I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
As we are currently members the EU accept our testing, as non members they wont. The products that require testing by the EU, will obviously be delayed. The EU currently have free trade agreements with around 70 countries, so much of the stuff going in will have the rules, standards, and regulations already agreed. Many of the other EU members are very small countries that do a fraction of our trade. One of the problems we face is the volume of trade we do, and the lack of any infrastructure to support the imposition of border checks. Our side have been knocking up car parks away from the port, and talked of turning motorways into car parks, to enable checks to be carried out. Don't forget we have been members for nearly 50 years, so this will be a massive change. Imposing border checks where there were none before, must cause delays. A ten minute delay would not be noticeable if you had 6 trucks per day coming in, but cause havoc when there are 10,000. Had we stayed in the Single Market, and Customs Union there wouldn't be a problem. Nor if we remained closely aligned, which was Theresa Mays plan. Boris has a different plan. If we had a 10 year transition, and completely rebuilt the Port of Dover, we could perhaps minimise the problems. Going from no checks today, to checking everything tomorrow, will cause difficulties. Some of the trucks contain over 400 consignments of different products, and it is my understanding that Customs Officers specialise in particular products, rather than having all of them learning every regulation under the sun. This means one lorry may have to be checked by many officers. In addition each consignment will require a Customs Declaration, which in itself will cause delays, and incur extra costs.
I suppose that the short answer to your question is that if a country like Germany were silly enough to leave the EU, and then stupid enough to follow the same path as Boris, the VW factory would be screwed. Whereas if they left, but remained closely aligned, very little would change.
There has been too much talk about Dover (generally, not on this thread) and not enough about Britain's most important port for trade-Felixstowe.
In the West of Western Europe, there are 2 major container ports: Europoort (Rotterdam) and Felixstowe. Felixstowe is responsible for 48% of the UK's container trade.
Felixstowe is facing 2 massive problems, which are being completely ignored.
Firstly, a lot of Felixstowe's trade is international for both import and export, and often for the same goods. Any cargo destined partly/wholly for other countries is far more likely to use Europoort in the future, as it will be far simpler logistically. The Port of Felixstowe is not British-owned
The 2nd problem is something you couldn't make up. Unlike almost all other Western European countries we do not have a nationalised Railway. East Anglia's franchise is run by Abellio. The trading name of the Dutch National Railway. Due to "new trains" not being "able to read the signals" the Felixstowe-Ipswich line has been out of service more than any other line in the region. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but leaving a major part of the freight service in the hands of our biggest competitor (on a contract til 2025 without any apparent safeguards) is folly.
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
As we are currently members the EU accept our testing, as non members they wont. The products that require testing by the EU, will obviously be delayed. The EU currently have free trade agreements with around 70 countries, so much of the stuff going in will have the rules, standards, and regulations already agreed. Many of the other EU members are very small countries that do a fraction of our trade. One of the problems we face is the volume of trade we do, and the lack of any infrastructure to support the imposition of border checks. Our side have been knocking up car parks away from the port, and talked of turning motorways into car parks, to enable checks to be carried out. Don't forget we have been members for nearly 50 years, so this will be a massive change. Imposing border checks where there were none before, must cause delays. A ten minute delay would not be noticeable if you had 6 trucks per day coming in, but cause havoc when there are 10,000. Had we stayed in the Single Market, and Customs Union there wouldn't be a problem. Nor if we remained closely aligned, which was Theresa Mays plan. Boris has a different plan. If we had a 10 year transition, and completely rebuilt the Port of Dover, we could perhaps minimise the problems. Going from no checks today, to checking everything tomorrow, will cause difficulties. Some of the trucks contain over 400 consignments of different products, and it is my understanding that Customs Officers specialise in particular products, rather than having all of them learning every regulation under the sun. This means one lorry may have to be checked by many officers. In addition each consignment will require a Customs Declaration, which in itself will cause delays, and incur extra costs.
I suppose that the short answer to your question is that if a country like Germany were silly enough to leave the EU, and then stupid enough to follow the same path as Boris, the VW factory would be screwed. Whereas if they left, but remained closely aligned, very little would change.
There has been too much talk about Dover (generally, not on this thread) and not enough about Britain's most important port for trade-Felixstowe.
In the West of Western Europe, there are 2 major container ports: Europoort (Rotterdam) and Felixstowe. Felixstowe is responsible for 48% of the UK's container trade.
Felixstowe is facing 2 massive problems, which are being completely ignored.
Firstly, a lot of Felixstowe's trade is international for both import and export, and often for the same goods. Any cargo destined partly/wholly for other countries is far more likely to use Europoort in the future, as it will be far simpler logistically. The Port of Felixstowe is not British-owned
The 2nd problem is something you couldn't make up. Unlike almost all other Western European countries we do not have a nationalised Railway. East Anglia's franchise is run by Abellio. The trading name of the Dutch National Railway. Due to "new trains" not being "able to read the signals" the Felixstowe-Ipswich line has been out of service more than any other line in the region. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but leaving a major part of the freight service in the hands of our biggest competitor (on a contract til 2025 without any apparent safeguards) is folly.
There is a reason that they have relationships with various other ports. Often, it is because they own them.
"DP London Gateway". sounds so much more friendly than its original name-
"Dubai Ports London Gateway". Or, before that "Jebel Ali Port". Owns 78 ports around the world.
