WEBVTT - Covid Forced the World to Change in Ways We May Keep

0:00:05.640 --> 0:00:09.119
<v Speaker 1>Hello, and welcome to Stephanomics, the podcast that brings the

0:00:09.119 --> 0:00:12.360
<v Speaker 1>global economy to you. The smart heard among You will

0:00:12.400 --> 0:00:15.720
<v Speaker 1>have noticed I'm not Stephanie Flanders. In fact, I'm Tom Warlick,

0:00:15.840 --> 0:00:19.360
<v Speaker 1>chief economist at Bloomberg. Stephanie is taking a break this week,

0:00:19.400 --> 0:00:22.400
<v Speaker 1>and in a rare display of poor judgment, left me

0:00:22.480 --> 0:00:26.239
<v Speaker 1>to mind the shop. Now. There haven't been many benefits

0:00:26.239 --> 0:00:28.720
<v Speaker 1>from the COVID crisis, but one that is hard to

0:00:28.760 --> 0:00:31.360
<v Speaker 1>deny has been that the planet has been given a

0:00:31.360 --> 0:00:34.520
<v Speaker 1>bit of a breather. Carbon emissions are expected to fall

0:00:34.560 --> 0:00:37.879
<v Speaker 1>in twenty for the first time since the Great Financial Crisis,

0:00:38.479 --> 0:00:41.959
<v Speaker 1>and marine biologists tell us that whales and other aquatic

0:00:42.040 --> 0:00:44.479
<v Speaker 1>life are getting to hear themselves think for a change

0:00:45.400 --> 0:00:48.159
<v Speaker 1>in those respects, at least, we don't really want to

0:00:48.200 --> 0:00:50.600
<v Speaker 1>go back to the way things were about how to

0:00:50.680 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>do it? Bloomberg's own Michell jam risco as a story

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:58.000
<v Speaker 1>this week explaining how some of Southeast Asia's tourist hotspots

0:00:58.160 --> 0:01:01.600
<v Speaker 1>are trying to answer that question. We also have senior

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:06.400
<v Speaker 1>UK economist Dan Hansen on Brexit and Dave Rank, America's

0:01:06.440 --> 0:01:09.720
<v Speaker 1>former top diplomat in China, on high relations between the

0:01:09.760 --> 0:01:13.160
<v Speaker 1>world's two biggest powers might look under a Biden administration.

0:01:13.440 --> 0:01:16.240
<v Speaker 1>But first of all, here's Michelle with a view from

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:29.920
<v Speaker 1>Thailand's tourist authority. These feelings are waiting for you to

0:01:30.040 --> 0:01:36.360
<v Speaker 1>come back from the north. That's the appeal from the

0:01:36.400 --> 0:01:40.200
<v Speaker 1>Tourism Authority of Thailand, a country that typically owes one

0:01:40.319 --> 0:01:43.480
<v Speaker 1>fifth of its economy to tourism. Thailand has seen its

0:01:43.520 --> 0:01:46.400
<v Speaker 1>growth protects fall apart this year with travel shut down

0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:50.400
<v Speaker 1>amid the global pandemic. Yet even as Southeast Asia's second

0:01:50.400 --> 0:01:53.200
<v Speaker 1>biggest economy is doing what it can to bring visitors back,

0:01:53.840 --> 0:01:56.440
<v Speaker 1>it's also doubling down on a rare victor in the pandemic.

0:01:56.800 --> 0:02:01.120
<v Speaker 1>The environment. The country has seen normally packed beaches get

0:02:01.120 --> 0:02:06.240
<v Speaker 1>a reprieve, elephants roam freely, and endangered species pepper lonely shorelines.

0:02:07.400 --> 0:02:11.840
<v Speaker 1>That's prompted Thailand's Environmental Minister, Barrow Silva Archa to dust

0:02:11.880 --> 0:02:17.120
<v Speaker 1>off a decades old dream. Now, by government decree, Thailand's

0:02:17.200 --> 0:02:19.399
<v Speaker 1>national parks will be required to close for at least

0:02:19.440 --> 0:02:22.919
<v Speaker 1>a couple of months every year. That gives mother nature

0:02:22.960 --> 0:02:25.320
<v Speaker 1>the chance to regularly get the sort of virus era

0:02:25.400 --> 0:02:30.000
<v Speaker 1>rehabilitation that's been a silver lining for an otherwise disastrous

0:02:31.440 --> 0:02:37.560
<v Speaker 1>cod COVID nineteen is a big knock on the door.

0:02:38.000 --> 0:02:40.560
<v Speaker 1>That is time for you to adjust your way of life.

0:02:40.800 --> 0:02:43.440
<v Speaker 1>If you don't adjust, mother nature will do it for you.

0:02:44.280 --> 0:02:47.959
<v Speaker 1>The disease is the result of humans upsetting balance in nature.

0:02:48.639 --> 0:02:52.320
<v Speaker 1>Everything has repercussions. We have to find balance and should

0:02:52.440 --> 0:02:55.120
<v Speaker 1>use this pandemic as a lesson that we have to

0:02:55.200 --> 0:02:58.640
<v Speaker 1>protect nature before it's too late. We have to realize

0:02:58.639 --> 0:03:05.120
<v Speaker 1>it's a very see of the damage we've cost. The

0:03:05.120 --> 0:03:07.720
<v Speaker 1>coronavirus pandemic has been a wake up call too many.

0:03:08.639 --> 0:03:11.280
<v Speaker 1>Amid the horrors of sickness, the terrible death toll, and

0:03:11.320 --> 0:03:15.120
<v Speaker 1>the devastation of economies, it's prompted people, businesses, and governments

0:03:15.160 --> 0:03:19.000
<v Speaker 1>across the globe to rethink the way they live and operate. Now,

0:03:19.040 --> 0:03:21.800
<v Speaker 1>as countries try to take their first steps back toward normality,

0:03:22.400 --> 0:03:25.040
<v Speaker 1>many are reassessing and wondering what elements of the COVID

0:03:25.080 --> 0:03:27.600
<v Speaker 1>world they might actually want to keep even after the

0:03:27.639 --> 0:03:31.960
<v Speaker 1>crisis has passed. On the Thai Island destination of cocamt

0:03:32.400 --> 0:03:35.640
<v Speaker 1>which forms part of a marine national park, businesses are

0:03:35.640 --> 0:03:39.360
<v Speaker 1>weighing the government's message on sustainable tourism against their simple

0:03:39.440 --> 0:03:55.120
<v Speaker 1>desperation to have visitors backs. I've lived here for modern tas,

0:03:55.960 --> 0:04:01.160
<v Speaker 1>I've never seen the that Skalawan Kumnum also known as Petch.

0:04:02.000 --> 0:04:04.320
<v Speaker 1>He's a fire dance performer who also owns a bar.

