{"id":5280,"date":"2019-03-18T08:18:37","date_gmt":"2019-03-18T08:18:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/chief-exec.com\/?p=5280"},"modified":"2019-12-30T12:38:43","modified_gmt":"2019-12-30T12:38:43","slug":"complex-language-of-trade-falls-on-deaf-ears","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/?p=5280","title":{"rendered":"Complex language of trade falls on deaf ears"},"content":{"rendered":"<h4><span style=\"color: #333399;\">The empty space that sits where detailed, comprehensive and forward-looking planning for British post-Brexit trade should be set out is arguably the most perplexing example of why the Brexit debate has been so scandalously shallow throughout, writes <em>Geoff Kitney<\/em>.<\/span><\/h4>\n<p>I was once offered the chance to be trade policy roundsman for a newspaper on which I worked. I thought there was a message in this \u2013 that maybe it was time to think about a career outside journalism.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTrade policy\u201d are two words which are bound to have the immediate effect on a listener of wanting to change the subject. Trade \u2013 especially trade negotiations and diplomacy \u2013 is a specialty area of international relations which compels anyone interested in trying to understand it to learn a new language.<strong><br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>As such, it is an issue on which it is very easy to pull the wool over the eyes of anyone who cannot understand that language.<\/p>\n<p>And it is an issue on which anyone with evil intent can pretend to understand and easily fool those who do not. This is exactly what has happened with Brexit.<\/p>\n<p>A recent poll found that 44 per cent of British voters questioned by the pollster said they were OK with the UK crashing out of the European Union without a deal. Without a deal means without any arrangement for what happens to Britain\u2019s trading relationship with the EU \u2013 or with any other country in place of the European Union.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #333399;\">From the outset, Brexit has been an historic gamble by Britain with its future.<\/span><\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Either those voters understand the issues but consider regaining the UK\u2019s \u201cfreedom\u201d as so fundamentally important they are prepared to pay the cost of \u201cfreedom\u201d in economic damage caused by long-term disruption to British trade.<\/p>\n<p>Or those voters clearly feel reassured by Brexit leaders that they have no need to worry about what happens if there is a no deal Brexit.<\/p>\n<p>As far back as before David Cameron succumbed to internal pressure in the Conservative Party to conduct a referendum on Britain\u2019s future relationship with the EU, Brexiters were arguing that trade policy would be a breeze for post no deal Britain.<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"twitter-tweet\" data-lang=\"en\">\n<p dir=\"ltr\" lang=\"en\">(3\/4) Within minutes of a vote for <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/hashtag\/Brexit?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\">#Brexit<\/a> CEO\u2019s would be knocking down Chancellor Merkel\u2019s door. Demanding access to the British market<\/p>\n<p>\u2014 David Davis (@DavidDavisMP) <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/DavidDavisMP\/status\/695208361625796608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw\">February 4, 2016<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><\/p>\n<p>Britain was a great trading nation, they argued. Non-EU trade was growing faster than trade with the EU. Members of the Commonwealth \u2013 particularly Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India \u2013 would be willing to agree to trade deals on favourable terms with Britain and, of course, there was President Trump\u2019s USA ready to do its bit to give the terrible European Union a good kick in the guts to help Britain.<\/p>\n<p>At no point were these assertions properly tested.<\/p>\n<p>Some trade policy specialists did analyse them closely and concluded that, in fact, post-Brexit free trade agreements would be very difficult to negotiate and could not possibly, in the foreseeable future, replace the favourable trade arrangements that Britain already had with the EU.<\/p>\n<p>But trade specialists talked in incomprehensible jargon which was so full of \u201cifs\u201d and \u201cbuts\u201d and \u201cmaybes\u201d that no-one could be bothered taking any notice of them.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, non-trade specialist Brexiters cast the European Union as a protectionist, closed trading bloc which strangled Britain\u2019s ability to be the great trading nation of past and its potential future.<\/p>\n<p>It suited the narrative which was that Britain\u2019s membership of the EU \u201csuper-state\u201d had stunted its greatness and straight-jacketed its great industries to such an extent that only quitting the EU, the single market and the customs union made sense.<\/p>\n<p>But, if this was such a clear cut and obvious choice for Britain to make, why was so little evidence produced by the May Government to persuade its recalcitrant \u2018Remoaners\u2019 to abandon their cause and vote in favour of Britain\u2019s future out of the clutches of the EU?<\/p>\n<p>At no point in the two years of struggle by the government to build a clear majority for its strategy for leaving the EU has a clear, post-Brexit trade policy, with a clear, credible strategy for securing post-EU global trading relationships which would replace Britain\u2019s existing trade relationship within the EU been set out.<\/p>\n<p>The only detail that has been forthcoming was the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/politics\/2019\/mar\/13\/brexit-tariffs-on-87-of-uk-imports-cut-to-zero-in-temporary-no-deal-plan\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">announcement<\/a> that, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK government would apply zero tariffs for one year on imports into the UK with exceptions for some products such as beef and ceramics, which would still get some protection.<\/p>\n<p>To avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, those remaining special tariffs would not apply across the Northern Ireland border \u2013 a move which trade experts say would almost certainly be in breach of World Trade Organization rules.<\/p>\n<p>This announcement had nothing to do with trade policy per se.