Big suppliers to UK most affected by hard Brexit

The Netherlands, along with Ireland and Germany, have been identified as the member states with the most to lose from a hard Brexit.

This is because they are big suppliers to the UK, and so would be hit hard by tariffs set at World Trade Organisation levels after a hard Brexit.

A figure for the Dutch losses has been set at 500 million euro a year, equivalent to a 2% drop in agricultural revenues. This would mainly affect beef, poultry and cheese.

The report says a negotiated deal for the UK, effectively maintaining single market rules, would avoid these losses for the Dutch economy.

Meanwhile the European Commission has drawn up a 950 million euro target list for retaliation if the US imposes tariffs on steel. All the products being targeted are food and drink, led by bourbon whisky.

Defra minister Michael Gove has promised to deliver worldbeating animal welfare standards after Brexit, but the EC appears to have pulled ahead in this area.

It is committed to a series of ‘reference centres’ to promote higher welfare standards. It has begun with pigs, where it says the case for action is greatest. This involves a joint operation by a consortium of research institutes in the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark.

They will provide advice and practical assistance to member states in implementing new and existing policies. .

This also underlines that post-Brexit UK universities and other research bodies will not be eligible to be part of joint programmes, since EU research funds must be spent within member states.

EU member states have moved further on agreeing a future shape for the CAP. A draft proposal from the Bulgarian presidency was deemed to represent a good foundation for debate.

This does not mean there are no disagreements. Some of the paymaster member states, including the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark, called for a greater market focus, rather than assuming member states will cover the drop in the EU budget from the UK’s departure.

There were also calls from member states in the opposite position – net funding beneficiaries – for greater fairness and convergence in the proposals. These were predictable positions, and the long slog starts now to find a compromise.

Without Brexit this would have been a frustrating process for the UK, since there is less support than it would have wanted for more economic reality. Those who want this will miss the UK’s traditional role in driving this thinking.

Greenpeace have upped the stakes in the battle over the environment, with a warning that climate change will only be averted if there is a reduction in livestock production.

It says the target should be a 50% cut by 2050. Their case lacks robust scientific evidence, making it an unlikely prospect.

But it does mean farmers will be on the defensive in the debate about what measures will be included in post-Brexit plans to switch UK support from food production to environmental delivery.

The EC has drawn up a 950 million euro target list for retaliation if the US imposes tariffs on steel

Dutch losses from a hard Brexit would mainly affect cheese, poultry and beef.