Can the United Kingdom break brexit?

var cookie_token = $.cookie('token');

url = window.location.href;
var param = url.split('?')[1]
console.log(url);

if ($.cookie('token') && param != 'webview=true') {

var settings = {
"url": "https://my.financebrokerage.com/api/transactions/my",
"method": "GET",
"timeout": 0,
"headers": {
"Content-Type": "application/json",
"Authorization": `Bearer ${cookie_token}`
},
};

$.ajax(settings).done(function (response) {

if (response[0].status == "Approved") {

$('.blur').html(`</p>
<p>A bemused driver with several sandwiches wrapped in tin foil asked if he could maybe surrender the meat and keep just the bread, but the customs officer told him, “No, everything will be confiscated. Welcome to the Brexit, Sir, I’m sorry.” At least he apologised.<br />
The ban came into force on New Year’s Day 2021 as the Brexit transition period came to an end, with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) saying that travellers should “use, consume, or dispose of” prohibited items at or before the border. The European Commission says that the ban is necessary because meat and dairy products can contain pathogens causing animal diseases such as foot-and-mouth or swine fever and “continue to present a real threat to animal health throughout the union”. Dutch customs also posted a photograph of foodstuffs ranging from breakfast cereals to oranges that officials had confiscated in the ferry terminal, adding: “Since 1 January, you can’t just bring food from the UK.”<br />
This summed up Brexit in a nutshell, and it only took a few days to be revealed. The first that springs to mind is that if this is what the Brexit agreement has given us, then it is obviously an appallingly bad deal. That is, if it could not even take care of something as petty as a piece of ham, then we can be sure that nothing else of consequence will have been dealt with properly either.<br />
As for those “meat and dairy products (which) can contain pathogens,” what gives the Dutch the idea that ham coming from Poland, Denmark or Ireland is free of them? Ireland is right next door to the UK, so the whole premise of this argument is ridiculous. If that really was the premise. Also, it is worth mentioning a little piece of history. In the winter of 1944 to 1945, the Dutch nation was suffering a Winter of Hunger (Hongerwinter). When the British government found out about this, they sent the Royal Air Force (RAF) to drop all sorts of food supplies into the Netherlands to help relieve the hunger. That’s right, young men in the RAF risked their lives, not to drop bombs on the German enemy, but to give food to the starving Dutch who were hitherto making do with eating tulip bulbs. According to reports, the Dutch population received these food supplies gratefully, and as far as I am aware, no one complained about the risk of eating pathogens coming from Britain. And when the British armed forces had finished their food deliveries, they went on to liberate the entire country.<br />
This is just one of many unintended consequences of Brexit, otherwise known as the Great European Divorce. That is, they were unintended by the people who voted for it, people who were relying on what they had been promised. I am not sure about those who negotiated the “deal.” That is, if what was negotiated can even be called a deal. Prime Minister (PM) Boris Johnson and his team seem to have got the worst outcome in almost every area. And no wonder when one considers how it was done. I can recall the PM standing there, with the Brexit clock running down, and saying that we needed to “get Brexit done.” If that sounds a bit desperate, then that is what it was. The people negotiating on behalf of the European Union (EU) knew that the British had to “get it done” within a certain timeframe, and so they had no incentive to make any major concessions. And this is how we got to where we are today.<br />
But maybe things are about to change. A senior Tory has called for both main parties to show the courage and strength of character to firstly admit that Brexit has failed, and to secondly seek to rejoin the EU single market. Tobias Ellwood MP, who is Conservative chairman of the defence select committee, said many MPs privately agree with the case for a Norway-style relationship with the EU, but are too scared to say so.</p>
<p>“Nobody dares mention Brexit on the Labour or Conservative side or will even look at the numbers to see whether economically it would be wiser for us to be in or outside of the single market,” he says. “Surely, we should have that strength of character, and the courage, to look at the biggest decision made in our generation, one which has clearly not gone in the right direction. I don’t know anybody who voted either way, Remain or Brexit, who expected us to be where we are today. But apparently, we dare not go there.” In addition to the vast economic damage that leaving the single market has caused, Mr. Ellwood said that Brexit has left the UK isolated from many of its allies just as the world is becoming much more dangerous.<br />
So, what is this Norway-style relationship with the EU which Mr. Ellwood has referred to? This is the European Economic Area (EEA) which consists of 31 European countries. These are the 28 EU member states, plus Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein. These latter three are also members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA).<br />
Through the EEA Agreement, Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein are equal partners in the EU internal market, on the same terms as all the EU member states. This includes having access to the internal market’s four freedoms. These are the free movement of goods, persons, services, and capital. In addition, the Agreement covers cooperation in other important areas such as research and development, education, social policy, the environment, consumer protection, tourism, and culture.<br />
The only things the EEA Agreement does not cover are the EU common agriculture policy, the EU common fisheries policy, the customs union, the common trade policy, the common foreign and security policy, home affairs (including justice) and the monetary union. Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein also participate in many EU programmes and agencies. They are also members of the Schengen cooperation, which abolishes border controls between members. Norway also cooperates closely with the EU on foreign and security policy issues.<br />
In passing, it might be asked why on earth the UK did not go for this kind of arrangement if we absolutely had to leave the EU? What would have been so wrong with that? It would have kept British sovereignty intact to a greater extent than it would have in the EU, but it would have done so without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Instead, the PM led us out in such a way that we were left with sovereignty and next to nothing else.<br />
