Gransnet forums

News & politics

Sajid now says 'no alignment post Brexit' ...

(81 Posts)
jura2 Sat 18-Jan-20 17:30:40

So basically what he is saying is that we won't be able to export to EU, and won't be able to take part in production chains. The job losses will be massive- and so will the tax losses, etc.

MaizieD Sat 18-Jan-20 18:00:01

That would be the same Sajid Javid who wrote this in 2016?


I was somewhere in West London, meeting with one of the area’s many television companies, when the EU Single Market really began to make more sense.

I was Culture Secretary at the time, and the company’s chief executive was explaining why they’d chosen the UK for their main base outside North America.

It had a lot to do with wealth of creative talent here. But the clincher was the Single Market – it meant they could broadcast to up to half a billion viewers across 28 countries and only have to deal with regulators in the UK. Thanks to common standards across Europe, they didn’t have to worry about meeting the demands of dozens of different local bureaucrats.

It was a similar story when I worked in financial services. If I wanted to seal a deal in, say, Paris, all I had to do was hop on a train, get the paperwork signed and head home again. My biggest worry was whether I’d be back in time to put the kids to bed.

I’m a Eurosceptic and proud of it. I think the Euro is a bad idea. I have no time for ever-closer union and I’ve long been a vocal critic of Brussels’ worst excesses.

But, just like Bank of England Governor Mark Carney and IMF head Christine Lagarde, I still believe that Britain is better off in. And that’s all because of the Single Market.

It’s a great invention, one that even Lady Thatcher campaigned enthusiastically to create.

The world’s largest economic bloc, it gives every business in Britain access to 500 million customers with no barriers, no tariffs and no local legislation to worry about.

It’s no surprise that nearly half of our exports go to other EU nations, exports that are linked to three million jobs here in the UK. And as an EU member we also have preferential access to more than 50 other international markets from Mexico to Montenegro, helping us to export £50 billion of goods and services to them every year.

Even companies that are neither exporters nor part of the export supply chain – your local corner shop, for example – benefit from the economic growth that kind of access brings.

And it works for imports too – British consumers benefit from lower prices on the things they want to buy, and British companies can easily import the raw materials they need to make goods. There’s no doubt about it, remaining in the EU is good for business.

Of course, the Brexit camp say we don’t have to be a member of the EU to benefit from all this.

That, should we vote to leave, Brussels would instantly offer us full and easy access to the Single Market and influence over regulations. All the good stuff, none of the bad.

It sounds like a no-brainer. But it’s just not realistic.

For one thing, even Europe’s biggest fan would admit that it’s hardly a byword for thrusting dynamism. As Iain Duncan Smith said this week, the EU only moves as quickly as its slowest member state – and getting 27 nations to agree terms for British access to the Single Market would simply not happen overnight.

Then there’s the nature and scope of any access agreement.

Today, almost 80 per cent of British jobs are part of the service sector – everything from that TV company to pensions to education.

It’s a sector with exports of £226 billion, nearly half of which go to Europe. But of the trade agreements the EU has with more than 50 countries around the world, not one gives service industries the same level of guaranteed access as the Single Market. Not one.

And this isn’t just an EU problem – the biggest free trade agreement in the world, NAFTA, doesn’t come close either. No free trade agreement does. And that's because services are complex and highly regulated.

Unless the exporting country submits to the importing country’s rules and local regulator, access will be denied. Maybe the EU will break the habit of a lifetime and come up with something new just for us.

But I wouldn’t want to bet the jobs of millions of British workers on it.

Finally, the negotiations themselves would be extremely lopsided, giving the upper hand to our rivals.

Forty-four per cent of our exports go the EU, but only eight per cent of the rest of the EU’s exports come to the UK.

One of the advantages of EU membership is that we get to negotiate wider and deeper trade deals from a position of strength. If we leave, the boot will be on the other foot – and that will put Britain at a serious disadvantage.

The remaining EU nations will want to secure a deal that’s good for their economies. So Germany will want to protect its carmakers from British imports. France will want to protect its farmers from UK rivals. Even little Luxembourg will want to protect its financial services industry from the global hub of London.

And who could blame them? If I was in their shoes, I’d do the same. If Germany left the EU tomorrow, I’d make damn sure any trade agreement we reached put British businesses first. I’d be failing in my job as Secretary of State if I didn’t.

Business leaders from kitchen-table start-ups to vast multi-nationals are already telling me that the uncertainty over the referendum result is causing them to delay investment decisions, to think twice about creating new jobs.