The 2 main points for me are:-
1. We blindly believe that a Prime minister actually has the power ro control our infrastructure, whereas power is routinely held abroad 2. It is a question of whether we want our businesses to be the gateway to the World, or just the gateway to our island
As the world becomes more accessible, we pull up the drawbridge. Sad.
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
As we are currently members the EU accept our testing, as non members they wont. The products that require testing by the EU, will obviously be delayed. The EU currently have free trade agreements with around 70 countries, so much of the stuff going in will have the rules, standards, and regulations already agreed. Many of the other EU members are very small countries that do a fraction of our trade. One of the problems we face is the volume of trade we do, and the lack of any infrastructure to support the imposition of border checks. Our side have been knocking up car parks away from the port, and talked of turning motorways into car parks, to enable checks to be carried out. Don't forget we have been members for nearly 50 years, so this will be a massive change. Imposing border checks where there were none before, must cause delays. A ten minute delay would not be noticeable if you had 6 trucks per day coming in, but cause havoc when there are 10,000. Had we stayed in the Single Market, and Customs Union there wouldn't be a problem. Nor if we remained closely aligned, which was Theresa Mays plan. Boris has a different plan. If we had a 10 year transition, and completely rebuilt the Port of Dover, we could perhaps minimise the problems. Going from no checks today, to checking everything tomorrow, will cause difficulties. Some of the trucks contain over 400 consignments of different products, and it is my understanding that Customs Officers specialise in particular products, rather than having all of them learning every regulation under the sun. This means one lorry may have to be checked by many officers. In addition each consignment will require a Customs Declaration, which in itself will cause delays, and incur extra costs.
I suppose that the short answer to your question is that if a country like Germany were silly enough to leave the EU, and then stupid enough to follow the same path as Boris, the VW factory would be screwed. Whereas if they left, but remained closely aligned, very little would change.
Your analysis is as always informative and explains the situation in easy to understand terms.I was taking the VW factory as an example as it got me thinking when I watched the programme.My thinking is that if the Asian,American,South American etc markets can supply the EU with the many thousands of containers daily without there being any significant delays,then why would the UK encounter problems when doing the same? I'm assuming the goods that non EU countries import into the EU must have,at one point in time,been inspected/tested and that each and every container now entering the EU is not held for inspection/testing.If that were the case then not only would the EU but the worldwide import/export trade business would also be in a disastrous state.
I thought the VW factory was brilliant, and reflected the super efficiency we have come to expect from the Germans. To manufacture a car every 16 seconds is incredible, and shows that amazing things can be accomplished, if they are well organised. Although, I would suspect that it resembles car factories the world over, but on a much larger scale. On this scale, any delays will cost a fortune. I suspect that our car factories are very efficient at present, but Boris seems intent on destroying them. This could be avoided.
Any amount of checks can be accomplished quickly, with the right amount of qualified people, and the space in which the checks can be carried out. We don't have either. While we have been members it has all worked perfectly for us. Boris could have chosen to continue frictionless trade, but hasn't. It is not just about leaving, it is also about how we leave. The chaos will be a choice that Boris has opted for. Around 40% of our fresh food comes from the EU, delays and fresh food don't mix well.
It was fascinating to watch how everything came together to produce the cars,even down to the sausages,now that's German efficiency at it's best
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
As we are currently members the EU accept our testing, as non members they wont. The products that require testing by the EU, will obviously be delayed. The EU currently have free trade agreements with around 70 countries, so much of the stuff going in will have the rules, standards, and regulations already agreed. Many of the other EU members are very small countries that do a fraction of our trade. One of the problems we face is the volume of trade we do, and the lack of any infrastructure to support the imposition of border checks. Our side have been knocking up car parks away from the port, and talked of turning motorways into car parks, to enable checks to be carried out. Don't forget we have been members for nearly 50 years, so this will be a massive change. Imposing border checks where there were none before, must cause delays. A ten minute delay would not be noticeable if you had 6 trucks per day coming in, but cause havoc when there are 10,000. Had we stayed in the Single Market, and Customs Union there wouldn't be a problem. Nor if we remained closely aligned, which was Theresa Mays plan. Boris has a different plan. If we had a 10 year transition, and completely rebuilt the Port of Dover, we could perhaps minimise the problems. Going from no checks today, to checking everything tomorrow, will cause difficulties. Some of the trucks contain over 400 consignments of different products, and it is my understanding that Customs Officers specialise in particular products, rather than having all of them learning every regulation under the sun. This means one lorry may have to be checked by many officers. In addition each consignment will require a Customs Declaration, which in itself will cause delays, and incur extra costs.
I suppose that the short answer to your question is that if a country like Germany were silly enough to leave the EU, and then stupid enough to follow the same path as Boris, the VW factory would be screwed. Whereas if they left, but remained closely aligned, very little would change.
Your analysis is as always informative and explains the situation in easy to understand terms.I was taking the VW factory as an example as it got me thinking when I watched the programme.My thinking is that if the Asian,American,South American etc markets can supply the EU with the many thousands of containers daily without there being any significant delays,then why would the UK encounter problems when doing the same? I'm assuming the goods that non EU countries import into the EU must have,at one point in time,been inspected/tested and that each and every container now entering the EU is not held for inspection/testing.If that were the case then not only would the EU but the worldwide import/export trade business would also be in a disastrous state.
I thought the VW factory was brilliant, and reflected the super efficiency we have come to expect from the Germans. To manufacture a car every 16 seconds is incredible, and shows that amazing things can be accomplished, if they are well organised. Although, I would suspect that it resembles car factories the world over, but on a much larger scale. On this scale, any delays will cost a fortune. I suspect that our car factories are very efficient at present, but Boris seems intent on destroying them. This could be avoided.
