Zitat von Maga-neu im Beitrag #4550

---

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #4548

---

The starting gun has fired on Brexit trade talks – and we’re already running out of time
For all the tough rhetoric of Johnson’s henchmen, the timeline and the EU’s busy inbox could be bad news for Britain

... The problem is that they will be aggravated by two related factors: the limited time available to do the deal, as well as the EU’s lack of focus and its competing priorities. Both increase the risk of a bad deal, or of no deal whatsoever.

The time constraint primarily flows from Johnson’s unwillingness to extend the transition period beyond this year. The most important reason for this is the government’s desire to loudly signal it has “taken back control”. Another reason is money. Any extension to the transition period would mean continued UK contributions to the EU budget, as the £39bn payment negotiated as part of the UK’s exit package only covers the government until the end of this year. The optics of negotiating how many more billions to send to Brussels wouldn’t be easy for Johnson, regardless of the 80-seat majority he now commands.

The UK’s unwillingness to extend the transition suggests that the government has 10 months – from March to December – to strike a deal. In fact, the window will be much tighter: probably four months, from July to October. This is because whatever deal is negotiated will require ratification at the end of the year. Even if member states’ national parliaments don’t have to sign off on the initial deal, there will still be an approval process that involves EU leaders, the European parliament and the House of Commons which will eat up quite some time.

Then there is the problem of focus – or lack thereof. The EU is currently in the process of finalising the negotiating mandate that will inform its position in the upcoming talks. But EU capitals haven’t been able to agree among themselves what their negotiating priorities should be. Some member states want to focus on goods and fish; others on social security, aviation, data, security and foreign policy as well. That means there will be a substantial number of parallel tracks at the outset – some well-placed officials suggest 10-15 being negotiated at the same time. With little focus, senior EU officials worry that only limited progress will be made.

This diluted negotiating process will only be rectified on 18-19 June, when EU leaders meet in Brussels to take stock of negotiations. It’s at this point that they will have a reckoning with reality, and probably agree to focus their discussions on a few key areas – trade in goods and the governance framework for UK-EU relations being the most likely candidates. But four important months will have been lost.

The final problem, which is outside the government’s control but should have been factored into its thinking, concerns EU politics. Senior EU officials are currently trying to agree the union’s budget blueprint and spending priorities through to 2028. EU leaders will meet in Brussels tomorrow to try and thrash out a deal. But they remain far apart, so agreement is only likely closer to summer or in the second half of the year. This is where leaders’ time, energy and political capital will be spent. The EU will also be attempting to negotiate more stringent 2030 climate targets, a mini-trade deal with the US, host a summit with China, and advance its plans for “digital sovereignty”. Trade talks with the UK, while important, are a distraction – “a pain in the neck”, in the words of one of the EU principals who will be on the frontlines in the negotiations. ...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...no-deal-britain

Das laesst eigentlich nur die nachstehenden Optionen offen:

1. BoJo sagt ja zu allem was die EU will -nur um einen Deal ueber die Runden zu bringen. Damit bliebe dann das UK ganz wie zuvor immer noch eingebunden in EU Bedingungen - jedoch nun ohne Mitglied zu sein. Das wuerde die Brexiteers nicht freuen.

2. BoJo knickt ein und verlaengert die Verhandlungsphase -was automatisch auch bedeutet mehr Milliarden in Richtung EU zu schicken. In der man aber de facto kein Mitglied mehr ist und keinerlei Repraesentanz vor Ort und Mitbestimmung mehr hat. Und es bleibt trotzdem alles beim alten -politisch und wirtschaftlich, so als ob man noch Mitglied waere, solange man noch verhandelt und es noch keinen neuen Deal gibt. Das wuerde sicherlich innenpolitisch auch nicht gerade zu grosser Freude fuehren.

3. BoJo bleibt hart und das UK crashes out am Ende des Jahres mit einem 'No Deal' Brexit. Was wiederum wirtschaftspolitisch katastrophal waere.
Und was man ja auch schon vor 4 Jahren haette haben koennen -was aber, wie wir wissen, das Parlament partout nicht wollte. Da hat man ja sogar noch May's Deal abgelehnt.
Auch das birgt also jede Menge Potential fuer schwere Verwerfungen. Noch mehr wenn zu wirtschaftlichen Problemen kommt.