0:04:04.600 --> 0:04:08.680
<v Speaker 1>It is the rule that looks good on paper, but

0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:14.240
<v Speaker 1>in reality, especially for small business populate does who have

0:04:14.400 --> 0:04:22.480
<v Speaker 1>rent to pay would be devastating. Before the pandemic struck,

0:04:22.800 --> 0:04:25.520
<v Speaker 1>cosimt was well known for its nightlife and party scene,

0:04:25.520 --> 0:04:28.440
<v Speaker 1>which profited from the hordes of visitors to the island's idyllic,

0:04:28.480 --> 0:04:32.640
<v Speaker 1>white sand beaches. One afternoon earlier this month, only a

0:04:32.680 --> 0:04:35.120
<v Speaker 1>few visitors walked on the shoreline of the newly pristine

0:04:35.200 --> 0:04:38.719
<v Speaker 1>main beach, talking to locals from the beach front papayas

0:04:38.720 --> 0:04:42.880
<v Speaker 1>salad vendors to bar workers like Wichion Jong. Everyone worries

0:04:42.880 --> 0:04:45.599
<v Speaker 1>how they will survive if there are more months without tourists,

0:04:46.680 --> 0:04:50.040
<v Speaker 1>which who tends the Naga bar on the island thinks

0:04:50.040 --> 0:04:51.880
<v Speaker 1>he might even have to leave the country to find

0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:55.320
<v Speaker 1>employment and pay the bills during the closure. It's one,

0:04:59.240 --> 0:05:02.520
<v Speaker 1>there are two se Some agree with the closures because

0:05:02.520 --> 0:05:06.279
<v Speaker 1>he's during the low season, but some said the closure

0:05:06.320 --> 0:05:17.360
<v Speaker 1>will mean no income for them. Saren tip To Monks,

0:05:18.000 --> 0:05:21.599
<v Speaker 1>president of the Islands Tourism Association, says there was already

0:05:21.640 --> 0:05:23.880
<v Speaker 1>a tangle with government officials on the duration of the

0:05:23.880 --> 0:05:26.960
<v Speaker 1>annual closures, which the ministry first wanted to be four

0:05:27.040 --> 0:05:30.599
<v Speaker 1>months long. Businesses are calling for a waiver from the

0:05:30.640 --> 0:05:34.440
<v Speaker 1>closures altogether. They argue that an annual shutdown would inflict

0:05:34.520 --> 0:05:38.240
<v Speaker 1>yet more pain on the islands residents after the pandemic

0:05:38.279 --> 0:05:45.720
<v Speaker 1>already decimated trade Hawaii will affect us for sure. Don't

0:05:45.720 --> 0:05:50.880
<v Speaker 1>forget that this archipelago isn't just some uninhabited islands. There

0:05:50.880 --> 0:05:54.320
<v Speaker 1>are people living on God Summit, so if they close,

0:05:54.600 --> 0:05:57.880
<v Speaker 1>there will be an impact. At first, they wanted to

0:05:57.880 --> 0:06:00.880
<v Speaker 1>close the park for four months. We've asked them to

0:06:00.920 --> 0:06:03.960
<v Speaker 1>cut it back to two months, but really we don't

0:06:03.960 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 1>want them to close at all. Who will be responsible

0:06:07.560 --> 0:06:12.760
<v Speaker 1>for our jobs, income and livelihoods For tourism businesses. If

0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:15.960
<v Speaker 1>there's no clients at all for just two or three weeks,

0:06:16.360 --> 0:06:21.040
<v Speaker 1>we'll feel the pain already because there are expenses. People

0:06:21.080 --> 0:06:23.840
<v Speaker 1>here on the island are already taking care of the environment.

0:06:24.240 --> 0:06:28.240
<v Speaker 1>Otherwise we wouldn't be here today. Nobody is here to

0:06:28.279 --> 0:06:37.520
<v Speaker 1>destroy the island. They need to rethink this. Coosamt was

0:06:37.560 --> 0:06:41.159
<v Speaker 1>once a modest fishing village, then it exploded into a

0:06:41.200 --> 0:06:45.400
<v Speaker 1>magnet for European visitors and backpackers. It's only getting tourists

0:06:45.400 --> 0:06:47.800
<v Speaker 1>by the handfuls these days, though, and even then it's

0:06:47.880 --> 0:06:52.080
<v Speaker 1>usually locals visiting on the weekends with borders still largely

0:06:52.080 --> 0:06:55.160
<v Speaker 1>closed in a special tourism visa only just being offered now.

0:06:55.800 --> 0:06:58.640
<v Speaker 1>Thailand's efforts to revive the industry have relied on getting

0:06:58.640 --> 0:07:02.760
<v Speaker 1>that domestic travel churning again. They've even tried offering high

0:07:02.800 --> 0:07:07.200
<v Speaker 1>roller packages to push wealthier travelers to depleted resorts, but

0:07:07.279 --> 0:07:09.520
<v Speaker 1>these have been met with limited success and are no

0:07:09.680 --> 0:07:12.920
<v Speaker 1>match for Thai tourism's ban or year of when it

0:07:12.960 --> 0:07:15.320
<v Speaker 1>took in more than sixty billion dollars in revenue from

0:07:15.360 --> 0:07:19.760
<v Speaker 1>about forty million foreign visitors. There's a heated debate in

0:07:19.800 --> 0:07:22.880
<v Speaker 1>the business world about how hard to push sustainability tourism

0:07:22.960 --> 0:07:27.040
<v Speaker 1>right now. If you don't prioritize it, you risk overstressing

0:07:27.080 --> 0:07:30.120
<v Speaker 1>popular destinations and ruining what visitors came to enjoy in

0:07:30.160 --> 0:07:33.480
<v Speaker 1>the first place. But push too hard and only the

0:07:33.560 --> 0:07:36.080
<v Speaker 1>very wealthiest will be able to frequent these beautiful corners

0:07:36.080 --> 0:07:38.920
<v Speaker 1>of the earth, crushing local mom and pop firms that

0:07:38.960 --> 0:07:44.480
<v Speaker 1>rely on mass tourism. McKinsey and Company partner Steve Saxon

0:07:44.520 --> 0:07:46.560
<v Speaker 1>has spent the past decade and a half watching the

0:07:46.600 --> 0:07:50.480
<v Speaker 1>fast evolving tourism landscape and Asia, including a long building

0:07:50.480 --> 0:07:52.720
<v Speaker 1>debate on how many visitors might mean too much of

0:07:52.720 --> 0:07:56.720
<v Speaker 1>a good thing. What we called over tourism before was

0:07:56.760 --> 0:08:00.800
<v Speaker 1>never actually any good for anybody. The toys themselves didn't

0:08:00.840 --> 0:08:03.680
<v Speaker 1>enjoy going to crowded places where they couldn't enjoy the

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:06.200
<v Speaker 1>natural beauty or see the sites because there were just

0:08:06.280 --> 0:08:09.960
<v Speaker 1>too many other tourists, and in some cases this even

0:08:10.160 --> 0:08:15.280
<v Speaker 1>started to frustrate the local residents. Higher end or more

0:08:15.320 --> 0:08:18.480
<v Speaker 1>affluent tourism does support a bit more in terms of

0:08:18.600 --> 0:08:22.760
<v Speaker 1>jobs and in terms of GDP. However, in terms of

0:08:22.760 --> 0:08:27.080
<v Speaker 1>flights coming in hotel rooms you need, that's dependent on

0:08:27.120 --> 0:08:30.480
<v Speaker 1>the number of guests. The focus needs to be on

0:08:30.520 --> 0:08:33.959
<v Speaker 1>how do we bring back the quantity and improve the

0:08:34.040 --> 0:08:38.000
<v Speaker 1>quality at the same time. Thailand isn't alone in its dilemma,

0:08:38.600 --> 0:08:42.360
<v Speaker 1>especially in Southeast Asia, whose travel and tourism industries account

0:08:42.400 --> 0:08:45.719
<v Speaker 1>for over one tenth of the region's GDP and its employment.