Any amount of checks can be accomplished quickly, with the right amount of qualified people, and the space in which the checks can be carried out. We don't have either. While we have been members it has all worked perfectly for us. Boris could have chosen to continue frictionless trade, but hasn't. It is not just about leaving, it is also about how we leave. The chaos will be a choice that Boris has opted for. Around 40% of our fresh food comes from the EU, delays and fresh food don't mix well.
It was fascinating to watch how everything came together to produce the cars,even down to the sausages,now that's German efficiency at it's best
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
As we are currently members the EU accept our testing, as non members they wont. The products that require testing by the EU, will obviously be delayed. The EU currently have free trade agreements with around 70 countries, so much of the stuff going in will have the rules, standards, and regulations already agreed. Many of the other EU members are very small countries that do a fraction of our trade. One of the problems we face is the volume of trade we do, and the lack of any infrastructure to support the imposition of border checks. Our side have been knocking up car parks away from the port, and talked of turning motorways into car parks, to enable checks to be carried out. Don't forget we have been members for nearly 50 years, so this will be a massive change. Imposing border checks where there were none before, must cause delays. A ten minute delay would not be noticeable if you had 6 trucks per day coming in, but cause havoc when there are 10,000. Had we stayed in the Single Market, and Customs Union there wouldn't be a problem. Nor if we remained closely aligned, which was Theresa Mays plan. Boris has a different plan. If we had a 10 year transition, and completely rebuilt the Port of Dover, we could perhaps minimise the problems. Going from no checks today, to checking everything tomorrow, will cause difficulties. Some of the trucks contain over 400 consignments of different products, and it is my understanding that Customs Officers specialise in particular products, rather than having all of them learning every regulation under the sun. This means one lorry may have to be checked by many officers. In addition each consignment will require a Customs Declaration, which in itself will cause delays, and incur extra costs.
I suppose that the short answer to your question is that if a country like Germany were silly enough to leave the EU, and then stupid enough to follow the same path as Boris, the VW factory would be screwed. Whereas if they left, but remained closely aligned, very little would change.
There has been too much talk about Dover (generally, not on this thread) and not enough about Britain's most important port for trade-Felixstowe.
In the West of Western Europe, there are 2 major container ports: Europoort (Rotterdam) and Felixstowe. Felixstowe is responsible for 48% of the UK's container trade.
Felixstowe is facing 2 massive problems, which are being completely ignored.
Firstly, a lot of Felixstowe's trade is international for both import and export, and often for the same goods. Any cargo destined partly/wholly for other countries is far more likely to use Europoort in the future, as it will be far simpler logistically. The Port of Felixstowe is not British-owned
The 2nd problem is something you couldn't make up. Unlike almost all other Western European countries we do not have a nationalised Railway. East Anglia's franchise is run by Abellio. The trading name of the Dutch National Railway. Due to "new trains" not being "able to read the signals" the Felixstowe-Ipswich line has been out of service more than any other line in the region. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but leaving a major part of the freight service in the hands of our biggest competitor (on a contract til 2025 without any apparent safeguards) is folly.
There is a reason that they have relationships with various other ports. Often, it is because they own them.
"DP London Gateway". sounds so much more friendly than its original name-
"Dubai Ports London Gateway". Or, before that "Jebel Ali Port". Owns 78 ports around the world.
The 2 main points for me are:-
1. We blindly believe that a Prime minister actually has the power ro control our infrastructure, whereas power is routinely held abroad 2. It is a question of whether we want our businesses to be the gateway to the World, or just the gateway to our island
As the world becomes more accessible, we pull up the drawbridge. Sad.
It seems we are destined to be infamous for our racist notes to immigrants, left in blocks of flats.
Journalists walk out of No 10 after bid to impose selective briefing of Boris Johnson's Brexit plans
Journalists walked out of a Downing Street briefing on Boris Johnson’s Brexit plans after the prime minister’s director of communications tried to restrict it to selected publications and broadcasters. An invitation sent out by Number 10 offered a “technical background briefing” on the PM’s plans to negotiate a Canadian-style free trade agreement with the EU by the end of the year. But when political correspondents from various outlets arrived inside Number 10, they were asked their names and told to stand in two groups on opposite sides of the entrance hall. Director of communications Lee Cain then invited those on one side to enter and told those on the other to leave. Asked to explain why Downing Street was denying access to some publications - including The Independent - he replied: “We are welcome to brief whoever we want whenever we want.” All of the correspondents refused to take part in the event on those terms and left Number 10.
A well known quote that Boris seems to be attempting- Whoever controls the media, controls the mind.
Maybe on topic - I watched “ 999 what’s your emergency “ this evening, I knew there was an underlying racist element in this Country, but tonight’s episode really highlighted where we are as a nation and what the emergency services put up with on a daily basis, truly shocking.
Not everyone who voted Leave is a racist, but I would wager every racist voted Leave.
Finally, the Financial Times reports that the EU's final words to the UK as it departed the bloc were "thank you, goodbye, and good riddance".
According to the paper, they were spoken by the Croatian ambassador in Brussels, chairing a meeting of EU diplomats with the UK present for the last time as a member state. But it appears the ambassador was not being rude. The paper reports that she thought "good riddance" was akin to "good luck", and the UK ambassador took the comment in good part.