Das wird also noch hochinteressant.
Meine Erwartung ist dass Captain BoJo in vorhersehbar kommendes schweres Wetter segelt. So, oder so, oder so.
Mit wenigen guten Aussichten, da auch wieder unbeschadet wieder herauszukommen. Und das gilt nicht nur fuer den "Lord Nelson" auf der Bruecke, sondern auch fuer das kleine Schifflein UK.

---

I do hope that "Nelson" Johnson with his battleship UK will inflict a new Trafalgar on "Villeneuve" Barnier.

---

Zitat von Leto_II. im Beitrag #4551

---

Zitat von Maga-neu im Beitrag #4550

---

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #4548

---

The starting gun has fired on Brexit trade talks – and we’re already running out of time
For all the tough rhetoric of Johnson’s henchmen, the timeline and the EU’s busy inbox could be bad news for Britain

... The problem is that they will be aggravated by two related factors: the limited time available to do the deal, as well as the EU’s lack of focus and its competing priorities. Both increase the risk of a bad deal, or of no deal whatsoever.

The time constraint primarily flows from Johnson’s unwillingness to extend the transition period beyond this year. The most important reason for this is the government’s desire to loudly signal it has “taken back control”. Another reason is money. Any extension to the transition period would mean continued UK contributions to the EU budget, as the £39bn payment negotiated as part of the UK’s exit package only covers the government until the end of this year. The optics of negotiating how many more billions to send to Brussels wouldn’t be easy for Johnson, regardless of the 80-seat majority he now commands.

The UK’s unwillingness to extend the transition suggests that the government has 10 months – from March to December – to strike a deal. In fact, the window will be much tighter: probably four months, from July to October. This is because whatever deal is negotiated will require ratification at the end of the year. Even if member states’ national parliaments don’t have to sign off on the initial deal, there will still be an approval process that involves EU leaders, the European parliament and the House of Commons which will eat up quite some time.

Then there is the problem of focus – or lack thereof. The EU is currently in the process of finalising the negotiating mandate that will inform its position in the upcoming talks. But EU capitals haven’t been able to agree among themselves what their negotiating priorities should be. Some member states want to focus on goods and fish; others on social security, aviation, data, security and foreign policy as well. That means there will be a substantial number of parallel tracks at the outset – some well-placed officials suggest 10-15 being negotiated at the same time. With little focus, senior EU officials worry that only limited progress will be made.

This diluted negotiating process will only be rectified on 18-19 June, when EU leaders meet in Brussels to take stock of negotiations. It’s at this point that they will have a reckoning with reality, and probably agree to focus their discussions on a few key areas – trade in goods and the governance framework for UK-EU relations being the most likely candidates. But four important months will have been lost.

The final problem, which is outside the government’s control but should have been factored into its thinking, concerns EU politics. Senior EU officials are currently trying to agree the union’s budget blueprint and spending priorities through to 2028. EU leaders will meet in Brussels tomorrow to try and thrash out a deal. But they remain far apart, so agreement is only likely closer to summer or in the second half of the year. This is where leaders’ time, energy and political capital will be spent. The EU will also be attempting to negotiate more stringent 2030 climate targets, a mini-trade deal with the US, host a summit with China, and advance its plans for “digital sovereignty”. Trade talks with the UK, while important, are a distraction – “a pain in the neck”, in the words of one of the EU principals who will be on the frontlines in the negotiations. ...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...no-deal-britain

Das laesst eigentlich nur die nachstehenden Optionen offen:

1. BoJo sagt ja zu allem was die EU will -nur um einen Deal ueber die Runden zu bringen. Damit bliebe dann das UK ganz wie zuvor immer noch eingebunden in EU Bedingungen - jedoch nun ohne Mitglied zu sein. Das wuerde die Brexiteers nicht freuen.

2. BoJo knickt ein und verlaengert die Verhandlungsphase -was automatisch auch bedeutet mehr Milliarden in Richtung EU zu schicken. In der man aber de facto kein Mitglied mehr ist und keinerlei Repraesentanz vor Ort und Mitbestimmung mehr hat. Und es bleibt trotzdem alles beim alten -politisch und wirtschaftlich, so als ob man noch Mitglied waere, solange man noch verhandelt und es noch keinen neuen Deal gibt. Das wuerde sicherlich innenpolitisch auch nicht gerade zu grosser Freude fuehren.

3. BoJo bleibt hart und das UK crashes out am Ende des Jahres mit einem 'No Deal' Brexit. Was wiederum wirtschaftspolitisch katastrophal waere.
Und was man ja auch schon vor 4 Jahren haette haben koennen -was aber, wie wir wissen, das Parlament partout nicht wollte. Da hat man ja sogar noch May's Deal abgelehnt.
Auch das birgt also jede Menge Potential fuer schwere Verwerfungen. Noch mehr wenn zu wirtschaftlichen Problemen kommt.

