A Brexit-driven reconfiguration of the UK’s food and agricultural sector suggests that a period of significant transformation lies ahead; but if mapped successfully, can be a positive one.
Richard Ferguson, 21st June 2017
The possibility of a Brexit-driven reconfiguration of the UK’s food and agricultural sector suggests that a period of significant transformation and structural adjustment lies ahead. Set against an industry already in the midst of rapid technological displacement, value-chain disruption and regulatory change, a transformative event such as Brexit appears to add to existing uncertainty.
However, while the potential institutional, financial and operating frameworks that will arise from Brexit suggest a wide range of possible outcomes, the process, if mapped successfully, can be a positive one. The UK’s current position is not unique. In the 1980s, the government of New Zealand instigated a reform programme to transform the country’s food and agriculture sector, the results of which were immediate and painful as well as long-term and beneficial.
Unveiling a Reflection paper on the future of the EU’s finances, EU budget commissioner Günther Oettinger warned that the “gap in the EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities needs to be clearly acknowledged.” He warned that the EU is “going to be down €10bn-12bn in our budget once the UK departs, so we cannot act as if it is business as usual. We need to be shifting expenditure and making cuts…But making cuts is not enough,” adding, “If Europe is to tackle new challenges, the money must come from somewhere. We can either spend less or find new revenues.”
The paper sets out five “scenarios” including reducsing the budget, establishing a system where additional budgets are made available by some Member States for the areas where they decide to do more, and a “radical redesign.”
Source: European Commission press release , Financial Times
Amidst yesterday’s talk of ‘implementation periods’ and ‘transitional arrangements’ following the UK’s exit from the EU, Theresa May was handed the opportunity to make a pronouncement on the matter yesterday when Brexiteer Tory backbencher, William Wragg, asked her about it at Prime Minister’s Questions. The Prime Minister reiterated that her Article 50 letter raised the prospect of the possible need for an implementation period but was explicit in saying that this would not mean an “unlimited transitional phase”. Click here to watch the exchange for yourself.
Patrick O’Flynn has been UKIP MEP for the East of England since 2014 and all views expressed are his personal views.
Above all other politicians, Chancellors of the Exchequer must take care to calibrate their words carefully. Any lapse into hyperbole can set off speculative reactions that destabilise the economy. They must aim to appear serene on the surface even when their legs are paddling like crazy below the waterline.So what on earth was Philip Hammond up to when he went on The Andrew Marr Show earlier this month and declared that leaving the EU without a formal deal would be a “very, very bad result for Britain”?By using such a phrase, Mr Hammond made matters much more difficult for his Cabinet colleague David Davis, whose job it is to actually reach agreement with Brussels on the terms of our departure. Mr Hammond in effect sought to turn Mr Davis into that salesman’s dream: a customer who has advertised at the outset that he cannot leave the showroom without making a purchase. Continue reading →
Italy’s migrant welcome centers are in a state of “collapse” as huge waves of African migrants take advantage of the temperate climate to make the crossing from Libya to the Italian peninsula.
On Tuesday, 8,500 African migrants are reaching Italian shores aboard 14 different ships, adding to the 5,000 who arrived on Monday. The massive arrivals have led local media as well as politicians to speak of an authentic immigrant “invasion” exceeding the country’s capacity of assimilation.
Speaking exclusively to Westmonster, Whittle said he wants to lead a “cultural movement” which doesn’t shy away from talking about subjects the other parties are afraid of even discussing.
Whittle, who leads UKIP’s group on the London Assembly, told Westmonster that the party is needed now “more than ever before”. He pointed out how there is a very real possibility of a complete undermining of Brexit and that on other issues such as historical levels of migration, “UKIP are the only party that actually really talks about these things”.
Express Headline: RIPPED OFF AGAIN: EU splurges on building projects…and guess how much Britain’s getting?
BRITAIN was yet again on the wrong end of an EU funding decision today as it emerged the country will barely benefit at all from a £2.4 billion Brussels splurge designed to upgrade the continent’s infrastructure.
Cast your mind back to before the general election. Theresa May was governing with authority. The centre-right press was fully behind her. The anti-Brexit coalition that stretched from trade union leaders through Keir Starmer through Tim Farron through the CBI to Philip Hammond was cowed – and balanced out by pro-Brexit forces such as, most credibly, Vote Leave’s successor organisation, Change Britain. This was able to send talented backbenchers, such as Gisela Stuart on the Labour side and Michael Gove on the Conservative one, into the TV studios and onto the airwaves. The Tory European Research Group, marshalled via WhatsApp by Steve Baker, was working productively with Ministers.
EU Parliament multinational transparency vote introduces ‘commercial confidentiality’ loophole
This last minute amendment “makes the text about as watertight as a sponge,”according to Elena Gaita of Transparency International EU. TJN’s John Christensen commented:
“For decades so-called ‘commercial sensitivity’ has been used as a pretext for hiding all sorts of shenanigans and dodgy deals with tax havens. Economic liberals within the European Parliament are confusing genuine competition between companies on price and quality of service with false competition based on special tax treatments and rent-seeking behaviour.”