0:08:46.360 --> 0:08:49.120
<v Speaker 1>The boom already had policymakers thinking about how to make

0:08:49.120 --> 0:08:53.280
<v Speaker 1>sure these gains were sustainable. As in Thailand, the Philippines

0:08:53.360 --> 0:08:55.880
<v Speaker 1>is now making the environment a bigger part of that conversation.

0:08:56.679 --> 0:09:01.680
<v Speaker 1>It's become a sort of grassroots movement. Take Alamino's home

0:09:01.720 --> 0:09:05.760
<v Speaker 1>of the Hundred Islands National Park as an example. Twenty

0:09:05.840 --> 0:09:09.160
<v Speaker 1>four year old Mayor Brian Celeste is sketching plans for

0:09:09.240 --> 0:09:14.920
<v Speaker 1>longer term restrictions to foot traffic. Local scuba sureros divers

0:09:14.960 --> 0:09:18.359
<v Speaker 1>who collect garbage have been retrieving only a few kilograms

0:09:18.400 --> 0:09:21.719
<v Speaker 1>a month recently, compared with hundreds before the virus hit.

0:09:23.160 --> 0:09:25.839
<v Speaker 1>So Lestie wants to preserve those games long after COVID

0:09:25.920 --> 0:09:28.760
<v Speaker 1>nineteen has eased, and he's commissioned to study to help

0:09:28.800 --> 0:09:33.320
<v Speaker 1>local officials moderate the inflow of visitors. For me, because

0:09:34.120 --> 0:09:36.880
<v Speaker 1>under dions it's a it's a pressure, do I know,

0:09:37.720 --> 0:09:41.520
<v Speaker 1>it's a pressure to our city. So we cannot afford

0:09:41.559 --> 0:09:44.120
<v Speaker 1>to loose under dias And if we continue to over

0:09:44.200 --> 0:09:51.160
<v Speaker 1>commercialize our our and all we may stand in the

0:09:51.320 --> 0:09:55.439
<v Speaker 1>honorand so we try our best to limit, not severely

0:09:55.480 --> 0:10:01.319
<v Speaker 1>limit the man very at least to balance everything, balancing

0:10:01.360 --> 0:10:10.000
<v Speaker 1>commercialization and preservation between if you overcommercialize preserved, if you

0:10:10.120 --> 0:10:13.599
<v Speaker 1>overpreserve the kind of man An incong cities. So it

0:10:13.679 --> 0:10:16.640
<v Speaker 1>does we have to strike the balance between. We heard

0:10:16.640 --> 0:10:19.400
<v Speaker 1>a lot about balance and the course of reporting this story.

0:10:20.240 --> 0:10:24.160
<v Speaker 1>In reality, government officials are all quick to celebrate environmental gains,

0:10:24.640 --> 0:10:27.720
<v Speaker 1>the far more at odds about how to sustain them.

0:10:27.720 --> 0:10:31.199
<v Speaker 1>That's especially true during a highly fraught economic recovery, as

0:10:31.200 --> 0:10:33.440
<v Speaker 1>other problems pop up like a game of whack mole

0:10:33.679 --> 0:10:38.199
<v Speaker 1>competing for attention. Even just across Asia, there are plenty

0:10:38.200 --> 0:10:41.320
<v Speaker 1>of countries that are implementing their own environmental studies, but

0:10:41.400 --> 0:10:45.120
<v Speaker 1>prioritizing the prittying up of local attractions in preparation for

0:10:45.200 --> 0:10:49.280
<v Speaker 1>mobs of tourists to return Sri Lanka's enjoying a bit

0:10:49.320 --> 0:10:52.319
<v Speaker 1>of a boom and domestic tourism and New Zealand's authorities

0:10:52.320 --> 0:10:56.200
<v Speaker 1>are pushing the same. At Cambodia's world famous anchor Wad

0:10:56.200 --> 0:10:59.560
<v Speaker 1>Temple complex, flower beds and thousands of trees are being

0:10:59.559 --> 0:11:04.760
<v Speaker 1>planted and anticipation of the crowd's return. Mother Nature certainly

0:11:04.760 --> 0:11:08.000
<v Speaker 1>has more adoring fans these days. It'll be tough to

0:11:08.080 --> 0:11:10.720
<v Speaker 1>keep up her winning street because everyone recalibrates their lives

0:11:10.920 --> 0:11:15.360
<v Speaker 1>yet again after the pandemic. But environmental activists Billy doom

0:11:15.480 --> 0:11:20.040
<v Speaker 1>Leeing in this Philippines is upbeat. She sees businesses adapting

0:11:20.520 --> 0:11:25.000
<v Speaker 1>because they'll have to because Touristan has been closed for

0:11:25.160 --> 0:11:32.199
<v Speaker 1>so long. Um businessmen are tourists and enterprises. I detempted,

0:11:32.480 --> 0:11:37.319
<v Speaker 1>do you know, get as many people back as possible.

0:11:37.880 --> 0:11:42.319
<v Speaker 1>But I think the circumstances surrounding the pandemic will naturally

0:11:42.720 --> 0:11:46.800
<v Speaker 1>UM help crypt that because now people are forced to

0:11:46.840 --> 0:11:51.200
<v Speaker 1>see it to innovate, what other experiences, what other models

0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:57.080
<v Speaker 1>they can use to become sustainable financially and ecologically. As

0:11:57.120 --> 0:12:00.040
<v Speaker 1>travel lanes reopen and fits and starts, some of the

0:12:00.120 --> 0:12:03.600
<v Speaker 1>world's hattes destinations will have a new look, and they'll

0:12:03.640 --> 0:12:07.320
<v Speaker 1>expect everyone to help keep it that way. For Bloomberg News,

0:12:07.559 --> 0:12:19.000
<v Speaker 1>this is Michelle jam Risco. Thanks Michelle for that report.

0:12:19.400 --> 0:12:21.360
<v Speaker 1>Good to hear that the pandemic is having at these

0:12:21.360 --> 0:12:25.120
<v Speaker 1>some positive impacts, even if the main beneficiaries so far

0:12:25.400 --> 0:12:30.000
<v Speaker 1>a Thailand's elephant population. Now let's go from a part

0:12:30.040 --> 0:12:32.400
<v Speaker 1>of the world where the COVID pandemic is providing some

0:12:32.559 --> 0:12:36.280
<v Speaker 1>respite to a partner. It definitely is not U. S.

0:12:36.360 --> 0:12:40.400
<v Speaker 1>China relations Already in we've had a war of words

0:12:40.480 --> 0:12:43.440
<v Speaker 1>between Washington, d C. And Beijing over the origins of

0:12:43.440 --> 0:12:48.959
<v Speaker 1>the COVID crisis, US sanctions on Chinese technology firms, escalating

0:12:49.000 --> 0:12:52.800
<v Speaker 1>concern about events in Shinjang in Hong Kong, the US

0:12:52.800 --> 0:12:57.480
<v Speaker 1>closing a Chinese consulate, and China retaliating in kind. All

0:12:57.520 --> 0:13:01.040
<v Speaker 1>of this, of course, is bad news for the global economy.