Das wird also noch hochinteressant.
Meine Erwartung ist dass Captain BoJo in vorhersehbar kommendes schweres Wetter segelt. So, oder so, oder so.
Mit wenigen guten Aussichten, da auch wieder unbeschadet wieder herauszukommen. Und das gilt nicht nur fuer den "Lord Nelson" auf der Bruecke, sondern auch fuer das kleine Schifflein UK.

---

I do hope that "Nelson" Johnson with his battleship UK will inflict a new Trafalgar on "Villeneuve" Barnier.

---

Dann wird der ärmste ja erschossen.

---

Zitat von Leto_II. im Beitrag #4551

---

Zitat von Maga-neu im Beitrag #4550

---

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #4548

---

The starting gun has fired on Brexit trade talks – and we’re already running out of time
For all the tough rhetoric of Johnson’s henchmen, the timeline and the EU’s busy inbox could be bad news for Britain

... The problem is that they will be aggravated by two related factors: the limited time available to do the deal, as well as the EU’s lack of focus and its competing priorities. Both increase the risk of a bad deal, or of no deal whatsoever.

The time constraint primarily flows from Johnson’s unwillingness to extend the transition period beyond this year. The most important reason for this is the government’s desire to loudly signal it has “taken back control”. Another reason is money. Any extension to the transition period would mean continued UK contributions to the EU budget, as the £39bn payment negotiated as part of the UK’s exit package only covers the government until the end of this year. The optics of negotiating how many more billions to send to Brussels wouldn’t be easy for Johnson, regardless of the 80-seat majority he now commands.

The UK’s unwillingness to extend the transition suggests that the government has 10 months – from March to December – to strike a deal. In fact, the window will be much tighter: probably four months, from July to October. This is because whatever deal is negotiated will require ratification at the end of the year. Even if member states’ national parliaments don’t have to sign off on the initial deal, there will still be an approval process that involves EU leaders, the European parliament and the House of Commons which will eat up quite some time.

Then there is the problem of focus – or lack thereof. The EU is currently in the process of finalising the negotiating mandate that will inform its position in the upcoming talks. But EU capitals haven’t been able to agree among themselves what their negotiating priorities should be. Some member states want to focus on goods and fish; others on social security, aviation, data, security and foreign policy as well. That means there will be a substantial number of parallel tracks at the outset – some well-placed officials suggest 10-15 being negotiated at the same time. With little focus, senior EU officials worry that only limited progress will be made.

This diluted negotiating process will only be rectified on 18-19 June, when EU leaders meet in Brussels to take stock of negotiations. It’s at this point that they will have a reckoning with reality, and probably agree to focus their discussions on a few key areas – trade in goods and the governance framework for UK-EU relations being the most likely candidates. But four important months will have been lost.

The final problem, which is outside the government’s control but should have been factored into its thinking, concerns EU politics. Senior EU officials are currently trying to agree the union’s budget blueprint and spending priorities through to 2028. EU leaders will meet in Brussels tomorrow to try and thrash out a deal. But they remain far apart, so agreement is only likely closer to summer or in the second half of the year. This is where leaders’ time, energy and political capital will be spent. The EU will also be attempting to negotiate more stringent 2030 climate targets, a mini-trade deal with the US, host a summit with China, and advance its plans for “digital sovereignty”. Trade talks with the UK, while important, are a distraction – “a pain in the neck”, in the words of one of the EU principals who will be on the frontlines in the negotiations. ...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...no-deal-britain

Das laesst eigentlich nur die nachstehenden Optionen offen:

1. BoJo sagt ja zu allem was die EU will -nur um einen Deal ueber die Runden zu bringen. Damit bliebe dann das UK ganz wie zuvor immer noch eingebunden in EU Bedingungen - jedoch nun ohne Mitglied zu sein. Das wuerde die Brexiteers nicht freuen.

2. BoJo knickt ein und verlaengert die Verhandlungsphase -was automatisch auch bedeutet mehr Milliarden in Richtung EU zu schicken. In der man aber de facto kein Mitglied mehr ist und keinerlei Repraesentanz vor Ort und Mitbestimmung mehr hat. Und es bleibt trotzdem alles beim alten -politisch und wirtschaftlich, so als ob man noch Mitglied waere, solange man noch verhandelt und es noch keinen neuen Deal gibt. Das wuerde sicherlich innenpolitisch auch nicht gerade zu grosser Freude fuehren.