Well, we now learn that at least one Conservative MP is daring to go against the trend and challenge what was done. I believe that he is the first of many, because the polls are showing a huge degree of “buyers’ remorse.” As the polling guru John Curtice notes, just 33% of Britons now believe the 2016 decision was the right one, while 55% say it was wrong. More striking still, as many as 59% say they would vote to rejoin the EU if given the chance, with just 41% preferring to stay out. Yes, indeed, making a hugely expensive mistake will lead people to think that way. The only wonder is that only one MP appears to be openly heading in this direction. Everyone else is seemingly scared of being thought “undemocratic” in the sense that 52% of people voted for Brexit, and therefore if we are a democracy, how can we go against what the people voted for? This argument sounds nice and reasonable, but a bit of reflection would show how disingenuous it is.<br />
The first point to make is that referendums are always a bit dubious in nature. Boiling a complex political argument down to one question is a huge risk. In fact, I would go so far as to say that no one can design a referendum question which can handle such complexities. Given these facts, I still have no idea why PM David Cameron embarked on the idea. A PM above all people should know how inaccurate this kind of thing can be. What I mean by this is that it very much depends on how the referendum is organised and it also depends on how the question is asked. People in the polling industry have long known that one can obtain almost any answer from polls and referendums. It just depends how the questions are phrased.<br />
The second point is that there are ways of influencing outcomes even apart from how one asks the questions. For example, what about advertising? The day before the referendum, I personally recall watching a slick professional video showing that the UK could be like independent and wealthy Switzerland, enjoying both freedom and a high standard of living if only we would get out of the EU. No doubt this kind of thing encouraged impressionable people to vote to leave. Of course, it’s true that both sides had the chance to spend money on advertising the respective merits of their positions, but was this being done in a fair manner? Apparently not, according to the UK’s Electoral Commission which fined Vote Leave £61,000 for arranging to spend £675,315 more than the agreed limit of £7 million. And if they were willing to break the rules on this, what other rules, which we don’t know about, might have also been broken? However, it will be no surprise that this kind of revelation only came to light long after the results had been declared. It takes a while to do audits and check all the figures, and by the time it was all done, and the excess spending noted, the UK was already on its way out.<br />
The third point is that I can now go so far as to say that the referendum was fraudulent in the way that many elections always are. What happened to all those promises made by Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson and all the rest of the politicians who campaigned to leave? They promised increased prosperity, cheaper food, flourishing trade, and a National Health Service (NHS) which would be supported by all the extra cash being saved and made available. In addition, they said we’d be free of all that tedious European red tape and would take back control of our borders, encouraging anyone agitated by immigration to believe that fewer people would now be coming in. There would be no downside, only upsides. As David Davis pledged soon after the vote, the British exit deal would “deliver the exact same benefits” as EU membership.<br />
Seven years on, all the above promises have turned out to be completely false. Not one of them has proven to be true. The only conclusion is that the Brexit referendum was a giant fraud played on the British people. Let’s just look around and see how it all turned out. The UK is in the grip of a cost-of-living crisis, food prices are rocketing, trade is either down or static while it has surged post-pandemic for our EU neighbours. And the NHS is ailing in almost every area. Post-Brexit red tape is strangling thousands of small businesses, especially exporters of goods who have found themselves tied up in piles of daunting forms and/or extra charges that cost time and money which they don’t have. And those who thought legal migration of 330,000 people a year was too much when they voted, are now faced with over 600,000 a year.<br />
As for the terms of Brexit, if we ever want to know what people think of them, just ask anyone who buys from the EU, who sells to the EU, or who is stuck in a queue to visit the continent. They will soon let us know whether Brexit has “delivered the exact same benefits” which we once enjoyed as EU members. And these are not simply observations by disappointed people who had wanted to remain in the EU. These are facts which have been seen and understood by a growing majority of the British people, including many who voted leave.<br />
But the main impetus which should be leading British politicians to seek a way back to a better relationship with the EU, is the fact that the current relationship is simply unsustainable. It doesn’t work on any level, and it needs to be fixed. Never mind what was promised or not promised, because in any case, what we have now does not compare in any way to anything that anyone promised.<br />
These are just a few examples of the way Brexit is not working. Many people voted to leave the EU because they did not want the free movement of labour coming into the UK and taking British jobs. Except that now many British factory owners cannot get the workers which they need to man their production lines, and many farmers cannot find the labourers they need to pick their crops. And hotels and public houses struggle to get any of the staff they need.<br />
So, factories get closed, crops rot in the fields, and the hospitality industry ends up being much less efficient due to lack of the necessary staff. And all the time, boatloads of refugees are streaming onto the South Coast leading to even more illegal immigration than there had been of the legal kind. Except that because these immigrants are not legal, they get held in detention camps and cannot be employed in the general workforce in those factories, on those farms, or in those hotels. The net result is that no one benefits from any of this.<br />