0:13:01.480 --> 0:13:05.880
<v Speaker 1>At Bloomberg Economics, we've estimated the decoupling between China and

0:13:05.880 --> 0:13:09.720
<v Speaker 1>the US could deal a significant blow to China's growth,

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:13.200
<v Speaker 1>and if the US persuaded its allies to join up

0:13:13.200 --> 0:13:17.600
<v Speaker 1>on a containment strategy, China's annual expansion could slow all

0:13:17.600 --> 0:13:21.480
<v Speaker 1>the way down towards one percent. Now, not a lot

0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:23.880
<v Speaker 1>of people know more about U. S. China relations than

0:13:23.960 --> 0:13:27.280
<v Speaker 1>Dave Rank. Dave served as the Deputy Chief of Mission

0:13:27.400 --> 0:13:30.240
<v Speaker 1>in the US Embassy in Beijing. That means he was

0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:33.920
<v Speaker 1>the most senior career diplomat charged with making the relationship

0:13:33.960 --> 0:13:36.800
<v Speaker 1>work on the ground. He quit in two thousand and

0:13:36.880 --> 0:13:40.439
<v Speaker 1>seventeen after a difference of opinion with the Trump administration

0:13:40.600 --> 0:13:43.760
<v Speaker 1>whole climate change. He believed in it and they didn't,

0:13:44.400 --> 0:13:47.160
<v Speaker 1>and is now teaching at Yale and providing advice to

0:13:47.240 --> 0:13:50.240
<v Speaker 1>business leaders from a perch at the Cohen Group. I'm

0:13:50.360 --> 0:13:57.080
<v Speaker 1>very glad he's able to join us today. It's really

0:13:57.080 --> 0:14:01.160
<v Speaker 1>been a remarkable deterioration in US in your relationships over

0:14:01.200 --> 0:14:04.000
<v Speaker 1>the course of the last four years, but with the

0:14:04.040 --> 0:14:07.760
<v Speaker 1>election coming up in November, there's a chance for reset.

0:14:08.360 --> 0:14:10.920
<v Speaker 1>How should we think about this? How much is how

0:14:11.000 --> 0:14:15.240
<v Speaker 1>much of the deterioration in the relationship is an idiosyncrasy

0:14:15.280 --> 0:14:17.960
<v Speaker 1>of the Trump administration and how much of it is

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:21.280
<v Speaker 1>structural something we shouldn't expect to change no matter who's

0:14:21.280 --> 0:14:24.240
<v Speaker 1>in power. Sure, I mean that's a great question to

0:14:24.240 --> 0:14:27.400
<v Speaker 1>start with. Tom And as you know, I left government

0:14:27.440 --> 0:14:29.560
<v Speaker 1>about three years ago. But I'll say even at the

0:14:29.680 --> 0:14:33.160
<v Speaker 1>end of the Obama administration, there was a strong sense

0:14:33.320 --> 0:14:35.920
<v Speaker 1>that the U. S. China relationship was coming to a

0:14:36.040 --> 0:14:39.400
<v Speaker 1>really fundamental change, that that the paradigm the way we

0:14:39.440 --> 0:14:45.160
<v Speaker 1>had looked at the relationship essentially since since UH the U. S.

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:50.760
<v Speaker 1>And China started, UH recognized each other that the rules

0:14:50.800 --> 0:14:52.800
<v Speaker 1>of the game had changed, and that whether it was

0:14:52.880 --> 0:14:55.920
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, UH, you were going to

0:14:55.960 --> 0:14:58.520
<v Speaker 1>see a change in the U. S. China relationship. I

0:14:58.560 --> 0:15:03.120
<v Speaker 1>think though that you know, Donald Trump took the relationship

0:15:03.200 --> 0:15:07.520
<v Speaker 1>that no American government, at least since the end of

0:15:07.520 --> 0:15:10.600
<v Speaker 1>the Second World War has gone, which is much more unilateral,

0:15:11.240 --> 0:15:15.120
<v Speaker 1>much less interested in the global structures and partnerships and

0:15:15.160 --> 0:15:20.440
<v Speaker 1>alliances that really had been our hallmark since And so

0:15:20.800 --> 0:15:23.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think there's an aberration in the sense

0:15:23.280 --> 0:15:26.320
<v Speaker 1>that Donald Trump is not the internationalists, not interested in

0:15:26.320 --> 0:15:30.560
<v Speaker 1>international partnerships, but the concern about China and what it

0:15:30.560 --> 0:15:34.160
<v Speaker 1>means for for the US that competition. I think that

0:15:34.280 --> 0:15:36.400
<v Speaker 1>was coming no matter who was there. And I think

0:15:36.400 --> 0:15:39.640
<v Speaker 1>you'll see if if Biden is elected, that there will

0:15:39.680 --> 0:15:42.520
<v Speaker 1>be a tension in the relationship, even if we get

0:15:42.520 --> 0:15:45.240
<v Speaker 1>back to a more normal way of working within the

0:15:45.280 --> 0:15:49.040
<v Speaker 1>US government. Dave, you worked with a number of officials

0:15:49.360 --> 0:15:52.680
<v Speaker 1>under the Obama administration who we might well see coming

0:15:52.720 --> 0:15:56.280
<v Speaker 1>back if we see a Biden win in November. What's

0:15:56.320 --> 0:16:00.680
<v Speaker 1>your sense of how the Biden team views the U S.

0:16:00.760 --> 0:16:03.960
<v Speaker 1>China relationship. What do you think their priorities would be

0:16:04.280 --> 0:16:08.640
<v Speaker 1>if we saw them coming in at the end of November. Sure, well,

0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:11.280
<v Speaker 1>I think some of you you'd see some consistency. There's

0:16:11.320 --> 0:16:14.640
<v Speaker 1>real concern, not just in the at the political level,

0:16:14.640 --> 0:16:17.040
<v Speaker 1>in other words, in the Democratic and Republican Party, but

0:16:17.080 --> 0:16:22.200
<v Speaker 1>also within the bureaucracy about particularly in the area of technology,

0:16:22.680 --> 0:16:25.600
<v Speaker 1>the rivalry between the United States and China and the

0:16:25.680 --> 0:16:28.520
<v Speaker 1>relevance of a lot of those technologies to really core

0:16:28.680 --> 0:16:31.760
<v Speaker 1>national security concerns. And I think that will be, at

0:16:31.840 --> 0:16:34.280
<v Speaker 1>least from what I can see and read, that will

0:16:34.320 --> 0:16:36.480
<v Speaker 1>be a concern of a would be a concern of

0:16:36.520 --> 0:16:40.240
<v Speaker 1>a Biden administration if there is one. But you know,

0:16:40.720 --> 0:16:43.760
<v Speaker 1>I think you'd also see, which is I think very

0:16:43.800 --> 0:16:48.360
<v Speaker 1>different from the Trump administration, an effort because the the

0:16:48.440 --> 0:16:51.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, the people around Biden, and as I understand

0:16:51.440 --> 0:16:54.440
<v Speaker 1>Vice President Biden himself, see a lot of areas where,

0:16:54.880 --> 0:16:56.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, whether we want to or not, we're gonna

0:16:56.520 --> 0:16:58.480
<v Speaker 1>have to cooperate with the Chinese. We're gonna have to

0:16:58.480 --> 0:17:02.680
<v Speaker 1>work together areas like climate change, the Iran nuclear deal,

0:17:02.880 --> 0:17:05.720
<v Speaker 1>and of course the pandemic and dealing with the global

0:17:05.840 --> 0:17:10.000
<v Speaker 1>public health issues. Is there a world where things keep

0:17:10.080 --> 0:17:14.000
<v Speaker 1>getting worse? I wonder whether the Chinese side have been

0:17:14.160 --> 0:17:18.760
<v Speaker 1>pulling their punches because they're thinking, we need to maintain

0:17:18.800 --> 0:17:22.320
<v Speaker 1>optionality for when a Biden administration comes in. We don't