3. BoJo bleibt hart und das UK crashes out am Ende des Jahres mit einem 'No Deal' Brexit. Was wiederum wirtschaftspolitisch katastrophal waere.
Und was man ja auch schon vor 4 Jahren haette haben koennen -was aber, wie wir wissen, das Parlament partout nicht wollte. Da hat man ja sogar noch May's Deal abgelehnt.
Auch das birgt also jede Menge Potential fuer schwere Verwerfungen. Noch mehr wenn zu wirtschaftlichen Problemen kommt.

Das wird also noch hochinteressant.
Meine Erwartung ist dass Captain BoJo in vorhersehbar kommendes schweres Wetter segelt. So, oder so, oder so.
Mit wenigen guten Aussichten, da auch wieder unbeschadet wieder herauszukommen. Und das gilt nicht nur fuer den "Lord Nelson" auf der Bruecke, sondern auch fuer das kleine Schifflein UK.

---

I do hope that "Nelson" Johnson with his battleship UK will inflict a new Trafalgar on "Villeneuve" Barnier.

---

Dann wird der ärmste ja erschossen.

---

Die ersten Verhandlungen der EU Länder in Sachen Budget und Haushalt 2021-2027 wurden erfolglos abgebrochen. NL will nicht mehr Zahlmeister sein, Deutschland immer wieder gerne.

Die alte EI-Mär von "gemeinsam sind wir stärker".
Die Wahrheit ist: 27 starke Männer werden nicht stärker, wenn man sie aneinanderkettet, sie werden bewegungsunfähig.

Is Britain now on the verge of repeating a dangerous moment in its own history?
Amid the Brexit chaos of the last few years, the social division and economic uncertainty it has created, overall public faith in Britain’s political system has reached rock bottom. It doesn’t get much worse than this before something rather unpleasant happens. It might appear that things are bad right now, but we are actually on the cusp of something that may turn out worse.

It was only last April that the Hansard Society, formed in 1944 to promote parliamentary democracy published its audit of political engagement. Unbelievably, it is now lower even than at the depths of the crisis over MPs’ expenses – and that was the worst on record by some margin.
Almost three-quarters of those asked in Hansard’s audit said the system of governance needed significant improvement, and other attitudes emerged that “challenge core tenets of our democracy”, the audit’s authors stated. It predicted that Britain was on the verge of actually ’embracing authoritarianism’. And so it has come to pass – we have Boris Johnson. Since his election in December, he has promised to do what the people seemingly want, that is to tear down ‘the establishment’ and rebuild it, presumably this time, for the benefit of everyone – not just the few.
So far, we know that the four pillars that uphold the current workings of civil society are to be ‘reformed’ as they like to phrase it. This reformation of the judiciary, legislature and media are to bend to the will of the executive – and henceforth, Britain will have its autocrat (Boris Johnson) supported by a tyrannical (Dominic Cumings) and fanatical government (Gove, Patel, Raab et al). ...

... Nearly 60 per cent of people in Britain think the country is in decline. About half believe they have no influence in elections. About half believe referendums solve nothing. About half think Brexit will solve these problems, the other half thinks it will make matters worse. But no-one thinks it’ll be the same. We have left versus right, Boomers versus Millenials, black versus white, nationalists versus internationalists. Scotland wants independence, England won’t give it. There’s nothing in the middle, no compromise, no agreement.

The last time Britain was in this mood, the English Civil War broke out. That was also a battle of two ideologies and about the political governance of the country, which dominated the land for over a decade. It was also about England, Scotland and Ireland. And when it was over – a military dictator emerged. The country was soon facing complete anarchy and in the end, after a considerable amount of social and economic upheaval, the ‘restoration’ period came about.
https://truepublica.org.uk/united-kingdo...NJ1Er0TDbqshBIE

Zitat von Corto im Beitrag #4555

---

Die alte EI-Mär von "gemeinsam sind wir stärker".
Die Wahrheit ist: 27 starke Männer werden nicht stärker, wenn man sie aneinanderkettet, sie werden bewegungsunfähig.

---

So the west is winning, is it? Only if you’re a delusional Trump toady, Mr Pompeo
The special relationship has ended in tears for Britain and other allies have no reason to trust America

When was the last time a British prime minister cancelled a White House summit with a US president? Possibly never. Yet that’s what Boris Johnson did after a livid, cursing Donald Trump slammed the phone down on him in a row over the Chinese firm, Huawei.

