EU's custons union is a racket which Britain must leave

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,944
1,910
113
Why the government must defy the Remoaners and get Britain out of the EU customs union...

LIAM HALLIGAN We’ve paid shameless EU £16 billion in tariffs for non-EU goods — and we should scrap the NCP

The New Customs Partnership is an unworkable plan hatched in Whitehall which could topple Theresa May and derail Brexit

Comment
By Liam Halligan
7th May 2018

ON seeing the initials NCP, most of us think about parking. National Car Parks is, after all, Britain’s largest parking provider.

To political insiders, though, NCP now means the New Customs Partnership — an unworkable scheme cooked up in Whitehall that could topple Theresa May and derail the UK’s European Union exit.

Britain has sent Juncker and his Eurocrat cronies £16bn in non-EU goods tariffs in seven years - enough to pay for 100,000 extra nurses

It refers to May’s bright idea about what to do about our departure from the EU customs union.

During the referendum campaign, Brexiteers prevailed by arguing for Britain to “take back control of our laws, borders and money”.

But NCP will mean we remain ensnared within EU tariff structures, with Britain charged with collecting tariffs for Brussels and applying EU rules at its ports.

The scheme relies on an untested “track-and-trace” technology to judge if goods are destined for UK or EU markets. Repayment mechanisms will then hopefully settle differences between UK and EU tariffs later — something even the EU has dismissed as “magical thinking”.

When Brits hear 'NCP' they usually think of Britain's largest car park provider - not the 'New Customs Partnership'

It is an idea riddled with problems. And if you think it sounds ludicrously complex, that’s because it is.

Nevertheless arch-Remainer civil servants surrounding May are pushing the scheme incessantly — egged on by pro-Brussels ministers who have never accepted Brexit.

Getting out of the EU customs tangle is vital for Britain’s prosperity, post-Brexit.

The EU’s customs union puts a tariff wall around all member states, imposing charges on goods brought in from the rest of the world.

That means UK shoppers pay more, often to protect inefficient producers elsewhere in the EU.

Because of the EU customs tariff, UK shoppers pay more on goods to protect more inefficient countries

Almost 40 per cent of all EU tariff revenue comes from imported clothing and footwear — raising prices on goods accounting for a high share of poorer households’ spending.

EU tariffs also make food more expensive. Grocery bills could fall by up to 20 per cent once we leave the customs union, according to the Policy Exchange think-tank.

It is scandalous that four fifths of the tariffs on non-EU goods bought by UK shoppers go directly to Brussels.

Over the past seven years, Britain has sent European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker and his EU pals £16billion in such tariffs — enough to pay for 100,000 extra nurses over that entire period.

Britons' grocery bills could fall by up to 20 per cent when we leave the customs union

Poor UK households paying over the odds for non-EU imports have footed much of this bill. We’re often told that being in the customs union means Britain benefits from the EU’s “60-plus” free-trade agreements with other nations. But only around half of these deals are in force — and most are with minnows and microstates.

All the EU’s trade deals combined cover less than a tenth of the global economy.

The EU is bad at striking trade deals as member states’ interests often conflict — and the French always dig their heels in on agriculture.

That’s why, after years of trying, there is no EU free trade agreement with the US, China, India or any really large economy.


The EU is bad at striking trade deals, which is why there is no free trade agreement between it and the US, China and India


Britain has more chance of securing valuable consumer-friendly agreements negotiating alone with big nations — as Switzerland did with China in 2014. London can cut deals favouring sectors where we are strong, such as services, not skewed towards French and German interests, as EU deals often are.

And sizeable nations with EU trade agreements, such as South Korea and Mexico, say they now want bespoke post-Brexit UK deals. Big business lobbyists such as the Confederation of British Industry want to keep Britain in the customs union. They care more about protecting incumbent, inefficient corporations than democracy.

Leaving the customs union will boost the UK’s smaller, dynamic firms, as new trade agreements help them export to the world’s fastest-growing Eastern markets.

In the early 1970s, when Britain joined what became the EU, the bloc comprised 30 per cent of the global economy. That figure, once Britain leaves, falls below 15 per cent — despite the EU now having more member states.

London could attract global business if left to make its own deals, but EU business is skewed towards French and German interests

It makes no sense for a diverse, competitive economy such as Britain to hide behind a tariff wall harming our consumers.

Which is why we need to leave the EU’s backward-looking customs union — as voters said in June 2016.

And we certainly don’t need NCP to save Northern Ireland from renewed conflict. This is alarmist nonsense.

Practical solutions exist, as the head of the UK’s border authorities and his Irish equivalent have made clear.

We do not need the NCP to save Northern Ireland from renewed conflict - this is alarming nonsense

The EU’s customs union is a racket that Britain must ditch in its entirety.

Pro-Remain fanatics have parked their tanks on the lawn of democracy — and Mrs May needs to drive them off.

Liam Halligan is an economics expert. Follow @liamhalligan.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6231261/liam-halligan-ncp-eu-tariffs-bills-brexit/
 
Last edited:

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,415
9,576
113
Washington DC
[/URL]

True. All you need is murder of British citizens and collusion with Orange terrorists.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,944
1,910
113
They're already colluding with the big orange one.

Mustn't "collude" with the most popular party in Northern Ireland and the fifth-biggest party in the Commons, eh?

No. The Conservative and Unionist Party would be far better off colluding with Sinn Fein. Makes a lot more sense.

