Britain outside the EU

Originally Posted by Blackshep

No you know what I mean the EU can request but cannot demand or order anything militarily and the UK's role within NATO has not been affected by brexit as somebody would like some to believe.

You appear, once again, to be countering an argument I haven’t made…

[OLD BOY]

Here is confirmation, if any were needed, that bureaucratic EU laws are damaging the economy.

The GDPR is one of the worst, and it’s not that effective in achieving its objectives either.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...saster-better/

[EXTRACT]

‘We have ticked all the right boxes a hundred thousand times. We have clicked past reams of terms and conditions we have never had the slightest intention of ever actually reading. And we have accepted cookies, shared our data, and opted in for emails.

We already knew the European Union’s GDPR rules for managing the way data is used and shared over the internet were tedious, bureaucratic and overly complex. But now we know something else as well. The system has cost us billions, and made us all much poorer than we otherwise would be.

According to a new study from academics at Oxford University, the rules have had two dramatic impacts. They have significantly reduced the profits and sales of digital companies.

And even worse, the harm has been concentrated on the smaller companies, leaving the American tech giants such as Facebook and Google largely unscathed. It has turned into one of the worst pieces of legislation ever introduced.

There is little hope of the EU ever reforming it. Brussels does not admit to mistakes. But the UK should sweep the system away, and replace it with something more workable, before it does any more damage to our economy.

When GDPR – General Data Protection Regulation – was introduced in May 2018 it was meant to turn the digital economy into a safer, properly regulated space, where privacy would be protected, and data valued and looked after.

In the almost four years since then, EU officials have held the legislation up as a huge improvement in the way ordinary people are protected by better, smarter regulation.’

Here’s the actual research conclusions, without the Telegraph’s anti-EU spin…

https://voxeu.org/article/how-data-p...mance-globally

Conclusions
Our findings lead us to conclude that the adverse performance impact of GDPR on both profits and sales have been significant for companies operating in the EU. But the main effect has occurred through rising compliance costs rather than reduced sales. That said, these results must be interpreted with caution. First, some of the adverse impacts we document might be temporary adjustment costs, meaning that the negative effects of GDPR might taper off in the future. For example, the marked increase in patenting after 2018 probably reflects one-off investments in new GDPR-compliant technologies. Second, if GDPR is widely adopted and becomes a global standard, companies targeting EU residents will gradually become less disadvantaged. Third, we note that our estimates do not capture the aggregate welfare effects of the regulation since potential benefits to citizens concerned with data protection are unaccounted for.

Nonetheless, we believe that some modifications to GDPR in its current form would be desirable, taking into account that the regulation has put smaller companies at a disadvantage. Indeed, while European leaders have pledged to reign in the power of bigTech, GDPR might even have strengthened them by weakening their competitors. Indeed, our findings show that smaller companies have been disproportionally adversely impacted, both in terms of sales and profits

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Here is confirmation, if any were needed, that bureaucratic EU laws are damaging the economy.

The GDPR is one of the worst, and it’s not that effective in achieving its objectives either.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...saster-better/

[EXTRACT]

‘We have ticked all the right boxes a hundred thousand times. We have clicked past reams of terms and conditions we have never had the slightest intention of ever actually reading. And we have accepted cookies, shared our data, and opted in for emails.

We already knew the European Union’s GDPR rules for managing the way data is used and shared over the internet were tedious, bureaucratic and overly complex. But now we know something else as well. The system has cost us billions, and made us all much poorer than we otherwise would be.

According to a new study from academics at Oxford University, the rules have had two dramatic impacts. They have significantly reduced the profits and sales of digital companies.

And even worse, the harm has been concentrated on the smaller companies, leaving the American tech giants such as Facebook and Google largely unscathed. It has turned into one of the worst pieces of legislation ever introduced.

There is little hope of the EU ever reforming it. Brussels does not admit to mistakes. But the UK should sweep the system away, and replace it with something more workable, before it does any more damage to our economy.

When GDPR – General Data Protection Regulation – was introduced in May 2018 it was meant to turn the digital economy into a safer, properly regulated space, where privacy would be protected, and data valued and looked after.

In the almost four years since then, EU officials have held the legislation up as a huge improvement in the way ordinary people are protected by better, smarter regulation.’

Read your post a coup!e of times thinking I must have missed the confirmation. If you hadn't of included a link to the Telegraph I might have mistaken the post for something you heard some big boys saying down the pub but then remembered some of the Barclay clan were accused of breaking data protection laws so maybe, just maybe, the family is using one of their publications to defend their actions.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Here’s the actual research conclusions, without the Telegraph’s anti-EU spin…

https://voxeu.org/article/how-data-p...mance-globally

A lot of supposition in there except one thing.

adverse impacts we document might be temporary

negative effects of GDPR might taper off.

probably reflects one-off investments in new GDPR-compliant technologies.

if GDPR is widely adopted.

our estimates do not capture the aggregate welfare effects...