Michel Barnier: Johnson agreed last year to stick to EU rules EU chief negotiator responds to PM as Brussels sets out initial position on future relationship
Michel Barnier has reminded Boris Johnson that he has already agreed in a “very important” declaration to stay true to EU rules on subsidies and standards, as Brussels staked out its opening position on the EU’s future relationship with the UK. Responding to the prime minister’s claim that there would be no need for Britain to continue to respect EU regulations under a trade deal, the EU’s chief negotiator pointed to the “political declaration” agreed last year with Johnson, while admitting that alignment was a “red rag” to Westminster. Brussels is demanding that the UK “dynamically aligns” on state aid and competition regulations to prevent the British government from subsidising elements of the economy, such as the steel, aerospace or car industries.
A well known quote that Boris seems to be attempting- Whoever controls the media, controls the mind.
Maybe on topic - I watched “ 999 what’s your emergency “ this evening, I knew there was an underlying racist element in this Country, but tonight’s episode really highlighted where we are as a nation and what the emergency services put up with on a daily basis, truly shocking.
Not everyone who voted Leave is a racist, but I would wager every racist voted Leave.
The seemingly growing number of these programmes fill me with embarrassment, and shame.
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
I would say the crux of our problems are as follows.
What we have agreed with the EU so far is the Withdrawal Agreement.
This refers to The Irish border arrangements, citizens rights, and how much we money we owe them.
The WA also includes a Political Declaration, which is an outline of the trade negotiations, which are yet to begin.
The PD is not legal and binding.
When Theresa May was negotiating the WA, she claimed that no British PM could accept a border in the Irish Sea, which was the EU solution for avoiding a land border in Ireland, and came up with the backstop as a solution.
Her PD kept us in close alignment with the EU, therefore allowing frictionless trade to continue, and providing little change for our manufacturers, or our borders.
Boris was hailed by the Tory Party as a hero for concluding a deal.
When all he really did was revert to the original solution offered by the EU in respect of the Irish border, resulting in the Irish Sea border, which he also claimed that he would never accept, and changed the non legally binding PD. That was it end of.
So the difficulties surrounding our borders, and the trade deal problems are due to Boris wishing to diverge from the EU rather than align.
Theresa May was offered a number of options on deals that could be struck, one of which was a Canada type deal, but these offers were based on her plan for very close alignment.
The Tories are misleading the public as follows,
They are claiming the EU have backtracked on the deal they have previously offered, but the change in their position, is in response to Boris completely changing his.
No deal was scary for the public, so they started calling it a clean break Brexit, now they are calling it an Australian type deal. They were on telly yesterday, suggesting they now wanted a Canada deal, or an Australian deal, from the EU.
As Australia don't have a deal with the EU, it must be the new name for no deal.
The deal the EU will offer us will be worse than originally discussed, due to our wish to diverge.
This also applies to the friction at borders, no friction if we remained very closely aligned, but unavoidable friction if we chose to diverge.
The EU have maintained throughout that amount of access we are able to gain to the Single Market will be subject to how closely aligned we wished to remain.
So the chaos will be caused by Boris reaping what he has sowed, rather than the EU being difficult.
It looks like he is set to get a sh1t deal, for which he will blame the EU.
The Brexit negotiations seemed to have followed a formula from the start.
Our side knows that benefits involve commitments.
Yet we always want to cherry pick.
In this case if we want good access to Single Market, frictionless trade, and no border problems we have to remain closely aligned.
We want good access, frictionless trade, no border problems, but completely diverge.
We expect all the benefits, and none of the obligations.
Good luck with that Boris.(It is only the prospect of a Tikay (or tijay as he has become known) bo11ock1ng that has discouraged me from using an exclamation mark at this point)
Boris Johnson news – live: PM accused of ‘steering country off cliff’ after Gove says no need for EU trade deal, as climate change response labelled ‘amateur hour’
PM ‘refusing to be honest’ about Brexit damage, experts say
Boris Johnson is “refusing to be honest” about the likely damage from his Brexit plans, a leading think tank has warned.
A damning report by the UK in a Changing Europe group warns that the prime minister is on course to strike only “the barest of bare bone deals” with the EU by his deadline of the end of 2020 after the strict red lines he said out on Monday.
It argue Johnson’s government is failing to be upfront about the inevitable “trade-offs” to come and the adverse consequences for businesses, citizens and taxpayers.
The biggest operator of ferries in the Irish Sea has confirmed that there will be checks, inspections and some new infrastructure for trade, and it wants to know what the government will pay for. The plans will affect both trade with the Republic of Ireland and within the UK between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as a result of Brexit. Stena Line said that its working assumption was that new checks would be carried out in British ports.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson said in December there would not be any checks for goods travelling from Northern Ireland to Great Britain under his Brexit deal. He told Sky News at the time that a leaked Treasury analysis document was "wrong" to suggest this would be the case.
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
Boris and Barnier spar in first Brexit trade skirmish
The EU and UK are on a collision course when it comes to trade. Two speeches on Monday set out the contrasting aims of the EU and UK, foreshadowing clashes likely to take place when post-Brexit trade talks begin. UK prime minister Boris Johnson and European Commission chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier both set out their stalls. Both talked of wanting to strike an ambitious free trade deal but their respective visions differed greatly. Barnier said access to the EU’s Single Market would depend on the UK following EU standards and said there must be “mechanisms to uphold the high standards we have on social, environmental, climate, tax, and state aid matters.” Addressing journalists in Brussels, he called for continued access to UK fishing waters and “stable quota shares.