Lionel Shriver

The Irish border is the EU’s problem, not ours


Lionel Shriver





Michel Barnier gives a joint speech with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar (image: Getty)


Lionel Shriver
12 May 2018
The Spectator

In deference to public exhaustion, I’ve largely avoided Brexit in this slot. But a columnist’s output ought rightly to echo what she shouts at the television news. Big picture, the UK may have made an utter Horlicks of its putative withdrawal from the European Union because Britain should never have come to the EU with a begging bowl in the first place. Walking out first and reverting coolly to WTO rules, the UK might have negotiated from a position of strength. You don’t slap a party in the face, only to implore that same party for special favours while his face is still smarting. Big surprise, the strategy has been unavailing.

Hindsight aside, the biggest mistake the UK continues to make is to naively accept the EU’s opening construct. As I noted in November, rather than rejecting outright the legitimacy of any ‘divorce bill’, when the UK has been a generous net contributor for nearly all of its 40 years’ membership, Theresa May immediately leapt to haggle over how much. This government has consistently failed to question the underlying assumptions on which differences of opinion are founded. The EU has been setting the terms. The terms are all.

So let’s look at this Irish border matter. We’re given to believe that there absolutely mustn’t be a ‘hard border’ between Northern Ireland and the Republic. Thus we have May and her minions disappearing up their own arses trying to define what exactly constitutes this ‘hard border’ and anguishing about whether cameras count. An absence of ‘infrastructure’ along a boundary that, in legal terms, is already about as hard as it can get — between two entirely different countries — is ‘enshrined’ (that would be the EU and its Irish lapdog’s worshipful adjective of choice, enshrined) in the Good Friday Agreement.

But the GFA is not holy writ. It is a highly flawed accord, negotiated by mortal and often morally tainted antagonists in a state of late-night frenzy. It is not a set of eternal laws to live by dictated to Abraham from the Lord Thy God on Mount Sinai. Now 20 years old, the agreement could be regarded as having already served its purpose: getting the island’s excitable elements to stop killing each other. I’m not suggesting we chuck the thing. But that document was put together in different political circumstances: both nations entering into the agreement were members of the EU. Now one of them is leaving. If the document cannot accommodate this modification, something is wrong with the document, not with the historical change. For people and paper alike, the key to survival is adaptation.

The GFA itself was full of dubious compromises and exceptions — the wholesale release of prisoners, including murderers who’d served mere months; the unprecedented granting to one nation of political say in the sovereign affairs of another — all in the service of expedience. If the GFA is possible, so are a few freaking cameras between Newry and Dundalk.

Next: the policing of any national border involves entities on either side. On the British side of this one, May has been clear from the outset that the UK has no interest in heavy-handed customs or immigration enforcement. That is what is called ‘the UK’s business’.

There being once again such a thing as ‘the UK’s business’ is what Brexit is all about. Whatever happens on the Republic’s side of the border is the EU’s business.

Yet supping from that begging bowl — please, sir, may I have some more? — addles the brain. Staggeringly, the EU has persuaded the PM that the EU’s prosecution of a member state’s border is her problem. May’s offer to collect the bloc’s own tariffs, and subject importers to torturous ‘rebates’, constitutes abasement. Insofar as it is a problem, that border is the EU’s problem. Trump can put up his silly wall on the US side of its southern perimeter, but even the Donald wouldn’t presume to dictate procedure on the Mexican side. It’s therefore not up to May to concoct a ‘solution’ to a problem she need not recognise and need not own.

Moreover, the EU’s professed helplessness in the face of its own bureaucracy is fake. Eurocrats make all manner of exceptions to their own laws when it suits them. (For years, Brussels has turned a blind eye to Russia’s political manipulation of energy prices to different member states, in flagrant violation of EU law. Germany gets a sweetheart deal, so who cares if the Poles are screwed?) Michel Barnier’s obduracy about the rules regarding external borders is a pose, just like his concern for ‘peace’. That guy doesn’t give a rat’s ass about Northern Ireland.

Lastly: what is the unspeakable consequence of a ‘hard border’? Chris Patten likened tinkering with Northern Irish border arrangements to carrying ‘a can of petrol and a box of matches’. Who’d light the petrol? Supposedly, IRA retrogrades, with Sinn Fein cheering them on.

Doesn’t this sound horribly familiar? It’s the same old blackmail. If one customs official checks a single boot for smuggled cigarettes, then it’s back to Tube station bombings in London. Really? I don’t find that credible. But I do find the fearful reasoning repellent. We’re supposed to stay in the customs union — and the single market, and why not the EU while we’re at it — and thus defy the democratic wishes of the British electorate, just because we’re still afraid of Sinn Fein? I’m sorry, but those losers don’t scare me anymore.

This whole conundrum is contrived. May needs to tell Barnier that the Irish border is his problem, since we don’t have one. With a nominal volume of trade, the border is sortable. For policy should be a slave to purpose, not the other way around. When bureaucracy goes wrong — look at the Home Office — it is a slave to itself. Agreements, rules, laws — they’re all malleable, mere methods by which we accomplish our aims. Alas, the UK’s aim is to escape the EU, and the EU’s aim is to stop us.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/the-irish-border-is-the-eus-problem-not-ours/
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
They're already colluding with the big orange one.

You globalist commienazis would know toots...
;)
Those of us of Irish descent know eu trash when we see it.

Have a trutatoe doood!

WE LOVE seeing the brits get a taste of their own colonialism, just to find out it was NEVER their colonial rulership at all ( The brits were always just "trusties" ), they were just an agent for the same forces that are now doing it to them.