If we vote to leave, that uncertainty won’t end the morning after the referendum. Even the most conservative estimates say it could take years to secure agreements with the EU and other countries.

Having spent six years fighting to get British businesses back on their feet after Labour’s record-breaking recession, I’m not about to vote for a decade of stagnation and doubt.

I can see why some people want to leave the EU. Arguments about national identity and sovereignty pack an emotional punch. But for anyone who cares about British jobs, it comes down to one key question.

Do businesses want the benefits and security of continued access to the Single Market, or the instability and uncertainty of a lost decade?

However you feel about Europe, whether you’re an enthusiastic federalist or an ardent advocate of leaving, that is the question you have to answer on 23 June. And from where I’m standing, there’s only one answer – a vote to remain.


I wish he'd share exactly what has made him completely reverse his beliefs. Who knows, it might be so compelling that it could reconcile Remainers to the 31st Jan madness...

Nannarose Sat 18-Jan-20 18:02:10

I don't quite understand this. But I think what he means is that companies don't have to align to EU standards. If they choose to in order to export / work jointly, than I presume they can (no-one would be stopping them).
I know and understand little of trade and business, but I assume that if you want to work with / export to any country or trade bloc, then that product / service is aligned to that country's standards - or their's to ours. I think that must happen at the moment with lots of countries / trade regions.
The link didn't work on my computer, so apologies if it explained the issue, and I've got it wrong!

MaizieD Sat 18-Jan-20 18:08:50

Link doesn't work on mine, either. '404 not found' error message

jura2 Sat 18-Jan-20 18:36:08

Yes, that Sajid Javid sad

Does this work:

jura2 Sat 18-Jan-20 18:41:34

Nannarose- the level playing field means that competition is fair. If one country, or some employers, are allowed to not pay workers a fair wage and give them any employment security, allowed to make them work longer hours, etc, and allowed to use cheaper materials of lower quality, or allowed to feed cattle poor quality, or even contaminated foods, with antibiotics, Chlorine added, etc- then they will be able to compete with others, but producing more cheaply, be it food, meat or anything else.

The EU will not allow their standards to be compromised, and import products which will be unfairly competitive.

MaizieD Sat 18-Jan-20 18:46:02

It works. Thanks, jura.

One thing this could mean is that UK companies that wish to continue trading with EU countries will continue to produce to EU standards but, if we accept lower standards ( and therefore cheaper goods) from non EU countries for the same product they will not be able to compete in the domestic market. This will, of course, be in addition to their increased costs in complying with the non tariff barriers they will encounter when we leave the Single Market. I should point out that they will encounter these even if we stayed closed aligned to EU standards because we will no longer be part of the Single Market. Massive increases in paperwork... on that point I thought that leaving the EU was going to reduce 'red tape', not increase it. hmm

DoraMarr Sat 18-Jan-20 19:02:24

Just how is leaving the EU going to benefit me? Anyone?

jura2 Sat 18-Jan-20 19:04:44

Indeed - it will mean many businesses and farming, truly struggling and probably go down-, or move abroad- with all the job losses and price increases entailed. We will then have to import even more from abroad, be it good quality from EU, or cheap from USA, China, etc.

Grandad1943 Sat 18-Jan-20 19:19:09

But the above is what the majority in Britain voted for in electing a Boris Johnson led Tory government on a Brexit ticket.

There can be no doubt that being Brexitiers they knew exactly what they were voting for, and that's democracy.

In reality, we will see in two or three years time if Brexit is seen as a success or if the British electorate is desperately regretting what they wished to happen.

All will be revealed in the fullness of time?

jura2 Sat 18-Jan-20 19:26:09

Yes- but how much irreparable damage in the meantime sad

Grany Sat 18-Jan-20 19:34:59

In France a neoliberal president is chased by their people. In our country we vote for actual right wing fascists. Sickening......Vive le France!


Last night Macron had to be escorted out of a Theatre’s service door due to having to run away from protests against him

The Govt of France is scared of its people. Just wish that was the case in the UK

Grandad1943 Sat 18-Jan-20 19:36:42

jura2, we can only wait to witness in two to three years time how much damage has been done to the British economy, or if any damage has been done at all.

I feel that the first of the above will be the most likely outcome, but that is what the Electorate voted for in December, and Britain is ruled by democratic government.

So, what will be, will be.

Nannarose Sat 18-Jan-20 21:45:01

Thank you!

jura2 Sat 18-Jan-20 23:09:25

we still have no idea what kind of Brexit we will have - although we know it is not what he promised. I don't think even his staunchiest supporters will deny he is the worst liar ...