Now a planned tête-à-tête in Washington next month, already twice delayed, is off. Not postponed. Not rescheduled. Off. So much for “Britain Trump”, the servile moniker the president pinned on Johnson last year. So much for the “special relationship”. Perhaps it was always doomed to end in tears.
Imperious, bullying American behaviour, political arm-twisting and shameless economic blackmail over a post-Brexit trade deal pose big problems for Britain in a time of deep uncertainty. But other US partners are in the same boat.

If a reminder were needed, it came in the form of Mike Pompeo, US secretary of state and Trump’s most influential adviser, who pompously lectured fractious European leaders at last weekend’s Munich security conference.
Pompeo reassured mutinous allies that, despite unilateralist, isolationist appearances, America remained committed to global leadership. “The death of the transatlantic alliance is grossly over-exaggerated. The west is winning. We are collectively winning. We’re doing it together,” he declared.
This is utter hogwash. And almost everyone outside a dishonest, self-deceiving circle of Republican stooges and Trump toadies knows it. Together? In many respects, the US and Europe are further apart than at any time since 1941.

Pompeo’s speech revealed a cold war mindset that crudely divides the world into friends and foes, separated by walls, missiles, sanctions, insults, and mutually assured dysfunction. For Pompeo, who referenced his formative experience as a soldier patrolling “freedom’s frontier” in West Berlin in the 1980s, there is no middle way. It’s a black-and-white world ruled by fear and force. It’s pure regression.

Pompeo laid into China over military expansionism, debt diplomacy and cyber threats. Fair enough. But if he wants things to change, he needs to talk calmly. The coronavirus epidemic, like Huawei’s controversial G5 networks and Beijing’s HS2 bid, shows how inescapably interdependent China and western countries already are. When Jaguar Land Rover runs short of parts, Apple iPhones grow scarce and Lake District B&Bs bemoan missing tourists, all because Hubei is stricken by a virus, it’s plain the global die is cast. Whether for security, trade, political, or public health reasons, it’s too late to isolate China.

Pompeo had it in for Russia and Iran, too – another evil empire, in his telling, that wages “campaigns of terror in the Middle East and right here in Europe”. Strange, then, that Europeans mostly believe Trump’s Iran vendetta to be dangerous and foolish. Stranger still how Trump sucks up to Vladimir Putin.

Pompeo’s broader theme – that the west, representing freedom and democracy, is winning – is no less daft. Only people with their heads stuck in the self-congratulatory, delusional cloud that frequently envelops Washington could seriously make such a ridiculous claim about the world in 2020.
What kind of foggy thinking or wilful blindness allows a senior politician to indulge such complacency when, as he speaks, not so far away, hundreds of thousands of refugees are being mercilessly bombed on Idlib’s freezing hillsides?
Almost 10 years ago, Syrians rose up in search of the freedom and democracy Pompeo lauds. But they got precious little help from the west. The story of the war, in part, is the story of how the west lost Syria, lost other Arab spring countries – and lost credibility everywhere.

And away from conflict zones, new technologies, far from bolstering free societies, deliver ever more pervasive, pernicious means of monitoring, controlling and censoring citizens.

Across the globe, the battlements of open governance are under attack while its defenders are betrayed from within. Authoritarian regimes are on the up. Intolerant rightwing populists and ultra-nationalist mini-Trumps are on the march.

No, Mr Pompeo. “America First” may work for some in your country. But “the west”, meaning a multinational, democratic alliance that champions shared principles, aims and laws, is not winning. If this were a movie, it would be called How The West Was Lost – with Trump as outlaw-in-chief.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...rst-is-to-blame

The Guardian view of Boris Johnson: neglecting the nation
He ignores the floods while pursuing immigration plans and an attack on the BBC, which are destructive and divisive. The prime minister does not care
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...ting-the-nation

Social care is crumbling, and Johnson’s immigration plans will only make it worse
Without cheap labour from overseas, wages will have to steeply increase if the prime minister wants to ‘fix’ the system

Another one bites the dust. The fourth biggest provider of home care for the frail, the Mears Group, with 30 branches in the UK, is abandoning its domiciliary care services. “We’re not the first and certainly won’t be the last,” says Alan Long, the executive director. Social care is collapsing because too few people are willing to work gruelling hours in disgraceful conditions for pitiful pay.