<\/p>\n<p>It was simply an emergency response to the threat that, if it fell out of the EU, Britain would have to adopt WTO default tariff rates which would cost UK consumers billions of pounds in higher prices for imported goods<\/p>\n<p>This was a policy announced in a panic as the risk of no deal increased. Beyond that the May government has provided zero guidance for UK business about what its tariff policies will be in the future.<\/p>\n<p>Brexiters have talked airily of how it will simply be a matter of cutting tariffs below existing tariff rates applied by the EU and trade flows will gush Britain\u2019s way.<\/p>\n<p>They have not addressed or acknowledged the fact that anything that results in the UK having its own trade deals outside the EU would require the UK to renegotiate every trade agreement to which it is currently a partner as a result of its EU membership, a nightmare prospect for a country with virtually zero expertise in trade negotiations.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #333399;\"> Trade \u2013 especially trade negotiations and diplomacy \u2013 is a specialty area of international relations which compels anyone interested in trying to understand it to learn a new language.<\/span><\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Liam Fox, Trade Secretary, has hinted that immediately it leaves the EU, Britain could reduce tariffs across the board to zero, an idea which trade specialists argue would be massively disruptive and destructive to vast swathes of British industry and especially to farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Fox himself appears to have been happy to coast along towards Brexit with little concern for what happens in its aftermath. His passivity appears to be irresponsible in the face of the warnings from trade experts who, by the way, believe that Liam Fox simply doesn\u2019t understand trade policy and therefore what the consequences of Brexit could be for British trade.<\/p>\n<p>Fox\u2019s ennui was the target of a strong attack by former Australian Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in a recent article in which he described the idea that a Commonwealth trading block could in any sense be a better option for the UK than membership of the Single Market.<\/p>\n<p>Rudd, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2019\/mar\/11\/commonwealth-save-brexit-britain-utter-delusion-kevin-rudd\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">writing in The Guardian<\/a>, described it as \u201cutter bollocks\u201d and said of the idea that India would be ready to do a deal on favourable terms with the UK was fanciful.<\/p>\n<p>He pointed out that Australia had failed to secure a free trade agreement (FTA) with India after 10 years of negotiations. \u201cSo, good luck with that,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>Rudd was responding to calls from another former Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott \u2013 a conservative \u2013 for the UK to \u201cbe bold\u201d and go for a \u201cno deal\u201d Brexit.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/Chief_Exec_com\/status\/1107337940722692096\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignright wp-image-5283\" src=\"http:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/Davis-Brexit-Tweet2.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"400\" height=\"427\" srcset=\"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/Davis-Brexit-Tweet2.jpg 850w, https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/Davis-Brexit-Tweet2-281x300.jpg 281w, https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/Davis-Brexit-Tweet2-768x820.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 400px) 100vw, 400px\" \/><\/a>The empty space that sits where detailed, comprehensive and forward-looking planning for British post-Brexit trade should be set out is arguably the most perplexing example of why the Brexit debate has been so scandalously shallow throughout.<\/p>\n<p>From the outset, Brexit has been an historic gamble by Britain with its future.<\/p>\n<p>Yet much of the argument in favour of taking that step has been put in the most generalised terms and most Pollyannaish language. Those who have warned about the complexities of trade policy have been brushed aside, either as making much out of things that there was no need to worry about or, more sinisterly, as being guilty of exaggeration and lies intended to thwart the will of the British people.<\/p>\n<p>But the will of the British people could only be honestly and properly understood when it is informed by facts and sober analysis. No such thing has come from the Brexit side.<\/p>\n<p>Because trade is the issue which will most determine Britain\u2019s fate outside the EU \u2013 and because voters have been kept so ignorant of the post-Brexit risks a bungled trade strategy would pose \u2013 on this issue alone Article 50 should be delayed to allow time for a properly informed debate to take place.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-275 size-medium alignright\" src=\"http:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Kitney-VB1-300x133.jpg\" alt=\"kitney-vb1\" width=\"300\" height=\"133\" srcset=\"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Kitney-VB1-300x133.jpg 300w, https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Kitney-VB1-768x340.jpg 768w, https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Kitney-VB1.jpg 803w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<h6>Headline image credit: Ralf Gosch\/Shutterstock.com<\/h6>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The empty space that sits where detailed, comprehensive and forward-looking planning for British post-Brexit trade should be set out is arguably the most perplexing example of why the Brexit debate has been&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":5284,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,117],"tags":[17,50,54,56,37],"class_list":["post-5280","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-beyond-brexit","category-trade-europe-and-global-economy","tag-australia","tag-european-union","tag-fta","tag-kitney","tag-trade"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5280","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5280"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5280\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5293,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5280\/revisions\/5293"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/5284"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5280"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5280"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chief-exec.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5280"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}