0:17:22.359 --> 0:17:25.119
<v Speaker 1>want to burn our bridges. If a Biden team comes

0:17:25.160 --> 0:17:28.480
<v Speaker 1>in and they maintain the same kind of broad strategic

0:17:28.520 --> 0:17:32.879
<v Speaker 1>orientation regarding China as a kind of strategic threat, but

0:17:32.960 --> 0:17:36.280
<v Speaker 1>they're more effective at building alliances. Is there a world

0:17:36.280 --> 0:17:40.280
<v Speaker 1>where the gloves come off and China's restraint is removed

0:17:40.320 --> 0:17:44.040
<v Speaker 1>and we see relations deteriorating even further and faster than

0:17:44.080 --> 0:17:47.040
<v Speaker 1>they have under the Trump administration. So I left town

0:17:47.080 --> 0:17:50.000
<v Speaker 1>because anyone who has lived through will tell you that

0:17:50.200 --> 0:17:53.600
<v Speaker 1>it can always get worse, right, But I'm I'm relatively

0:17:53.600 --> 0:17:58.640
<v Speaker 1>optimistic that I mean, for for however much the Chinese

0:17:58.640 --> 0:18:02.960
<v Speaker 1>are concerned about, you know, a rivalry with the United States, fundamentally,

0:18:02.960 --> 0:18:05.399
<v Speaker 1>they've got a lot of interest in stability, not just

0:18:05.480 --> 0:18:07.920
<v Speaker 1>in the in the U. S. China relationship, but overall

0:18:08.000 --> 0:18:11.679
<v Speaker 1>that they they have a big vested stake in the

0:18:11.800 --> 0:18:15.399
<v Speaker 1>success of global systems, in the global trading system, and

0:18:16.040 --> 0:18:20.200
<v Speaker 1>in not uh sort of dediating that from that and

0:18:20.920 --> 0:18:24.119
<v Speaker 1>heading down the path to a really hot competition. I

0:18:24.200 --> 0:18:26.320
<v Speaker 1>think they understand that that's not in their interests, it's

0:18:26.359 --> 0:18:28.919
<v Speaker 1>not in our interests, and there is a middle ground

0:18:28.920 --> 0:18:31.880
<v Speaker 1>where we can It's kind of cliche, but we can

0:18:31.920 --> 0:18:35.800
<v Speaker 1>compete without being without confrontation that that you know, we

0:18:35.840 --> 0:18:39.480
<v Speaker 1>can walk that fine line at less drill dine on

0:18:39.520 --> 0:18:43.159
<v Speaker 1>a couple of live issues, um. First of all, Um,

0:18:43.200 --> 0:18:46.560
<v Speaker 1>I'd be really interested to get your view on financial decoupling.

0:18:47.000 --> 0:18:50.160
<v Speaker 1>There's been a couple of great Bloomberg news scoops recently

0:18:50.560 --> 0:18:54.320
<v Speaker 1>suggesting that at a senior level in the US administration

0:18:54.520 --> 0:18:58.720
<v Speaker 1>there's been real consideration of imposing sanctions on a big

0:18:58.800 --> 0:19:03.720
<v Speaker 1>Chinese bank, possibly imposing sanctions on some big Chinese financial

0:19:03.760 --> 0:19:07.919
<v Speaker 1>startups and financial Um, the kind of the the child

0:19:07.960 --> 0:19:10.720
<v Speaker 1>of the Ali Baba group is one that's been mentioned

0:19:11.280 --> 0:19:14.640
<v Speaker 1>from yours insiders experience. Could you tell us a little

0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:18.760
<v Speaker 1>bit about how that kind of decision would be made? Well,

0:19:18.800 --> 0:19:20.960
<v Speaker 1>I guess I can talk about how that kind of

0:19:21.000 --> 0:19:23.199
<v Speaker 1>decision used to you know, would have used to be

0:19:23.280 --> 0:19:26.440
<v Speaker 1>made under the Trump administrations a little different. And that's why,

0:19:26.520 --> 0:19:28.280
<v Speaker 1>first of all, I've heard the same reports and and

0:19:28.280 --> 0:19:30.520
<v Speaker 1>of course Bloomberg has done a great job and in

0:19:30.960 --> 0:19:33.880
<v Speaker 1>uh flushing some of those out. But it's really hard

0:19:33.920 --> 0:19:35.840
<v Speaker 1>to tell what's going on in the in the Trump

0:19:35.840 --> 0:19:39.239
<v Speaker 1>administration because so many decisions seem to be not just

0:19:39.400 --> 0:19:42.240
<v Speaker 1>made at the highest levels, but started and finished at

0:19:42.240 --> 0:19:45.680
<v Speaker 1>the highest levels. And so in the Obama administration or

0:19:45.800 --> 0:19:49.760
<v Speaker 1>previous administrations, you'd have people who know the issues intimately

0:19:49.880 --> 0:19:52.800
<v Speaker 1>understand the ups and downs. Why, you know, taking action

0:19:52.880 --> 0:19:55.639
<v Speaker 1>against one of the big big four Chinese banks or

0:19:55.680 --> 0:19:58.520
<v Speaker 1>against and financial you know, the impacts that could have

0:19:59.240 --> 0:20:04.199
<v Speaker 1>on real life issues here, whether they're financial or legal

0:20:04.320 --> 0:20:07.400
<v Speaker 1>or technical in the United States. In the Trump administration,

0:20:07.400 --> 0:20:09.399
<v Speaker 1>you look at the TikTok and the wee chat bands

0:20:09.440 --> 0:20:12.480
<v Speaker 1>and all of the legal trouble they run into. That's

0:20:12.480 --> 0:20:15.840
<v Speaker 1>what I think is different about this administration, and where

0:20:16.240 --> 0:20:18.440
<v Speaker 1>if something like that were to be rolled out, the

0:20:18.800 --> 0:20:21.919
<v Speaker 1>odds that it would run into something that sort of

0:20:21.920 --> 0:20:23.920
<v Speaker 1>working level folks would have flagged as, hey, this is

0:20:23.920 --> 0:20:26.440
<v Speaker 1>gonna be a problem. It's not legal, it's going to

0:20:26.520 --> 0:20:29.840
<v Speaker 1>have huge blowback for the U. S economy that the

0:20:29.840 --> 0:20:34.080
<v Speaker 1>Trump administration I think is liable to miss. Let's say

0:20:34.080 --> 0:20:37.400
<v Speaker 1>they do it anyway. Let's say the Trump administration has

0:20:37.440 --> 0:20:40.760
<v Speaker 1>a swing at and financial If you were sitting if

0:20:40.760 --> 0:20:43.600
<v Speaker 1>you were still sitting in the embassy in Beijing, what

0:20:43.680 --> 0:20:45.960
<v Speaker 1>would you be worried about? What would you see as

0:20:46.000 --> 0:20:49.399
<v Speaker 1>the sort of the range of possible Chinese reactions to

0:20:49.560 --> 0:20:52.080
<v Speaker 1>a to a U S move like that. Yeah, I mean,

0:20:52.240 --> 0:20:56.320
<v Speaker 1>I think the the at least traditionally, I would worry about, Okay,

0:20:56.560 --> 0:21:01.040
<v Speaker 1>what American companies are on the outs the Chinese anyway,

0:21:01.080 --> 0:21:04.679
<v Speaker 1>that have a toe hold here, but but are are vulnerable?