Johnson spoke around the same time as Barnier but parts of the prime minister’s speech sounded like a direct rebuttal. “There is no need for a free trade agreement to involve accepting EU rules on competition rules, subsidies, social protection, the environment or anything similar,” the prime minister said. The UK would be open to a deal on fishing access, he said, but any quotas would have to be reviewed annually “using the latest scientific data, ensuring British fishing grounds are first and foremost for British boats.”
The two speeches highlight just some of the flash points in trade negotiations. The EU fears poor quality UK products will be dumped in their market, undercutting local producers. Brussels also fears unfair boosts for British industry through state aid or side-stepping regulations. The UK, on the other hand, thinks adhering to EU standards defeats the point of Brexit — why leave if you keep following the rules? Brussels will use the size of the single market as a negotiating tool. Barnier emphasised the fact there are 450 million citizens the UK could sell to. Downing Street, meanwhile, are threatening a ‘no deal’ at the end of the year if the EU doesn’t play ball. Johnson on Monday threatened to walk away with an ‘Australia’ style deal, which would see the UK revert to World Trade Organisation rules with the EU.
Such a move would undoubtedly hurt both sides but experts said the UK would be worse off. “The risks of a go-it-alone trade policy appear to have been underestimated at a time of rising of global trade tension, which could have significant implications for the UK’s economic welfare,” Peter Dixon, a senior economist at Commerzbank, wrote in a note to clients last week.
The pound fell 1% against the dollar (GBPUSD=X) and 0.8% against the euro (GBPEUR=X) in the wake of Johnson’s threat to walk away without a deal. “The way the two sides have come out, traders are starting to consider no-deal risks again,” said Neil Wilson, chief market analyst at Markets.com. “The EU and UK look in very different places right now.” Trade negotiations are set to start later this month after EU leaders approve the draft negotiating proposals. “Even Brexit supporters acknowledge that the hard work is only now beginning and 2020 will be another difficult year, both economically and politically,” Dixon wrote.
Boris Johnson's push to diverge from EU regulations lacks public support, polling expert says 'Our perceptions as consumers is one where it is not as clear that the mood to diverge and certainly to de-regulate is perhaps as strong as the impression the government seem to be giving'
Boris Johnson’s push to diverge from key EU regulations in the Brexit trade talks is not as popular among the public as the government assumes, according to polling guru professor John Curtice. His remarks come after the prime minister outlined his priorities for the imminent negotiations, suggesting on Monday there was “no need” for a free trade treaty to compel the UK to adhere to Brussels’ regulations.
Sir John also suggested Mr Johnson’s decisive election victory did not represent a national endorsement of Brexit. Rather, it showed the Conservatives has successfully united Leave supporters while the Remain vote was “fragmented”.
The most recent poll – on maintaining EU mobile roaming charge rules – in September 2019 showed 72 per cent of all voters supported keeping the regulation, including 65 per cent of those who voted Leave.
On the de-regulation of food standards after Brexit, the polling expert also prevented evidence that both Leave and Remain voters did not want to allow chlorinated chicken and hormone treated beef into the UK market – something the US has floated.
He said: “We know from opinion polls that 52 per cent are in favour of Remain — 48 per cent are in favour of Leave. That is broadly reflected in the outcome of the election. Around 47 per cent of the vote went to parties in favour of Brexit, around 52 per cent went for parties that are in one way or another in favour of a second referendum.
I recently watched Richard Hammond's new series Big,the first episode was 'The Worlds Biggest Car Factory' the VW factory in Germany.As with similar manufacturers they operate on the 'Just In Time' system.It explained that a hatchback car uses 10,000 components from 2,600 suppliers spread across the world,not just within the EU.If other countries outside of the EU can meet the J.I.T. delivery deadlines,why do people assume that the U.K. will not be able to meet such timelines? The whole world does not revolve around the E.U. they are just a cog in the global scheme,who has to cooperate worldwide for it to work.
Firstly the EU is the largest trading bloc in the world. Secondly the EU have rules and regulations which all members have to comply with. For instance the finished car must have 50plus % of components that are manufactured within the EU. Germany will have their own rules on how they deal with non EU imports. The Germans are certainly much more efficient than we are. As long as the finished car complies with the regulations the EU will be happy. We currently have frictionless trade with the EU, however Boris is embarking on a course that will put an end to this. Customs checks, and additional paperwork will definitely cause delays at the border, and increase costs. Ten thousand trucks per day pass through Dover alone. They were estimating that a 10 minute delay would cause 17 mile tailbacks. The EU will not recognise our product testing after we have left, this will cause longer delays for some products, while they await testing on the EU side of the border. The path that Boris had chosen will screw up our automotive industry. He could have chosen a different path that would have allowed frictionless trade to continue.
This will be our fault, and the EU should not be blamed.
If there was a VW factory of a similar size in the UK, we would probably direct the world wide parts to a particular port, and prioritise the customs clearance, ensuring no friction, and causing no delays.
Germany export something like five times as much to China as we do, while remaining members of the EU, because they are better at it.
All that doesn't alter the fact that other non EU countries are able to meet J.I.T. deadlines,product testing etc,so I ask again,if other non EU countries can manage to supply goods to the EU,then why won't the UK be able to? Where are the miles of tailbacks currently in the EU now from all the non EU goods waiting to be checked and tested before being allowed in to the EU?
I would say the crux of our problems are as follows.
What we have agreed with the EU so far is the Withdrawal Agreement.