The new points-based immigration system announced by the home secretary, Priti Patel, on Wednesday will see many more companies fleeing the sector for lack of staff. With 122,000 vacancies, this decade’s 25% increase in people over 65 means another 580,000 staff will be needed to care for them over the next 15 years. In London, 40% of care staff are from overseas. Median average pay as of last March is a meagre £8.10 an hour, with parts of their hours unpaid: a quarter of staff are on zero-hours contracts. ...

No 10 claims to be beavering away on Boris Johnson’s promise to “fix social care once and for all”. But how? ...

The budget on 11 March will reveal Johnson’s true political priorities. Where, if anywhere, does social care come in his pecking order? And which comes first – restoring the quality and quantity of care for all, or ensuring homeowners’ families keep their inheritances? The auguries are not good, because one thing we know already: he has put the politics of immigration before the urgent need to employ more care workers for millions of the frail. If there is to be no more cheap foreign labour, he will need to raise pay steeply to attract enough British staff.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...migration-plans

Zitat von Hans Bergman im Beitrag #4560

---

Zitat von Willie im Beitrag #4559

---

The Guardian view of Boris Johnson: neglecting the nation
He ignores the floods while pursuing immigration plans and an attack on the BBC, which are destructive and divisive. The prime minister does not care
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...ting-the-nation

---

Sehr kleine Leute betrachten auch ein Rinnsal schon als Flut.

---

Veteran broadcaster David Dimbleby brands Boris Johnson a 'liar' that nobody trusts
Veteran BBC broadcaster David Dimbleby has told German media that Boris Johnson is a liar that nobody trusts, who has become 'arrogant with power' following the general election result.

... Attacking the politician he claimed the politician was only interested in being prime minister and does not care what people think.
He said: "Nobody trusts Boris Johnson. Who could trust Boris Johnson? He lies everywhere to everyone. He lies to his family. He just makes it up, you know.
"Boris Johnson, above all politicians, does it his way. He doesn't take any notice of what people say. He doesn't care what people think. He just wants to be prime minister."

He continued: "Johnson is apeing some of the attitudes of Trump. He is a different kind of political animal, like Trump, very similar rulebook.
"If you are like that the one thing you don't want is people questioning what you're doing, which is why he won't let his ministers go on television or any serious programme." ...

But Dimbleby added that this could all change if Brexit starts to go wrong.
"The moment will come when they need to talk to someone. Things are not going to go easy. The decisions that are stacking up over Brexit, trade negotiations, are going to be very difficult. At some point they will need to explain why they failed to get the 100% they promised."
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-sto...xFqmnYorRPnYeLc

Das Kleine ist zuweilen noch kleiner.

The Conservatives’ immigration plan puts ideology before economics
The cause of low wages isn’t EU freedom of movement, but the erosion of employment rights and collective bargaining

The government’s new immigration plan, which aims to move away from relying on influxes of cheap labour by closing Britain’s borders to “non-skilled” workers, is based on a flawed understanding of how the economy works. It reveals the risks of privileging ideology over economics, the hallmark of Conservative governments since the 1970s. ...

... Forty years of free market orthodoxy has seen Britain deindustrialise at a faster rate and to a greater degree than any other advanced economy. Britain stands alone in the G7 group of industrialised economies as the only country where manufacturing is less than 10% of the economy. The service sector employs too little machinery or technology to achieve the levels of productivity found in modern manufacturing. Reversing this situation requires a well-financed industrial strategy to revive Britain’s manufacturing sector, not an ill-thought through, ideologically driven set of changes to Britain’s borders.

But perhaps most strange of all is the absence of any discussion about demographic change: Britain is a rapidly ageing society, with ever-increasing demands for health and social care and greater pension liabilities. The dependency ratio – the number of workers to economically inactive people, mainly the elderly and children – is deteriorating. Britain needs immigrants not only to work in vital sectors such as social care, but to make the government’s finances sustainable.

The Tories are responding to cultural anxiety about immigration with a promise of better pay for Britain’s workers. It’s a policy doomed to fail, based on ideology not insight. Britain is still suffering the consequences of the destructive economic decisions of the 1980s. How long will this mistake reverberate through the British economy? Only time will tell.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...omics-low-wages

Paul Golding: Britain First leader charged under Terrorism Act
Paul Golding describes charges as 'abuse of legislation'

The leader of far-right political group Britain First has been charged with an offence under the Terrorism Act after refusing to give police access to his phone.