0:21:04.720 --> 0:21:08.560
<v Speaker 1>Are they liable to come under Chinese pressure? That's probably

0:21:08.600 --> 0:21:10.840
<v Speaker 1>where I would look first. You know that I won't

0:21:10.920 --> 0:21:13.400
<v Speaker 1>name names, but there I'm sure companies that have had

0:21:13.440 --> 0:21:17.520
<v Speaker 1>problems and and just look for additional problems in that area,

0:21:18.119 --> 0:21:21.960
<v Speaker 1>you know, something like the Unreliable Entities List. I could

0:21:22.000 --> 0:21:26.080
<v Speaker 1>see the mof COM, the Commerce Ministry floating out a

0:21:26.200 --> 0:21:29.800
<v Speaker 1>name for some critical American company that may end up

0:21:29.840 --> 0:21:31.520
<v Speaker 1>on that list. And you know, that's that's hard to

0:21:31.520 --> 0:21:35.399
<v Speaker 1>do business if you're that kind of rumors circulating for

0:21:35.520 --> 0:21:39.880
<v Speaker 1>you around you selling their treasury holdings. That's the kind

0:21:39.920 --> 0:21:43.280
<v Speaker 1>of the big sort of stick which many believe that

0:21:43.400 --> 0:21:46.320
<v Speaker 1>China holds over the US. Is that a real possibility?

0:21:46.680 --> 0:21:48.240
<v Speaker 1>Isn't there an old joke? You know, if you owe

0:21:48.240 --> 0:21:52.159
<v Speaker 1>the bank fifty you're in trouble. If you owe the

0:21:52.480 --> 0:21:54.760
<v Speaker 1>bank five million dollars, they're in trouble. I guess the

0:21:54.800 --> 0:21:56.960
<v Speaker 1>numbers have gone up since the joke was first issued.

0:21:57.000 --> 0:21:59.160
<v Speaker 1>But but you know, this is kind of I mean,

0:21:59.480 --> 0:22:03.680
<v Speaker 1>it's an ill stration of the the difficulty of taking actions,

0:22:03.720 --> 0:22:06.680
<v Speaker 1>whether it's the US against and financial or the Chinese

0:22:06.680 --> 0:22:09.520
<v Speaker 1>selling T bills, because you know that the act of

0:22:09.560 --> 0:22:13.560
<v Speaker 1>selling those would have enormous negative consequences for the Chinese,

0:22:13.560 --> 0:22:15.880
<v Speaker 1>and so it would be a tough decision to make,

0:22:15.920 --> 0:22:18.880
<v Speaker 1>and that technocrats in China would be I'm sure making

0:22:18.920 --> 0:22:23.120
<v Speaker 1>that case mutually assured destruction. I think Larry Summers once

0:22:23.160 --> 0:22:27.560
<v Speaker 1>called it. Let's talk about a risk which is kind

0:22:27.560 --> 0:22:31.840
<v Speaker 1>of increasingly sort of mentioned in the markets, um popping

0:22:31.920 --> 0:22:35.600
<v Speaker 1>up a little bit in commentary about the relationship. Let's

0:22:35.600 --> 0:22:40.520
<v Speaker 1>talk about the risk that something radical and destabilizing happens

0:22:40.560 --> 0:22:44.000
<v Speaker 1>with Taiwan. UM. Now, you've not only worked in the

0:22:44.119 --> 0:22:47.640
<v Speaker 1>US Embassy in Beijing, you've also worked in the US

0:22:47.720 --> 0:22:53.919
<v Speaker 1>mission in Taiwan. What probability would you put on a

0:22:54.119 --> 0:22:58.199
<v Speaker 1>Chinese invasion of Taiwan in between the US election on

0:22:58.480 --> 0:23:02.639
<v Speaker 1>November three and a new president coming into office on

0:23:02.720 --> 0:23:06.320
<v Speaker 1>January twentie So I should start off by saying I

0:23:06.320 --> 0:23:08.760
<v Speaker 1>am concerned. You listen to some of the rhetor coming

0:23:08.760 --> 0:23:10.840
<v Speaker 1>out of China. You saw that warning. I think it

0:23:10.920 --> 0:23:14.400
<v Speaker 1>was in people's daily that to the Taiwanese. Don't say

0:23:14.400 --> 0:23:17.879
<v Speaker 1>you haven't been warned, you know, a very stern tone

0:23:17.960 --> 0:23:21.000
<v Speaker 1>that you haven't. You know, the Chinese rarely roll out

0:23:21.640 --> 0:23:26.480
<v Speaker 1>unless they're contemplating something serious. I'm not a military person,

0:23:26.760 --> 0:23:30.959
<v Speaker 1>but my understanding from from talking to people who do

0:23:31.000 --> 0:23:33.280
<v Speaker 1>it for a living, say, it's not you know, an

0:23:33.280 --> 0:23:36.280
<v Speaker 1>invasion of Taiwan would not be an easy thing, and

0:23:36.760 --> 0:23:39.720
<v Speaker 1>the kind of preparations it would require to do that

0:23:40.440 --> 0:23:43.840
<v Speaker 1>we'd see between now and January twenties. So that's kind

0:23:43.840 --> 0:23:46.880
<v Speaker 1>of cold comfort that to me. I'm I'm I'm fairly

0:23:47.119 --> 0:23:50.399
<v Speaker 1>sanguine about the risk of an invasion before January twenty,

0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:53.119
<v Speaker 1>but I think the long term issue is one that

0:23:53.160 --> 0:23:55.200
<v Speaker 1>we ought to be concerned about. That. You know that

0:23:55.200 --> 0:23:58.160
<v Speaker 1>that the status quo that kept peace in the Taiwan

0:23:58.240 --> 0:24:02.719
<v Speaker 1>Strait is really starting to break down, and that wouldn't

0:24:02.720 --> 0:24:04.360
<v Speaker 1>be good for us, and I think it'll be good

0:24:04.359 --> 0:24:07.439
<v Speaker 1>for Beijing, it would be bad for Taiwan. So so

0:24:07.480 --> 0:24:10.760
<v Speaker 1>I worry about that. Dave, great pleasure having you on

0:24:10.760 --> 0:24:13.320
<v Speaker 1>the show. Thanks so much for sharing your insights. Thank you,

0:24:13.400 --> 0:24:23.120
<v Speaker 1>Tom Great to be here, So from a country that's

0:24:23.240 --> 0:24:26.040
<v Speaker 1>rising up in the global economic rankings to one that

0:24:26.160 --> 0:24:28.960
<v Speaker 1>is not. Every so often on Stephanomics, we like to

0:24:29.040 --> 0:24:31.919
<v Speaker 1>check in on progress with Britain's century long process of

0:24:31.960 --> 0:24:35.439
<v Speaker 1>industrial decline and with Brexit talks again in the news

0:24:35.760 --> 0:24:38.200
<v Speaker 1>now seems like a good moment. So I'm very glad

0:24:38.240 --> 0:24:40.840
<v Speaker 1>to be joined by one of the most astute observers

0:24:41.119 --> 0:24:45.360
<v Speaker 1>of the economics of Brexit, Bloomberg's UK economist Dan handsOn.