This refers to The Irish border arrangements, citizens rights, and how much we money we owe them.
The WA also includes a Political Declaration, which is an outline of the trade negotiations, which are yet to begin.
The PD is not legal and binding.
When Theresa May was negotiating the WA, she claimed that no British PM could accept a border in the Irish Sea, which was the EU solution for avoiding a land border in Ireland, and came up with the backstop as a solution.
Her PD kept us in close alignment with the EU, therefore allowing frictionless trade to continue, and providing little change for our manufacturers, or our borders.
Boris was hailed by the Tory Party as a hero for concluding a deal.
When all he really did was revert to the original solution offered by the EU in respect of the Irish border, resulting in the Irish Sea border, which he also claimed that he would never accept, and changed the non legally binding PD. That was it end of.
So the difficulties surrounding our borders, and the trade deal problems are due to Boris wishing to diverge from the EU rather than align.
Theresa May was offered a number of options on deals that could be struck, one of which was a Canada type deal, but these offers were based on her plan for very close alignment.
The Tories are misleading the public as follows,
They are claiming the EU have backtracked on the deal they have previously offered, but the change in their position, is in response to Boris completely changing his.
No deal was scary for the public, so they started calling it a clean break Brexit, now they are calling it an Australian type deal. They were on telly yesterday, suggesting they now wanted a Canada deal, or an Australian deal, from the EU.
As Australia don't have a deal with the EU, it must be the new name for no deal.
The deal the EU will offer us will be worse than originally discussed, due to our wish to diverge.
This also applies to the friction at borders, no friction if we remained very closely aligned, but unavoidable friction if we chose to diverge.
The EU have maintained throughout that amount of access we are able to gain to the Single Market will be subject to how closely aligned we wished to remain.
So the chaos will be caused by Boris reaping what he has sowed, rather than the EU being difficult.
It looks like he is set to get a sh1t deal, for which he will blame the EU.
The Brexit negotiations seemed to have followed a formula from the start.
Our side knows that benefits involve commitments.
Yet we always want to cherry pick.
In this case if we want good access to Single Market, frictionless trade, and no border problems we have to remain closely aligned.
We want good access, frictionless trade, no border problems, but completely diverge.
We expect all the benefits, and none of the obligations.
Good luck with that Boris.(It is only the prospect of a Tikay (or tijay as he has become known) bo11ock1ng that has discouraged me from using an exclamation mark at this point)
Foreign Office staff banned from saying 'no-deal Brexit' despite threat of UK leaving EU with no trade agreement
Foreign Office staff have been banned from saying “no-deal Brexit” as Boris Johnson steps up his drive to convince the public the argument is over. A directive reads: “On 31 December 2020 we will either leave the transition period with a Canada-style free trade agreement or the ‘2019 deal’ which will give us a trading relationship with the EU like Australia’s”. Staff were then told: “Do not use phrases such as ‘deal/no deal’.” The instruction comes despite Australia lacking a trade deal with Brussels, which means a similar “trading relationship” will mean tariffs and other barriers.
The rebranding is widely seen as softening up the public for the UK being forced onto vastly-inferior World Trade Organisation terms in 2021, with the threat of an economic slump. Peter Ricketts, the former top civil servant at the Foreign Office, mocked the memo, tweeting: “We have been warned.” It emerged at the weekend that a no-deal Brexit had been rebranded as an ‘Australia-style’ arrangement – and the prime minister then argued the word Brexit should no longer be used.
Ryanair is advertising for cabin crew jobs with a stipulation, the Independent reports: the candidates must be able to work freely around the EU. But what's that mean for British Citizens from the end of 2020, when the transition period ends? A spokesperson for Ryanair told The Independent: “Currently, we require UK cabin crew applicants to have the unrestricted right to live and work in the EU. However, we will revise and update this requirement before the transition period ends on 31 December 2020.” They don't say how this will be revised or updated, though.
Comments
"DP London Gateway". sounds so much more friendly than its original name-
"Dubai Ports London Gateway". Or, before that "Jebel Ali Port". Owns 78 ports around the world.
The 2 main points for me are:-
1. We blindly believe that a Prime minister actually has the power ro control our infrastructure, whereas power is routinely held abroad
2. It is a question of whether we want our businesses to be the gateway to the World, or just the gateway to our island
As the world becomes more accessible, we pull up the drawbridge. Sad.
Journalists walked out of a Downing Street briefing on Boris Johnson’s Brexit plans after the prime minister’s director of communications tried to restrict it to selected publications and broadcasters.
An invitation sent out by Number 10 offered a “technical background briefing” on the PM’s plans to negotiate a Canadian-style free trade agreement with the EU by the end of the year.
But when political correspondents from various outlets arrived inside Number 10, they were asked their names and told to stand in two groups on opposite sides of the entrance hall.
Director of communications Lee Cain then invited those on one side to enter and told those on the other to leave.
Asked to explain why Downing Street was denying access to some publications - including The Independent - he replied: “We are welcome to brief whoever we want whenever we want.”
All of the correspondents refused to take part in the event on those terms and left Number 10.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/journalists-walk-out-of-no-10-after-bid-to-impose-selective-briefing-of-boris-johnsons-brexit-plans/ar-BBZBEL6?ocid=spartanntp
Maybe on topic - I watched “ 999 what’s your emergency “ this evening, I knew there was an underlying racist element in this Country, but tonight’s episode really highlighted where we are as a nation and what the emergency services put up with on a daily basis, truly shocking.
