“Has the Brexit fishing promise come true?”

BBC News Reality Check

6th February 2023

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/64430216

Since leaving the EU, the major Scottish fishing port of Peterhead has been the main beneficiary of the Brexit fishing deal with the EU. Everywhere else has seen negligible gains or mostly losses and increased red tape.

Advertisement

“Brexit could be reversed — here’s howOpinion is shifting but the public are running ahead of the politicians”GIDEON RACHMAN Chief Foreign Affairs Commenter

Financial Times

6th February 2023

https://www.ft.com/content/0d195d46-b348-4325-824f-c33889bb2cc0?fbclid=IwAR1aF6LaSKD5MfrTTKepPACtv7g3vGePwBq7g8DCJoIZYLMFIx2XVKPLjBA

Those that won the civil war ended up losing. King Charles I was executed in 1649. Eleven years later, the English decided they had made a mistake and restored the monarchy. Could a similar reversal happen with Brexit?

This articles looks at reversing Brexit. It claims that the five main political groupings in the EU Parliament would all favour British re-entry.

Brexit Is Costing the UK £100 Billion a Year in Lost Output

By

Andrew Atkinson

January 31, 2023, 1:00 AM UTC

Bloomberg Economics

Outside the Paywall

https://archive.ph/2023.01.31-140913/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-31/brexit-is-costing-the-uk-100-billion-a-year-in-lost-output

An analysis by Bloomberg Economics finds three years after Britain left the European Union, Brexit is costing the UK economy £100 billion a year ($124 billion), with the effects spanning everything from business investment to the ability of companies to hire workers.

My 32nd letter to James Sunderland MP for Bracknell and his reply

18th January 2023

I’ve had a reply from James Sunderland MP for Bracknell to my 32nd letter to him.

Dear Mr Enga,

Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

I am sympathetic to your views in retaining the best bits of EU Legislation. The Government has already provided public assurance that they will keep those laws which protect individuals and their safety. You are right that these key laws should be kept to an equivalent bar or higher. I will of course scrutinise accordingly once they have released the detail of the Bill.

I want to assure you that this is an exciting opportunity for the UK in that it allows us to define what we want to be in the post-Brexit world. There is no suggestion of watering down the safeguards we already have and I would be unlikely as an entirely pragmatic and balanced MP to support that anyway. As PPS to the Home Secretary I will be unable to sign any amendments to the Bill but this will not preclude me from making sure that no key civil rights or liberties will be encroached upon and that the Bill will deliver for Bracknell.

I will, of course, continue to monitor the situation and act accordingly.

Thank you once again for taking the time to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

p.p., Adam Bell
James Sunderland MP
Member of Parliament for the Bracknell Constituency
Bracknell, Crowthorne, Finchampstead, Sandhurst and Wokingham

My letter

Tuesday 17 January 2023

Dear James Sunderland,

I am writing about my concerns about the Retained EU Law Bill, that I see as dismantling regulations and standards protecting our environment, food quality and workers’ rights.

I want the Government to:-

• Provide a legally binding guarantee that they won’t slash our standards or drop EU laws which positively builds on our established regulations and standards;

• Commit to retaining or improving key legislation on wildlife protection, animal welfare, employment rights, environmental protections, food standards;

• Engage openly and transparently with third-sector organisations that are raising concerns about the implications of divergence in these areas, and;

• Remove clauses that allow Ministers to change the law without adequate democratic and parliamentary scrutiny;

This bill threatens up to 4,000 pieces of legislation. It has been described as “Reckless”. The government’s independent regulation watchdog, the regulatory policy committee (RPC), has looked at the impact assessment for the plans and described it as “not fit for purpose”.

I have yet to see why I would need this Bill, why I would want those retained EU laws removed or anything to explain why the replacement or lack of replacement, actually benefits me or anyone else.

I strongly ask you to vote against this Bill and explain why and how you think you know what you’re voting for, instead of what you’re voting against.

Yours sincerely,

Terry Enga

The impact of Brexit, in chartsHow has leaving the EU affected Britain?