Paul Golding, 38, was stopped at Heathrow Airport in October on his way back from a trip to the Russian parliament in Moscow by officers from the Met's Counter Terrorism Command.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr...w-a9348666.html

In just two months, Boris Johnson’s election campaign promises have already crumbled to pieces
Editorial: As the government is slowly learning, sound bites are easy enough to deliver but translating them into concrete strategies and plans is rather more difficult

First, we witnessed the emasculation of HM Treasury as the engine room of government, in favour of the detested, shambling, muttering dictatorship of Dominic Cummings. Then, in a tragi-comic diversion, the recruitment, and rapid resignation, of a Downing Street “weirdo” adviser, Andrew Sabisky, who had written controversially about race and intelligence.

Swiftly following the brief Sabisky affair came serious allegations of the bullying of senior officials by Priti Patel, the home secretary. Now, as The Independent reports, civil servants at the Department of Health are expressing deep scepticism about the government’s pledge to “recruit” (to use a broad term) 50,000 nurses.

Two months after they won a famous election victory, the wheels on the machinery of the Johnson administration seem to be wobbling, if not actually falling off.
https://www.independent.co.uk/independen...l-a9347336.html

White House refuses to deny Trump accused Boris Johnson of 'betrayal' in angry phone call over Huawei decision
'We have to be very careful. National security. Huawei,' US president said on Sunday

The White House is not denying Donald Trump accused UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson of "betrayal" after slamming the phone down during a confrontational call last month.

The American president used that word to describe Mr Johnson's decision to partner with Huawei, a Chinese telecommunications firm the Trump administration has accused of pushing invasive technology, to build the UK's 5G network, during a conversation with a senior White House official, according to the Daily Mail.

Citing a source, the newspaper reported Mr Trump's anger during the 24 January transatlantic call as "appopletic."
Asked if the description of the Trump-Johnson call was accurate, a White House official on Monday did not dispute that the US president grew angry on the call and slammed down the phone.
Nor did the official deny that Mr Trump later used the word "betrayal" to describe Mr Johnson's Huawei decision. ...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world...e-a9355506.html

Small towns in Midlands and North will suffer most from Boris Johnson’s Brexit trade deal, IFS says
Impact of lost trade on earnings and well-being could be long-lasting
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po...s-a9360971.html

Brexit: Michel Barnier warns Boris Johnson that Brussels will not accept trade deal ‘at any price’
EU negotiator warns London against ‘backtracking’ on commitments in withdrawal agreement

Britain and the European Union are heading for a bust-up in talks on a trade agreement beginning next week, after EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier warned Boris Johnson that Brussels will not accept a deal “at any price”.

Speaking after the remaining 27 member states agreed their negotiating position, Mr Barnier said that the UK must agree to a “level playing field” on rules and regulations and access to fishing waters “or there won’t be any agreement at all”.
His comments set the scene for a no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020, after Downing Street made clear that the prime minister’s top priority is to secure freedom to diverge from Brussels rules, even if it means leaving on World Trade Organisation terms.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po...u-a9358516.html

Regierung Johnson lehnt EU-Regeln für künftige Beziehungen ab
Das Vereinigte Königreich ist aus der EU ausgetreten. Ein neues Handelsabkommen soll bis dahin gefunden werden - doch London weist in seinem Verhandlungsmandat Forderungen der EU zurück.

Die britische Regierung hat ihren Plan vorgestellt, wie das Vereinigte Königreich bis zum Jahresende einen neuen Handels-Deal mit der Europäischen Union finden will, um nicht in einen harten Brexit ganz ohne Abkommen zu schliddern.

Dabei geht Boris Johnson aber auf Konfrontationskurs zur EU: Man werde den Europäischen Gerichtshof nicht als Schiedsinstanz anerkennen, teilte London mit. Auch sonst wollen sich die Briten nicht an die Abstimmungsmaßnahmen mit der EU halten, welche Brüssel in seinem Verhandlungsmandat festgelegt hat.
https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/b...f0-52242cdb4e44

Britische Autoindustrie verlangt Hilfe der Regierung
Der Brexit-Trubel belastet die britische Autoproduktion. Der Branchenverband drängt London deshalb zu einem Vertrag mit Brüssel. Aston Martin verkündete hundert Millionen Pfund Verlust.

Das Bild von Aston Martin ist nach außen hin stets kraftstrotzend. Doch im vergangenen Jahr hat der Hersteller der Luxussportwagen aus James-Bond-Filmen stark geschwächelt. 2019 habe das Unternehmen einen Verlust von 104,3 Millionen Pfund vor Steuern gemacht, teilte der Autohersteller mit. Finanzchef Mark Wilson werde spätestens zum 30. April von seiner Funktion zurücktreten. Im Jahr zuvor hatte der mit Ferrari und Porsche konkurrierende britische Hersteller noch einen Vorsteuerverlust von 68 Millionen Pfund ausgewiesen. Die Auslieferungen schrumpften um neun Prozent auf 5862 Fahrzeuge.