0:24:48.720 --> 0:24:52.399
<v Speaker 1>So we're in the middle of negotiations, or we're in

0:24:52.440 --> 0:24:56.560
<v Speaker 1>the middle of the commencement of some new negotiations. What's

0:24:56.600 --> 0:24:59.800
<v Speaker 1>the latest So over the past week or say, there's

0:25:00.040 --> 0:25:02.159
<v Speaker 1>been a bit of a stalemate, surprise surprise in the

0:25:02.400 --> 0:25:06.280
<v Speaker 1>in the Brexit negotiations. So we've had the UK saying

0:25:06.280 --> 0:25:09.040
<v Speaker 1>that it doesn't want to continue for more negotiations with

0:25:09.119 --> 0:25:12.520
<v Speaker 1>the EU until the SHOW signs that it's willing to

0:25:12.560 --> 0:25:17.280
<v Speaker 1>make concessions. And the UK also wants the EU to

0:25:17.400 --> 0:25:21.560
<v Speaker 1>recognize the UK is a sovereign equal and also the

0:25:21.640 --> 0:25:24.159
<v Speaker 1>final the final request from the UK side is to

0:25:24.160 --> 0:25:26.359
<v Speaker 1>start work on the legal text of the treaty that

0:25:26.400 --> 0:25:30.000
<v Speaker 1>will underpin the free trade agreement and of course we've

0:25:30.000 --> 0:25:33.199
<v Speaker 1>got on the U side, you still looking for the

0:25:33.280 --> 0:25:36.239
<v Speaker 1>UK to make compromises as well. There's been a bit

0:25:36.240 --> 0:25:38.119
<v Speaker 1>of a change in the tone in the past twenty

0:25:38.119 --> 0:25:42.240
<v Speaker 1>four hours between the two sides. We've heard positive sounds

0:25:42.240 --> 0:25:46.320
<v Speaker 1>coming from the US chief negotiator Michelle Barnier, and Bloomberg

0:25:46.359 --> 0:25:49.160
<v Speaker 1>has reported that both sides could return to the negotiation

0:25:49.440 --> 0:25:52.480
<v Speaker 1>table and coming days. The aim of getting a deal

0:25:52.800 --> 0:25:55.240
<v Speaker 1>done in the next month or so. And the reason

0:25:55.280 --> 0:25:57.560
<v Speaker 1>that the deal needs to be done over that time

0:25:57.600 --> 0:26:03.080
<v Speaker 1>period is because laments need to ratify national partiments. I

0:26:03.119 --> 0:26:05.359
<v Speaker 1>should say, I need to ratify the deal in time

0:26:05.400 --> 0:26:07.679
<v Speaker 1>for the end of the Brexit transition period on December

0:26:07.840 --> 0:26:10.880
<v Speaker 1>thirty one. So as things down, it looks like we're

0:26:10.920 --> 0:26:13.719
<v Speaker 1>in for a dash to the finish line. And as

0:26:13.760 --> 0:26:16.800
<v Speaker 1>I say that, that deadline is December thirty one, when

0:26:16.800 --> 0:26:22.320
<v Speaker 1>the UK finally leaves the European Union. So some some

0:26:22.440 --> 0:26:26.040
<v Speaker 1>very modest good news, but even as we hope for

0:26:26.119 --> 0:26:30.560
<v Speaker 1>the recommencement of negotiations. You've written that the difference between

0:26:30.680 --> 0:26:35.199
<v Speaker 1>deal and no deal is pretty small. Why is that so?

0:26:35.240 --> 0:26:37.280
<v Speaker 1>I think the answer to that relates to the nature

0:26:37.320 --> 0:26:39.720
<v Speaker 1>of the deal the UK is seeking to negotiate with.

0:26:39.760 --> 0:26:42.640
<v Speaker 1>The EU is looking to sign a free trade agreement

0:26:42.640 --> 0:26:45.200
<v Speaker 1>with the Block, which, if we look on the spectrum

0:26:45.240 --> 0:26:48.600
<v Speaker 1>of possible trading relationships it could have chosen to pursue.

0:26:49.280 --> 0:26:51.760
<v Speaker 1>A free trade agreement is close to the bottom in

0:26:51.840 --> 0:26:54.679
<v Speaker 1>terms of the level of integration it demands or requires.

0:26:54.720 --> 0:26:58.320
<v Speaker 1>With the European Union and with an FDA. The UK

0:26:58.359 --> 0:27:01.080
<v Speaker 1>and EU would avoid tariffs and quotas that would come

0:27:01.119 --> 0:27:04.159
<v Speaker 1>alongside a no deal outcome, but there will still be

0:27:04.160 --> 0:27:07.520
<v Speaker 1>a significant increase in non tariff barriers. Now those range

0:27:07.560 --> 0:27:13.640
<v Speaker 1>from customs checks at the border, documentation around rules of origin,

0:27:14.440 --> 0:27:17.920
<v Speaker 1>but they're also behind the border costs such as regulatory barriers,

0:27:17.920 --> 0:27:21.320
<v Speaker 1>and those apply to both goods and services. So the

0:27:21.400 --> 0:27:23.560
<v Speaker 1>key point is that trade frictions are likely to ride

0:27:23.600 --> 0:27:26.080
<v Speaker 1>sharply at the start of next year, whether there's a

0:27:26.119 --> 0:27:29.159
<v Speaker 1>deal or not. And that's why the gap between a

0:27:29.240 --> 0:27:31.600
<v Speaker 1>deal and no deal is smaller than if, say you

0:27:31.680 --> 0:27:34.359
<v Speaker 1>compared to no deal outcome to the UK staying in

0:27:34.400 --> 0:27:38.920
<v Speaker 1>the Single Market or even staying in the Customers Union. Still,

0:27:39.240 --> 0:27:42.960
<v Speaker 1>no deal is not zero cost. You've put a number

0:27:42.960 --> 0:27:48.080
<v Speaker 1>on it and around one point five of GDP. How

0:27:48.080 --> 0:27:50.920
<v Speaker 1>did you get to that number. Well, we've we've looked

0:27:50.920 --> 0:27:54.160
<v Speaker 1>at it through three key channels that we think will

0:27:54.160 --> 0:27:57.000
<v Speaker 1>impact the economy in the short term. So the first

0:27:57.040 --> 0:27:58.800
<v Speaker 1>of those, and I mentioned it in the answer before,

0:27:59.400 --> 0:28:02.440
<v Speaker 1>there will be increase in tariffs and quotas if there

0:28:02.520 --> 0:28:05.879
<v Speaker 1>is no deal outcome between at the UK and the

0:28:07.359 --> 0:28:12.520
<v Speaker 1>added to that, it seems pretty certain that sterling would appreciate.