The Economist 3rd January 2023

Outside the Paywall

https://archive.ph/2023.01.03-185051/https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/03/the-impact-of-brexit-in-charts

John Springford, Centre for European Reform, a think-tank, tries to isolate the effect of Brexit by constructing a phantom country that tracked Britain’s performance before 2016’s referendum result.

He estimates that by the second quarter of 2022, Brexit had hit GDP by as much as 6% relative to this counterfactual. Using the same method, he reckons that Brexit dragged down investment by 11%.

The impact of Brexit, in chartsHow has leaving the EU affected Britain?

The Economist 3rd January 2023

Outside the Paywall

https://archive.ph/2023.01.03-185051/https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/03/the-impact-of-brexit-in-charts

John Springford, Centre for European Reform, a think-tank, tries to isolate the effect of Brexit by constructing a phantom country that tracked Britain’s performance before 2016’s referendum result.

He estimates that by the second quarter of 2022, Brexit had hit GDP by as much as 6% relative to this counterfactual. Using the same method, he reckons that Brexit dragged down investment by 11%.

The reply from James Sunderland MP for Bracknell to my 32nd Letter to him.

Dear Mr Enga,

Thank you for contacting me about the Elections Act 2022 and its provisions for introducing voter id. I must state that I reject any claims you make that this is an attempt at voter suppression. This is a vital piece of legislation to protect our democratic process and streamline how voting is conducted.

The public must have confidence that our elections are secure and fit for the 21st century. Asking voters to bring identification to their polling station is an important way of achieving this and the Elections Act puts such a requirement into law. This is part of a wider package of measures in the Elections Act to strengthen electoral integrity – including by tackling postal and proxy voting fraud, tackling intimidation, increasing transparency of digital campaigning, and preventing foreign interference in elections.

Identification to vote has been backed by the Electoral Commission and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, which state that its absence is a security risk. Without a requirement for identification at the polling station, it is harder to take out a library book or collect a parcel at a post office than it is to vote in someone else’s name.

In Northern Ireland voters have been required to produce personal identification before voting in polling stations since 1985, with photographic identification being required since 2003 when introduced by the last Labour Government. Ministers at the time noted that “the Government have no intention of taking away people’s democratic right to vote. If we believed that thousands of voters would not be able to vote because of this measure, we would not be introducing it at this time.”

Anyone without a form of identification will be able to apply for a new free Voter Authority Certificate – meaning that no voter will be disenfranchised. Ministers assure me that this system will be in operation in good time ahead of the implementation of voter identification. The Electoral Commission will also be delivering a national communications campaign for voter identification.

I am pleased that constituents such as yourself monitor my voting record and am always happy to answer queries about what I vote for and likewise do not vote for. I am always mindful of Bracknell in my voting and believe that this was an important measure for our collective electoral future.

Thank you once again for taking the time and effort to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

p.p., Niall Hawkins
James Sunderland MP
Member of Parliament for the Bracknell Constituency
Bracknell, Crowthorne, Finchampstead, Sandhurst and Wokingham Without


From: Terence Enga fyr-g77wq6k62v_q5mg6fosrnq46fret7y@writetothem.com
Sent: 13 December 2022 14:43
To: SUNDERLAND, James james.sunderland.mp@parliament.uk
Subject: Letter from your constituent Terence Enga

Tuesday 13 December 2022

Dear James Sunderland,

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year and hope you manage to
get some time to relax with family and friends over the holidays.

I noticed that last night you voted for the Elections Act 2022 which
most people are calling the Voter ID Bill. This will introduce the
requirement to show photo ID at UK Parliamentary elections. I am not
aware of any significant voter identity fraud at previous UK elections
and with a Government scrambling to make savings in public expenditure,
this Act seems expensive and unnecessary.

However, I am mainly concerned that the Act’s real purpose is to weight
future elections, by discouraging voters the Government think will not
vote for them. To me they do this by allowing more ID options for the
elderly than the young. The young are already familiar with ID for
their purchases or venue entry. The Act permits “An Older Person’s Bus
Pass”, “An Oyster 60+ Card” and “A Freedom Pass”, while not allowing
“18+ Student Oyster Cards”, “National Railcards”, or “Student ID
Cards”.