...GDPR might even have strengthened them.

Indeed, our findings show that smaller companies have been disproportionally adversely impacted, both in terms of sales and profits.

[jonbxx]

The last paragraph of that Telegraph article on GDPR includes the following;

True, there may be consequences if we break free. The EU may make it difficult to transfer data across the English channel.

So the argument is that we should remove GDPR as it's too difficult and expensive for small businesses. We should therefore make it impossible for those businesses to share data with the EU. I guess that will fix the issue.

[1andrew1]

UK explores fourth delay to imposing checks on EU imports

Warnings from industry of supply chain disaster if full post-Brexit border controls are imposed on July 1

Downing Street is exploring yet another delay to post-Brexit border checks on goods entering Britain from the EU to prevent what industry has warned would be a supply chain disaster.

Ministers are considering whether to push back for the fourth time the introduction of full checks on imports from the EU, which were supposed to come into effect on July 1, as part of a drive to tackle trade friction and the crisis in the cost of living, officials briefed on discussions said.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, Brexit opportunities minister, argued at a private meeting this week that one advantage of leaving the EU would be to allow Britain to apply only loose checks on imports. Goods arriving from the EU are not subject to safety and security declarations, while food and plant products are not physically checked.

Senior figures in Number 10 are “sympathetic” to the idea of further delays beyond July for the new checks, according to the officials.

Boris Johnson, the prime minister, has not yet made a firm decision but is being urged to extend the “grace period” for EU imports by Rees-Mogg and former Brexit minister Lord David Frost.

British exports to the EU have been subjected to the full panoply of EU border checks since the first day of Brexit in January 2020 — while imports from European competitors have enjoyed a far smoother entry into the UK.

Britain’s trade performance has recovered from the pandemic much more slowly than equivalent developed economies.

The Office for Budget Responsibility, the independent fiscal watchdog, last week held to its assumption that “leaving the EU will result in the UK’s total imports and exports being 15 per cent lower than had the UK remained a member state”.

https://www.ft.com/content/53636e5d-...c-a827d4b551a0

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

https://www.ft.com/content/53636e5d-...c-a827d4b551a0

It's nice to see that the UK Government is listening to industry and trying to be flexible, which is more than we can say for the EU. They imposed full checks from day one.

We need a more sophisticated system on both sides to speed up the checking process, but as we are seeing with NI/Ireland border trade, the EU is less than helpful on these matters.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It's nice to see that the UK Government is listening to industry and trying to be flexible, which is more than we can say for the EU. They imposed full checks from day one.

We need a more sophisticated system on both sides to speed up the checking process, but as we are seeing with NI/Ireland border trade, the EU is less than helpful on these matters.

Perhaps the Government should have listened to industry before the Government signed a deal with the EU. Probably more sensible than protecting industry from a deal that the Government itself signed by not implementing the agreement.

At the moment, the lack of implementation of the border controls favours importers to the UK massively over exporters

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Perhaps the Government should have listened to industry before the Government signed a deal with the EU. Probably more sensible than protecting industry from a deal that the Government itself signed by not implementing the agreement.

At the moment, the lack of implementation of the border controls favours importers to the UK massively over exporters

Well, thanks to the Remainer May's attempt to sabotage Brexit combined with the ticking clock, we were lumbered with what we finally signed.
Listening to industry at that point would not have prevented the UK from dropping out without a deal (my preferred path).

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Well, thanks to the Remainer May's attempt to sabotage Brexit combined with the ticking clock, we were lumbered with what we finally signed.
Listening to industry at that point would not have prevented the UK from dropping out without a deal (my preferred path).

These were Theresa Mays red lines and their implications on the relationship going forward with the EU;



They seem pretty 'Brexity' to me so I am curious how she tried to sabotage Brexit. What should the Johnson administration have changed from Theresa Mays approach?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Perhaps the Government should have listened to industry before the Government signed a deal with the EU. Probably more sensible than protecting industry from a deal that the Government itself signed by not implementing the agreement.

At the moment, the lack of implementation of the border controls favours importers to the UK massively over exporters

The government listened to the people. It’s the government’s job now to make it work.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The government listened to the people. It’s the government’s job now to make it work.

And how is that working out?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

And how is that working out?

Well, let’s wait and see, shall we? It’s early days yet. Nobody suggested everything would be hunky dory on day 1 as I recall, and certainly I did not expect that.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, let’s wait and see, shall we? It’s early days yet. Nobody suggested everything would be hunky dory on day 1 as I recall, and certainly I did not expect that.

Really, I thought they did say just that, the day we leave we hold all the cards, easiest deal ever done, sorted out in an afternoon etc