Auch insgesamt geht die britische Autoproduktion dem Branchenverband SMMT zufolge im Januar im Vergleich zum Vormonat erneut zurück. Die Inlandsnachfrage sank zweistellig um 23,9 Prozent, auch ein starker Anstieg der Exporte konnte dies nicht ausgleichen: Unterm Strich blieb ein Minus von 2,1 Prozent. Die Fabriken in dem Land produzierten insgesamt noch 118.314 Autos - im Vergleich zu 120.890 im Januar 2019. ...

"Der bevorstehende Haushalt ist eine Gelegenheit für die Regierung, unterstützende Maßnahmen zur Stimulierung des Marktes zu ergreifen, aber der größte Impuls wäre die Vereinbarung eines ehrgeizigen Freihandelsabkommens mit Europa", sagte SMMT-Geschäftsführer Mike Hawes. "Dies würde die anhaltende Unsicherheit beenden und Großbritannien helfen, seinen hart erkämpften Ruf als ein großartiger Ort für Investitionen in die Automobilindustrie zurückzugewinnen."
https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/untern...c4-750a2ebdc599

UK says it will consider walking away from Brexit talks in June
Negotiating mandate reveals Johnson seeks Canada-style deal and ‘regulatory freedom’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/202...t-talks-in-june

Johnson’s Brexit flunkey sums up all that’s wrong with his master’s trade fantasies
David Frost should drag himself out of the 18th century and address our perilous future

... The musings of one of his most obsequious courtiers last week were not comforting. Prepare for a very hard Brexit and careless insouciance from those delivering it.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...ies-david-frost

Ein exzellenter Kommentar.

Barnier pours scorn on Johnson's spokesman ahead of trade talks
EU negotiator signals future relationship negotiations are on course for acrimonious start

Barnier said he expected the talks, starting on Monday, to be “very difficult” but pronounced Brussels as “ready” following the official sign-off by EU ministers of their instructions for their chief negotiator.
In an impassioned press conference during which he repeatedly banged on his lectern for emphasis, Barnier said the UK’s implementation of the agreement for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland was a prerequisite for any trade deal.

Brandon Lewis, the Northern Ireland secretary, had claimed over the weekend there would be no border of any sort in the Irish Sea and promised “unfettered” trade after the UK leaves the single market and customs union at the end of the year.

“I think there are reasons for us to remain vigilant because the British minister in charge of Northern Ireland has come up with some very surprising statements,” Barnier said, noting the need for infrastructure to be erected for the necessary checks on goods.
“I would like him to take some time to read through the withdrawal agreement in some detail and he will see that commitments have been entered into by both parties to resolve what I call the squaring of the circle.”
The two sides had agreed in the withdrawal agreement – an international treaty – to enforce the the EU’s customs code on trade between Northern Ireland and Great Britain in order to avoid the need for a hard border with the Republic of Ireland.

Barnier also raised with reporters comments made on Tuesday by a Downing Street spokesman in which it was claimed that the goal of the UK in the negotiations was to secure British independence from the EU. Johnson’s chief negotiator, David Frost, has also in recent days spoken of the importance of the UK as a “sovereign equal” being untied from EU standards under a free trade deal.
Barnier said the EU was not seeking to retain any hold over the UK but that the prime minister had already committed to maintaining EU standards “less than six months ago”.
“Mr Johnson’s spokesman said the main objective of the UK in these negotiations is to ensure that we obtain the economic and political independence of the United Kingdom on 1 January this year, but, no, that is not true,” Barnier said. “The economic and political independence of the UK doesn’t need to be negotiated on its been done, it’s been achieved, that’s what Brexit has achieved. It was the will of the UK and they’ve left.
“Nobody’s going to discuss the sovereignty, the independence or the autonomy of the UK that’s not the purpose of these negotiations. I was very surprised to read this, supposedly something that was said by a spokesman from Downing Street.”

Barnier said the task was to put into legal text the commitments made by both sides in a 26-page political declaration on the future relationship, including the “robust” provisions to ensure Britain did not undercut the EU rulebook on workers’ and environmental standards and subsidies. ...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/202...eal-eu-tells-uk