You voted down The House of Lords Amendment allowing these additional
ID cards. This looks so much like a blatant attempt at Voter
Suppression with the Young Voter in particular being handicapped. I’m
puzzled though, about your vote for this Act. You represent a town with
one of the largest population growth rates in England. Many of these
newcomers will be just the young, that this Act will harm most. Our
Town is not an Old Population Town. In fact your vote harms your own
voters. Did you think this through?

Bad legislation tends to get replaced or removed and you must know,
this Act almost certainly won’t survive the next Government. Will it do
enough to change the next election outcome? I doubt it. What it will do
is make things harder for many legitimate voters and cost a lot of
money that could be used better elsewhere.

You might think your voting record isn’t noticed. Please don’t. I
know.

Yours sincerely,

Terry Enga

601d1a9b10114a20ad28/d49123865b32849b127a
(Signed with an electronic signature in accordance with section 7(3) of
the Electronic Communications Act 2000.)

[ This message was sent by WriteToThem.com. If you have had any
problems receiving this message, please email support@writetothem.com
and we’ll get back to you. See http://www.writetothem.com for more details
about the service. We have sent this email to
james.sunderland.mp@parliament.uk; if this address is out of date
please email us so that we can update our records. ]
UK Parliament Disclaimer: this e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This e-mail address is not secure, is not encrypted and should not be used for sensitive data.

My 32nd Letter to James Sunderland MP for Bracknell

13th December 2022

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9187/

Dear James Sunderland,

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year and hope you manage to get some time to relax with family and friends over the holidays.

I noticed that last night you voted for the Elections Act 2022 which most people are calling the Voter ID Bill. This will introduce the requirement to show photo ID at UK Parliamentary elections. I am not aware of any significant voter identity fraud at previous UK elections and with a Government scrambling to make savings in public expenditure, this Act seems expensive and unnecessary.

However, I am mainly concerned that the Act’s real purpose is to weight future elections, by discouraging voters the Government think will not vote for them. To me they do this by allowing more ID options for the elderly than the young. The young are already familiar with ID for their purchases or venue entry. The Act permits “An Older Person’s Bus Pass”, “An Oyster 60+ Card” and “A Freedom Pass”, while not allowing “18+ Student Oyster Cards”, “National Railcards”, or “Student ID Cards”.

You voted down The House of Lords Amendment allowing these additional ID cards. This looks so much like a blatant attempt at Voter Suppression with the Young Voter in particular being handicapped. I’m puzzled though, about your vote for this Act. You represent a town with one of the largest population growth rates in England. Many of these newcomers will be just the young, that this Act will harm most. Our Town is not an Old Population Town. In fact your vote harms your own voters. Did you think this through?

Bad legislation tends to get replaced or removed and you must know, this Act almost certainly won’t survive the next Government. Will it do enough to change the next election outcome? I doubt it. What it will do is make things harder for many legitimate voters and cost a lot of money that could be used better elsewhere.

You might think your voting record isn’t noticed. Please don’t. I know.

Yours sincerely,

Terry Enga

How three Bills now before Parliament tell us the story of Brexit7th December 2022

https://davidallengreen.com/2022/12/how-three-bills-now-before-parliament-tells-us-the-story-of-brexit/

DavidAllenGreen.com

Here is a story about three Bills.

The Bills are not chaps called William, but legislative proposals placed before the Westminster parliament by the government of the United Kingdom.

Taken individually – and especially taken together – these three Bills tell a tale.

They tell the story of Brexit.

EU tentatively agrees $60 price cap on Russian seaborne oilBy Jan Strupczewski and Kate Abnett

Reuters: 1st December 2022

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/eu-agrees-60-barrel-price-cap-russian-seaborne-oil-eu-diplomat-2022-12-01/

EU governments have tentatively agreed on a $60 a barrel price cap on Russian seaborne oil, with an adjustment mechanism to keep the cap at 5% below the market price. This has still to be agreed by all the EU governments.

This just shows how isolated the UK has become since Brexit. We huff and puff, but where was our input. What is very obviously important to us, especially with the Cost of Living crisis, the sky rocketing energy prices here, yet we are helpless. The EU though has real influence and can force Russia’s Gand on this.