Not everyone who voted Leave is a racist, but I would wager every racist voted Leave.
Finally, the Financial Times reports that the EU's final words to the UK as it departed the bloc were "thank you, goodbye, and good riddance".
According to the paper, they were spoken by the Croatian ambassador in Brussels, chairing a meeting of EU diplomats with the UK present for the last time as a member state.
But it appears the ambassador was not being rude. The paper reports that she thought "good riddance" was akin to "good luck", and the UK ambassador took the comment in good part.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-51365952
Michel Barnier: Johnson agreed last year to stick to EU rules
EU chief negotiator responds to PM as Brussels sets out initial position on future relationship
Michel Barnier has reminded Boris Johnson that he has already agreed in a “very important” declaration to stay true to EU rules on subsidies and standards, as Brussels staked out its opening position on the EU’s future relationship with the UK.
Responding to the prime minister’s claim that there would be no need for Britain to continue to respect EU regulations under a trade deal, the EU’s chief negotiator pointed to the “political declaration” agreed last year with Johnson, while admitting that alignment was a “red rag” to Westminster.
Brussels is demanding that the UK “dynamically aligns” on state aid and competition regulations to prevent the British government from subsidising elements of the economy, such as the steel, aerospace or car industries.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/03/michel-barnier-boris-johnson-eu-rules-brexit
What we have agreed with the EU so far is the Withdrawal Agreement.
This refers to The Irish border arrangements, citizens rights, and how much we money we owe them.
The WA also includes a Political Declaration, which is an outline of the trade negotiations, which are yet to begin.
The PD is not legal and binding.
When Theresa May was negotiating the WA, she claimed that no British PM could accept a border in the Irish Sea, which was the EU solution for avoiding a land border in Ireland, and came up with the backstop as a solution.
Her PD kept us in close alignment with the EU, therefore allowing frictionless trade to continue, and providing little change for our manufacturers, or our borders.
Boris was hailed by the Tory Party as a hero for concluding a deal.
When all he really did was revert to the original solution offered by the EU in respect of the Irish border, resulting in the Irish Sea border, which he also claimed that he would never accept, and changed the non legally binding PD. That was it end of.
So the difficulties surrounding our borders, and the trade deal problems are due to Boris wishing to diverge from the EU rather than align.
Theresa May was offered a number of options on deals that could be struck, one of which was a Canada type deal, but these offers were based on her plan for very close alignment.
The Tories are misleading the public as follows,
They are claiming the EU have backtracked on the deal they have previously offered, but the change in their position, is in response to Boris completely changing his.
No deal was scary for the public, so they started calling it a clean break Brexit, now they are calling it an Australian type deal. They were on telly yesterday, suggesting they now wanted a Canada deal, or an Australian deal, from the EU.
As Australia don't have a deal with the EU, it must be the new name for no deal.
The deal the EU will offer us will be worse than originally discussed, due to our wish to diverge.
This also applies to the friction at borders, no friction if we remained very closely aligned, but unavoidable friction if we chose to diverge.
The EU have maintained throughout that amount of access we are able to gain to the Single Market will be subject to how closely aligned we wished to remain.
So the chaos will be caused by Boris reaping what he has sowed, rather than the EU being difficult.
It looks like he is set to get a sh1t deal, for which he will blame the EU.
The Brexit negotiations seemed to have followed a formula from the start.
Our side knows that benefits involve commitments.
Yet we always want to cherry pick.
In this case if we want good access to Single Market, frictionless trade, and no border problems we have to remain closely aligned.
We want good access, frictionless trade, no border problems, but completely diverge.
We expect all the benefits, and none of the obligations.
Good luck with that Boris.(It is only the prospect of a Tikay (or tijay as he has become known) bo11ock1ng that has discouraged me from using an exclamation mark at this point)
PM ‘refusing to be honest’ about Brexit damage, experts say
Boris Johnson is “refusing to be honest” about the likely damage from his Brexit plans, a leading think tank has warned.
A damning report by the UK in a Changing Europe group warns that the prime minister is on course to strike only “the barest of bare bone deals” with the EU by his deadline of the end of 2020 after the strict red lines he said out on Monday.
It argue Johnson’s government is failing to be upfront about the inevitable “trade-offs” to come and the adverse consequences for businesses, citizens and taxpayers.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-live-boris-johnson-latest-today-climate-change-streatham-terror-labour-a9315986.html
The biggest operator of ferries in the Irish Sea has confirmed that there will be checks, inspections and some new infrastructure for trade, and it wants to know what the government will pay for.
The plans will affect both trade with the Republic of Ireland and within the UK between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as a result of Brexit.
Stena Line said that its working assumption was that new checks would be carried out in British ports.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson said in December there would not be any checks for goods travelling from Northern Ireland to Great Britain under his Brexit deal.
He told Sky News at the time that a leaked Treasury analysis document was "wrong" to suggest this would be the case.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51351677
The EU and UK are on a collision course when it comes to trade.
Two speeches on Monday set out the contrasting aims of the EU and UK, foreshadowing clashes likely to take place when post-Brexit trade talks begin.
UK prime minister Boris Johnson and European Commission chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier both set out their stalls. Both talked of wanting to strike an ambitious free trade deal but their respective visions differed greatly.
Barnier said access to the EU’s Single Market would depend on the UK following EU standards and said there must be “mechanisms to uphold the high standards we have on social, environmental, climate, tax, and state aid matters.” Addressing journalists in Brussels, he called for continued access to UK fishing waters and “stable quota shares.