The new laws have also adversely affected those travelling for short periods of time. Let us take the example of young, emerging musicians seeking to tour in Europe. New regulations and visa restrictions tend to penalise inexperience and have created a disaster area of bureaucracy. There is the case of established German punk band “Trigger Cut” who were detained in police cells by the UK Border Force because they apparently did not have all the paperwork necessary to come over and perform for a few nights. But those familiar with the case say that the rules are so confusing and opaque that it appears to be an almost impossible task to get everything necessary to satisfy everyone. Part of the problem is that there are two different sets of paperwork, the “Permitted Paid Engagement” (PPE) which is free, and the Certificate of Sponsorship (COS) which involves filling in more forms and costs some money but is generally deemed to be a “safer bet.” It appears that Trigger Cut had the former. A further problem is that many artists tend to get stuck at the border because government guidance is unclear and printed only in English, rather than any of the EU languages. And on top of all that, individual border officers can use their own discretion to refuse anyone they like at the border and there is no right of appeal.<br />
Those attending school have also been affected. School trips have become more complicated to arrange in both directions because of Brexit-related difficulties. The UK Border Force’s refusal to accept ID cards in place of passports and visas has contributed to a huge drop-off in the number of visiting European school groups. In 2022, the number of pupils travelling on group trips to the UK was 83% lower than in pre-pandemic 2019. At universities, the ending of the Erasmus programme has led to an accompanying decline in incoming EU students. This enforced narrowing of youthful horizons has occurred in plain sight but been cravenly accepted as Brexit’s collateral damage by successive Conservative governments. And young people have disproportionately paid the price. This does not augur well for the future.<br />
Thus far, I have hesitated to jump to any conclusions, but I have to say that there appears to be something very nasty in the attitude of those in charge of all these people on the move. Let’s not forget that the Dutch, the French, and the Belgians etc. were and still are our near neighbours, even though we are not in the EU anymore. And yet it seems that the rules accompanying Brexit are turning us all into bigots. We should also not forget that we are all military allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). At a time when this organisation is being challenged by the belligerence of Russia, is it helpful to have all these petty laws souring the debate between us. We should rather attempt to move back towards one another.<br />
In fact, as an interesting aside, one government which was extremely positive about Brexit was that of Vladimir Putin in Russia. It’s quite easy to see how this benefits his regime because his whole modus operandi is to weaken the West in whatever form it appears. So, if he can, he will weaken NATO. He has not really been able to achieve this so far, and in fact his Ukraine folly has strengthened NATO. But Brexit did drive a wedge into the EU, and I am sure that he did what he could to influence this outcome.<br />
Apparently, the Intelligence and Security Committee’s (ISC) Russia Report on Brexit thinks along the same lines. It stated that “we have not been provided with any post-referendum assessment of Russian attempts at interference … in stark contrast to the US handling of allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” In other words, it was upset that the possibility had not been taken seriously and investigated. Its press release is even more blunt, declaring that “the government did not take action to protect the UK’s process in 2016. The committee duly recommends that the intelligence services produce an analogous assessment of potential Russian interference in the EU referendum and publish an unclassified summary.” But at the time, the government chose not to do so. So, it’s inconclusive as far as it goes. But then what does the UK have these intelligence services for, if not to protect our lives and our democratic process? So, could the government have maybe just checked that all had been done according to the rules on the geopolitical level?<br />
In conclusion, Brexit has been a complete mess for the UK, and I would argue that it has not really helped the EU either. This does not necessarily mean that there is growing demand to rejoin the EU just yet, but it is something that should be considered, if only because what we have at present is so unwieldy and impractical.<br />
Europe is falling down the list of voters’ priorities and probably very few want to reopen such a bitterly divisive issue. Yet there is scope to soften the hard Brexit agreed to by Boris Johnson in December 2020. In February PM Rishi Sunak won kudos for negotiating the Windsor framework. That resolved many practical problems over the border in the Irish Sea created by Mr Johnson’s decision to take Great Britain out of the EU’s single market and customs union, but to leave Northern Ireland as part of both. This showed that there was and is a desire for some sort of rapprochement, at least. Then the UK was also well viewed by many, especially in Eastern Europe, for taking the lead in supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression. So there has been an increasing presence of goodwill coming from the EU.<br />
But the Conservative Party have been tainted by Brexit and all sorts of other problems as well over the last 13 years. Therefore, most people think that after the general election next year, the UK will probably have a Labour government. Sir Keir Starmer, Labour’s leader, insists he will not rejoin the single market or customs union, so there’s a nice open-minded approach to start with. One would hope for better.<br />
However, there are some rays of hope. David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, told a recent meeting of the EU-UK Forum in Brussels, that better relations with the EU were his “number one priority”. Labour figures have also floated various other ideas. These include more formal security and defence co-operation; full association with the EU’s Horizon and Copernicus scientific-research programmes; a mobility deal to reduce visa hassles for travelling musicians and others; and an enhanced agreement on financial and other services. And also a veterinary agreement to facilitate the trade in food. Perhaps ham sandwiches being confiscated by Dutch customs officers will be a thing of the past. If so, all this is much more like it, and in fact, I cannot see any reason why the current government cannot make even more progress on these kinds of issues. No man is an island, and even though the UK is an island, it needs to be part of something much bigger.<br />
However, reading between the lines, whoever wins the next election, the trend will probably be towards closer relations with the EU, rather than moving further away. The process may take longer than anti-Brexiteers are hoping for, and it will always be a mistake to take EU assent to future changes for granted. We need to recall that we were the ones who left them. Yet Brussels and other national capitals will surely feel under some pressure to be nicer to Britain, as we all face the many challenges of the future. The eventual destination may be still uncertain, but the direction of travel now looks more settled.<br />
`);