Cindersdad Sun 19-Jan-20 07:42:25

Yet more evidence of Government Self Harm - what a mess!

Whatever kind of Brexit we get will be worse than no Brexit.

I hope it won't be as bad as I fear but if it is there will be riots such as we have not seen for generations when the populace finally realises how they have been duped.

MaizieD Sun 19-Jan-20 10:12:19

There can be no doubt that being Brexitiers they knew exactly what they were voting for, and that's democracy.

I love your sense of humour, Grandad grin

jura2 Sun 19-Jan-20 10:13:42

yes, how very British smile

GracesGranMK3 Sun 19-Jan-20 10:37:17

There can be no doubt that being Brexitiers they knew exactly what they were voting for, and that's democracy.

I actually don't think this is a joke. The Brexit voters did know what they were voting for - they kept telling us they did. It is also true that, as a country, we will survive. Some businesses will go under and some will lose their jobs and we may also find the standards of what we buy drop but I don't think we could have been told more plainly that the Brexiteers disregarded this. Some did make half-hearted attempts to say "nothing will change" but, in truth, they just wanted to "win".

They did not care if we either isolate ourselves, some don't want any agreed rules and arrangements which means, therefore, no trade deals, some, on the other hand, don't mind rules as long as it's with the USA and no one else. It was never, for them, a question of right or wrong but just of win or lose.

We shall see. Not everyone will be affected but whatever effect it has this is exactly what they voted for.

Cunco Sun 19-Jan-20 10:49:35

Like Grandad1943, I will wait and see. When I voted Leave a second time, it was a choice between a rock and a hard place. I did not dismiss Project Fear out of hand, recognising that it would be a bumpy road, as it was for some when we joined the EU. I am encouraged that the prophets of immediate doom have proved false but only time will tell how it ultimately turns out. It does sadden me where people seem to hope for the worst to be proved right. We should all hope for the best whatever our fears may be.

The reason I voted Leave in 2016 was basically the same as in 1975. I did not believe a future United States of Europe would work well and membership would have its own share of risks, politically and economically. The Eurozone certainly has its full share of risks, with the single currency failing to live up to the exaggerated economic claims made for it 20 years ago. Our failure to join, it was said by its fans, would leave us trailing behind the growth of the Eurozone while its divergent economies would converge. The truth is that its creation was to create the nucleus of a monetary, economic and political union from which there is no way back. Judged purely on that criterion, it has been a success.

For 40 years, as a Eurosceptic, I have listened to those who understand the EU project and I remain unconvinced. I do believe that, had we voted to Remain in 2016, we and those that follow would have been locked into a future United States of Europe, perhaps with about as much say as the Scottish Nationalists now feel they have in the UK.

In 1975, there was a one hour ITV debate (now on youtube) between Michael Foot and Edward Heath, solely devoted to the question of sovereignty. It is worth watching whether you believe (like Heath) that sovereignty is trade-able for influence within the EU or Foot took the opposite view. This well-conducted debate between 2 senior politicians, sadly something we no longer see very often.

jura2 Sun 19-Jan-20 10:52:06

We are leaving- but we still do NOT know if we will leave with a Deal - or if the ERG and now Johnson (remember he was a Remainer and gave all the good and right arguments- as did Sajid at the time) - get what they really really always wanted No Deal- because that is what will make them and the few very rich- even though it will make the poorest poorer.

jura2 Sun 19-Jan-20 11:06:55

Promise after promise, on the way we would leave, has been broken - and we will now leave with 'No alignment' = massively reduced export opportunities and ensuing job losses. And probably, at the very last minute, with No Deal- as is becoming increasingly apparent with behind the scenes shenanigans of the highest order.

Daisymae Sun 19-Jan-20 12:22:52

According to an article in the Guardian today members of the Cabinet are being told to keep off TV etc and concentrate on their jobs. They are also being marked out of 10 prior to a reshuffle. They do not want the public finding out what is going on before they need to know. I think No.10s grip being tightened, they are going to control what info the media gets. I still expect to see the country crash out later in the year.

Yehbutnobut Sun 19-Jan-20 12:24:59

Bully boy tactics.

MaizieD Sun 19-Jan-20 15:19:14

Clearly many of us don't feel at all happy about the government being kept secret from us. We consider this to be undemocratic. Perhaps even smacking of dictatorship.

I wonder what Leavers feel about the clear intention of the government to keep as much from the public as they possibly can?