Johnson spoke around the same time as Barnier but parts of the prime minister’s speech sounded like a direct rebuttal.
“There is no need for a free trade agreement to involve accepting EU rules on competition rules, subsidies, social protection, the environment or anything similar,” the prime minister said.
The UK would be open to a deal on fishing access, he said, but any quotas would have to be reviewed annually “using the latest scientific data, ensuring British fishing grounds are first and foremost for British boats.”
The two speeches highlight just some of the flash points in trade negotiations.
The EU fears poor quality UK products will be dumped in their market, undercutting local producers. Brussels also fears unfair boosts for British industry through state aid or side-stepping regulations.
The UK, on the other hand, thinks adhering to EU standards defeats the point of Brexit — why leave if you keep following the rules?
Brussels will use the size of the single market as a negotiating tool. Barnier emphasised the fact there are 450 million citizens the UK could sell to.
Downing Street, meanwhile, are threatening a ‘no deal’ at the end of the year if the EU doesn’t play ball. Johnson on Monday threatened to walk away with an ‘Australia’ style deal, which would see the UK revert to World Trade Organisation rules with the EU.
Such a move would undoubtedly hurt both sides but experts said the UK would be worse off.
“The risks of a go-it-alone trade policy appear to have been underestimated at a time of rising of global trade tension, which could have significant implications for the UK’s economic welfare,” Peter Dixon, a senior economist at Commerzbank, wrote in a note to clients last week.
The pound fell 1% against the dollar (GBPUSD=X) and 0.8% against the euro (GBPEUR=X) in the wake of Johnson’s threat to walk away without a deal.
“The way the two sides have come out, traders are starting to consider no-deal risks again,” said Neil Wilson, chief market analyst at Markets.com. “The EU and UK look in very different places right now.”
Trade negotiations are set to start later this month after EU leaders approve the draft negotiating proposals.
“Even Brexit supporters acknowledge that the hard work is only now beginning and 2020 will be another difficult year, both economically and politically,” Dixon wrote.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/boris-johnson-michel-barnier-brexit-trade-talk-speeches-eu-132758089.html
Boris Johnson's push to diverge from EU regulations lacks public support, polling expert says
'Our perceptions as consumers is one where it is not as clear that the mood to diverge and certainly to de-regulate is perhaps as strong as the impression the government seem to be giving'
Boris Johnson’s push to diverge from key EU regulations in the Brexit trade talks is not as popular among the public as the government assumes, according to polling guru professor John Curtice.
His remarks come after the prime minister outlined his priorities for the imminent negotiations, suggesting on Monday there was “no need” for a free trade treaty to compel the UK to adhere to Brussels’ regulations.
Sir John also suggested Mr Johnson’s decisive election victory did not represent a national endorsement of Brexit. Rather, it showed the Conservatives has successfully united Leave supporters while the Remain vote was “fragmented”.
The most recent poll – on maintaining EU mobile roaming charge rules – in September 2019 showed 72 per cent of all voters supported keeping the regulation, including 65 per cent of those who voted Leave.
On the de-regulation of food standards after Brexit, the polling expert also prevented evidence that both Leave and Remain voters did not want to allow chlorinated chicken and hormone treated beef into the UK market – something the US has floated.
He said: “We know from opinion polls that 52 per cent are in favour of Remain — 48 per cent are in favour of Leave. That is broadly reflected in the outcome of the election. Around 47 per cent of the vote went to parties in favour of Brexit, around 52 per cent went for parties that are in one way or another in favour of a second referendum.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-trade-deal-brexit-news-eu-public-support-a9316511.html
Foreign Office staff have been banned from saying “no-deal Brexit” as Boris Johnson steps up his drive to convince the public the argument is over.
A directive reads: “On 31 December 2020 we will either leave the transition period with a Canada-style free trade agreement or the ‘2019 deal’ which will give us a trading relationship with the EU like Australia’s”.
Staff were then told: “Do not use phrases such as ‘deal/no deal’.”
The instruction comes despite Australia lacking a trade deal with Brussels, which means a similar “trading relationship” will mean tariffs and other barriers.
The rebranding is widely seen as softening up the public for the UK being forced onto vastly-inferior World Trade Organisation terms in 2021, with the threat of an economic slump.
Peter Ricketts, the former top civil servant at the Foreign Office, mocked the memo, tweeting: “We have been warned.”
It emerged at the weekend that a no-deal Brexit had been rebranded as an ‘Australia-style’ arrangement – and the prime minister then argued the word Brexit should no longer be used.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/foreign-office-staff-banned-from-saying-no-deal-brexit-despite-threat-of-uk-leaving-eu-with-no-trade-agreement/ar-BBZFEdh?ocid=spartandhp
Ryanair is advertising for cabin crew jobs with a stipulation, the Independent reports: the candidates must be able to work freely around the EU.
But what's that mean for British Citizens from the end of 2020, when the transition period ends?
A spokesperson for Ryanair told The Independent: “Currently, we require UK cabin crew applicants to have the unrestricted right to live and work in the EU. However, we will revise and update this requirement before the transition period ends on 31 December 2020.”
They don't say how this will be revised or updated, though.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/uk_leaves_the_eu
His comment comes amid reports that president Trump was “apoplectic” when told of the decision by Mr Johnson in a phone call last week.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/mike-pence-hints-boris-johnsons-huawei-decision-could-be-deal-breaker-in-us-uk-trade-deal-well-see/ar-BBZLn7X?ocid=spartandhp