} else {
$('.blur').css({
'background': 'linear-gradient(95deg, #4e4e4e 25%, #000 45%, #bbb 75%, #FFFFFF 100%) 98%/200% 100%',
'text-transform': 'inherit',
'-webkit-background-clip': 'text',
'background-clip': 'text',
'-webkit-text-fill-color': 'transparent'
})

$(".wpb_content_element").append(`<div>
<h5> Want to read more?</h5>
<p>Click on the button below to access all premium content <br> articles by purchasing one of our educational packages</p>
<a href="https://www.financebrokerage.com/premium-education-2/">GET PREMIUM</a>
</div > `)
}

});

} else {

$('.blur').css({
'background': 'linear-gradient(95deg, #4e4e4e 25%, #000 45%, #bbb 75%, #FFFFFF 100%) 98%/200% 100%',
'text-transform': 'inherit',
'-webkit-background-clip': 'text',
'background-clip': 'text',
'-webkit-text-fill-color': 'transparent'
})

}

});

</script>

<div>
<div>
<h2>Can the United Kingdom break brexit?</h2>
<p>A few days after Brexit went into full effect at the beginning of 2021, Dutch TV news aired footage of customs officers confiscating ham sandwiches from a lorry driver arriving by ferry from the UK. Under post-Brexit rules, apparently, anyone coming from the UK is banned from personally importing meat and dairy products into the EU. Officials wearing high-visibility jackets were shown explaining to startled car and lorry drivers at the Hook of Holland ferry terminal that since Brexit, <span>“you are no longer allowed to bring certain foods to Europe, like meat, fruit, vegetables, fish, that kind of stuff.”</span></p>

</div>
</div>
</div></div></div></div>
<p>The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.financebrokerage.com/can-the-united-kingdom-break-brexit/">Can the United Kingdom break brexit?</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.financebrokerage.com">FinanceBrokerage</a>.</p>

Can the United Kingdom break brexit?

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

France at war.

Lithium – the new white gold.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Related Posts

Alibaba Stock Forecast: BABA approaches $100 for first time since April amid Chinese equity rally

Xsolla Announces Acquisition Of Lightstream Rainmaker And Api.Stream

Top 5 Stocks to Watch in August 2023: Pharma, Tech and Leisure All on the Move!