0:28:12.800 --> 0:28:15.360
<v Speaker 1>And you add those two things together and you get

0:28:15.400 --> 0:28:17.919
<v Speaker 1>a rise in import costs and what that does is

0:28:17.960 --> 0:28:20.960
<v Speaker 1>it squeezed how household real incomes through a rise in

0:28:21.040 --> 0:28:27.200
<v Speaker 1>inflation um. Taken those assumptions together, so we think tarrists

0:28:27.240 --> 0:28:31.199
<v Speaker 1>could rise by about five cent on imports coming from

0:28:31.280 --> 0:28:34.119
<v Speaker 1>the EU, and we've assumed a five percent fall in

0:28:34.160 --> 0:28:37.520
<v Speaker 1>sterling um at those together and we think it could

0:28:37.560 --> 0:28:40.760
<v Speaker 1>knock about half a percent of GDP next year. The

0:28:40.800 --> 0:28:43.719
<v Speaker 1>second channel that we've looked at is uncertainty. And we

0:28:43.800 --> 0:28:47.400
<v Speaker 1>know uncertainty has affected the UK economy since it voted

0:28:47.600 --> 0:28:50.320
<v Speaker 1>to leave the European Union in twix and it's most

0:28:50.360 --> 0:28:53.760
<v Speaker 1>obviously seen in the business investment numbers. But if we

0:28:53.800 --> 0:28:57.000
<v Speaker 1>see uncertainty rise back up again, that could not a

0:28:57.080 --> 0:29:00.640
<v Speaker 1>further zero points six percent of GDP next year. We

0:29:00.720 --> 0:29:03.840
<v Speaker 1>think in the final channel that we've looked at is

0:29:03.880 --> 0:29:06.960
<v Speaker 1>the extent to which lower trade flows predominantly as a

0:29:07.000 --> 0:29:10.680
<v Speaker 1>result of the tariffs and the quotas, could feed through

0:29:10.760 --> 0:29:14.120
<v Speaker 1>to the supply capacity of the economy, and that could

0:29:14.120 --> 0:29:16.800
<v Speaker 1>add We think the story could not go further zero

0:29:16.840 --> 0:29:19.600
<v Speaker 1>point two percent off GDP next year. So you add

0:29:19.640 --> 0:29:22.480
<v Speaker 1>those three numbers up, you get close to one and

0:29:22.520 --> 0:29:26.600
<v Speaker 1>a half cent off GDP. So our baseline forecast where

0:29:26.600 --> 0:29:29.280
<v Speaker 1>there's a deal is for growth of five point four

0:29:29.280 --> 0:29:33.120
<v Speaker 1>percent next year. If there is no deal, we'd lower

0:29:33.160 --> 0:29:38.160
<v Speaker 1>that forecast to around four percent growth. So even that

0:29:38.400 --> 0:29:42.120
<v Speaker 1>one point five percent drag assumes a bit of goodwill

0:29:42.480 --> 0:29:45.920
<v Speaker 1>on both sides to prevent a complete snarl up in

0:29:45.960 --> 0:29:49.320
<v Speaker 1>the trade relationship. What happens if we don't even get that?

0:29:49.600 --> 0:29:53.480
<v Speaker 1>Could you outline a doomsday scenario for us? So you're

0:29:53.920 --> 0:29:56.720
<v Speaker 1>right that ar scenario assumes that even if both sides

0:29:57.080 --> 0:29:59.920
<v Speaker 1>decide that a trade deal is a stretch too far.

0:30:00.000 --> 0:30:02.760
<v Speaker 1>Are we've assumed that talks do continue to in an

0:30:02.800 --> 0:30:06.120
<v Speaker 1>effort to mitigate some of the most disrupted parts of

0:30:06.200 --> 0:30:09.280
<v Speaker 1>a no deal breakup. But clearly, as you say, there

0:30:09.400 --> 0:30:12.560
<v Speaker 1>is room for an acrimonious enter the talks and things

0:30:12.600 --> 0:30:16.480
<v Speaker 1>could get could get messy. So there are two two

0:30:16.600 --> 0:30:19.840
<v Speaker 1>channels that we've you can think about this through. First

0:30:19.960 --> 0:30:22.400
<v Speaker 1>is the disruption of the border, and it would clearly

0:30:22.400 --> 0:30:26.480
<v Speaker 1>be far more significant if there were big cues down

0:30:26.480 --> 0:30:29.400
<v Speaker 1>in over and over in Calais and goods couldn't move

0:30:30.520 --> 0:30:33.760
<v Speaker 1>across the border, and that would significantly way on the

0:30:33.800 --> 0:30:37.520
<v Speaker 1>supply capacity of the economy. Now, given this is unprecedented,

0:30:37.800 --> 0:30:40.560
<v Speaker 1>there isn't any clear way to calibrate the size of

0:30:40.600 --> 0:30:43.280
<v Speaker 1>the shock, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say

0:30:43.280 --> 0:30:45.480
<v Speaker 1>that in the near term the fall in trade, so

0:30:45.560 --> 0:30:51.360
<v Speaker 1>that's exports and imports, could easily be in double figures. Then,

0:30:51.440 --> 0:30:53.880
<v Speaker 1>on the demand side, you you would expect a few

0:30:53.920 --> 0:30:56.160
<v Speaker 1>things to happen, so you'd expect a bigger fall in

0:30:56.240 --> 0:31:01.040
<v Speaker 1>Sterling than we've assumed. You would expect tightening of financial

0:31:01.120 --> 0:31:05.480
<v Speaker 1>conditions as well. Um and you'll also see a bigger

0:31:05.480 --> 0:31:08.560
<v Speaker 1>lift in the uncertainty that's facing the economy, and all

0:31:08.560 --> 0:31:11.440
<v Speaker 1>of those factors together would contribute to an even bigger

0:31:11.440 --> 0:31:14.520
<v Speaker 1>fall in GDP. Now, bringing it all together, it's very

0:31:14.520 --> 0:31:16.880
<v Speaker 1>difficult to put a precise number on it, but I

0:31:16.920 --> 0:31:19.040
<v Speaker 1>think you could easily double the one and a half

0:31:19.040 --> 0:31:22.240
<v Speaker 1>percent that we've assumed in our scenario, and I go

0:31:22.520 --> 0:31:24.560
<v Speaker 1>so far to say that the risks to that view

0:31:24.640 --> 0:31:27.280
<v Speaker 1>would be still tilted to the downsides. The risk would

0:31:27.280 --> 0:31:30.600
<v Speaker 1>be to an even larger near term hit to the economy.

0:31:31.520 --> 0:31:36.080
<v Speaker 1>New Deal Brexit potentially good news to companies renting portable

0:31:36.160 --> 0:31:40.880
<v Speaker 1>toilets to lorry drivers trapped in the Kent countryside, but

0:31:41.000 --> 0:31:45.040
<v Speaker 1>probably bad news to a much larger constituency. Dad Hanson,

0:31:45.440 --> 0:31:58.160
<v Speaker 1>thanks very much for sharing your insights. Well, unfortunately that's

0:31:58.160 --> 0:32:00.600
<v Speaker 1>about all we have time for, so let me thank

0:32:00.640 --> 0:32:04.920
<v Speaker 1>our guests and reporters Michelle jan Risco, Grandy fanthol Knight,

0:32:05.440 --> 0:32:09.760
<v Speaker 1>Secret Alligado, Dave Rank, and Dan Hanson. Voice overs by

0:32:09.920 --> 0:32:16.120
<v Speaker 1>Chai Channock, Ran now Kel, Doc Noi and krim Gee

0:32:16.120 --> 0:32:19.960
<v Speaker 1>we Ruch. This week's episode of Stephanomics was brought to

0:32:20.000 --> 0:32:24.600
<v Speaker 1>you by executive producer Lucy Meekin, signed engineer Magnus Hendrickson,

0:32:24.920 --> 0:32:28.400
<v Speaker 1>and me Tom Wallack. You can get your regular fix

0:32:28.480 --> 0:32:31.920
<v Speaker 1>of economics on the Bloomberg Terminal website and app, and

0:32:32.000 --> 0:32:34.520
<v Speaker 1>please tune in again next week when your host, the

0:32:34.520 --> 0:32:37.360
<v Speaker 1>eponymous Stephanie Flanders will be back in the hot seat

0:32:37.840 --> 0:32:42.040
<v Speaker 1>and normal standards of economic insight and interviewing dexterity will

0:32:42.080 --> 0:32:43.000
<v Speaker 1>be restored.