably receive  NHS treatment when needed and might need other types of state assistance.

Where the last government said No, the current government is exploring options. They are looking at a lesser  time period and at some limitations on what kind of work they could take. It is difficult to see how even a lesser scheme is compatible with the government’s  aim of a major reduction in legal migration.

The EU also wants the UK to subsidise the fees charged continental students in UK universities. It would like to revive UK membership of Erasmus. That would mean we had pay for the  full fees for continental students to attend UK universities as well as pay for some UK students to study in the EU. When we were in Erasmus there were many more continental students coming to the UK than UK students going to Europe.

The post Brexit UK Turing scheme spends the money all on UK students going abroad. It gives UK students the choice from many Universities all round the world. It would be wrong to cut our support to UK students and to prevent  them studying in places. like the US and Australia.