Brexit: Irish Sea border issues foreseen when deal was done
On 17 October 2019 Boris Johnson was in ebullient form.
He had just sealed the Brexit withdrawal deal with the EU.
At a Brussels press conference, the prime minister hailed the agreement as marking the beginning of a "very exciting" time for the UK.
"I want to stress that this is a great deal for our country, for the UK," he said.
"And what it means is that we in the UK can come out of the EU as one United Kingdom - England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, together.
"And it means we can decide our future together, we can take back control, as the phrase goes, of our money, our borders, our laws, together."
Prescient study Meanwhile civil servants were doing the work of turning the deal into domestic UK law - what would become the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill.
Just four days after Mr Johnson's Brussels triumph, the Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) had produced an analysis of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.
It is that piece of work which shows that the problems with the Irish Sea border were foreseen virtually from the moment the deal was signed.
The DExEU civil servants produced a prescient study that almost precisely describes the issues which have come into sharp focus over the past week.
The Northern Ireland part of the deal - the Protocol - keeps Northern Ireland in the EU's single market for goods and EU customs rules are enforced at its ports.
That is to prevent a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland but at the expense of a new trade border within the UK.
The DExEU report was clear about what this meant: "Goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland will be required to complete both import declarations and Entry Summary Declarations because the UK will be applying the EU's custom code in Northern Ireland.
"This will result in additional administrative costs to businesses.
"Businesses that do not currently trade outside the EU will incur familiarisation costs as they have not had to engage with customs processes."
'Disproportionate effects' It went on to explain that the heaviest burden would fall on small businesses.
"The proposals will have an effect on all UK businesses that move goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, irrespective of the business's size.
"Economic theory suggests that a 'one size fits all' approach for business trade requirements is likely to have a disproportionate effect on small and micro businesses (SMBs) in particular.
"There would be both fixed and variable costs for firms as a consequence of the Protocol, consequently these costs are likely to be a larger proportion of SMBs' operating costs and therefore disproportionately affect them."
It is the trade in food and plant products from Great Britain to Northern Ireland that has faced the greatest disruption since 1 January.
The DExEU report devotes a lengthy section to that issue and again spelled out the implications.
"There will be additional documentation required on all agri-food goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland to ensure that they comply with the necessary regulations," it stated.
"These could include Export Health Certificates for products of animal origin, fish and live animals; and phytosanitary certificates for plants.
"This would result in an additional administrative cost to businesses moving goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland."
'Symbolically separated' DExEU was not the only government department with a clear view of what was coming.
During the 2019 UK general election campaign the Labour Party released a leaked Treasury presentation.
The language in the document was even blunter.
It said: "The Withdrawal Agreement has the potential to separate Northern Ireland in practice from whole swathes of the UK's internal market."
It also correctly anticipated the way in which the Protocol would be perceived by many unionists: "Northern Ireland symbolically separated from the union/economic union undermined."
What is the Northern Ireland Protocol? Five steps that led to an Irish Sea border UK and EU in 'constructive' talks on NI trade row Northern Ireland is of little interest to most voters or journalists in Great Britain so the issue sank without trace during the election campaign.
After winning that election, the government did act to mitigate the looming impacts of the Protocol.
Some potential requirements for new processes on Northern Ireland-Great Britain trade were negotiated away in further talks with the EU.
About £500m is being spent on a Trader Support Service to help with customs and a Movement Assistance Service to help with the certification costs of agri-food goods.
There are "grace periods", meaning some of the new processes are being phased in.
But the fundamental character of the Protocol has not changed since those DExEU officials explained it all more than 15 months ago.
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:-
1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
The EU did negotiate a far better price for the AZ, and Pfizer vaccines.
True. But they didn't get them Seems strange that there can be different pricing when this is supposedly "not for profit"
The authorisation process would have been identical.
But if we were still in the EU, we would have been forced to hand over our excess vaccine. Like every club, you have to look after your fellow members.
Of course anyone can call a thread anything they want. But calling it 1 thing and doing precisely the opposite is a bit strange
How do you think Brexit is going so far?
Better than I expected.
Not without any problems-but any sensible person would expect an amount of problems.
Northern Ireland is a major problem. But the upside for the UK is that this border problem will likely mean that any independent Scotland will not be admitted to the EU. For 2 reasons:-
1. Most current EU countries have not existed in their current form as long as the UK. Spain will not want to encourage their own separatist movements, etc 2. If anyone thinks the N.I border is problematic, imagine the problems in relation to the England/Scotland border.
Important to remember that no news means good news. The doomsayer wing of Remainers are as far removed from reality as the Farage wing.
This is quite an interesting brief trip back in time.
I was looking for the NewsNight report on Brexit last night, but couldnt find it.
Who said anything about a veto? European politics is rather deeper than that.
No-one will use a veto, because that would be seized upon by the various other separatist movements throughout Europe.
No-it will be waffle-"we'd love to admit Scotland, but regrettably due to problems related to the border between England/Scotland, and/or the shared currency and/or the various shared institutions, and/or any other excuse we can dream up over the next 8 years..."
But no-one will admit that. Because they would look weak. And might lose power in their own country.
Apparently the last 20 polls in Scotland have all resulted in a majority in favour of Independence. A slight swing from the result in 2014. Although a very small majority. The main two factors that seem to have fuelled this change, is their dislike of the Tories, in particular Boris Johnson, and Brexit. Should Brexit continue to go badly, and Boris remaining in office is likely to add fuel to the fire. Although any uncertainty regarding the need for a border with England, the likelihood of EU membership, and any currency issues may sew the seeds of doubt amongst the Scots. So if the EU came out and confirmed that Scotland would be accepted into the EU prior to a referendum. is likely to boost the number in favour of independence. Also if Boris was still in power, some certainty regarding a currency, and a smart border would help the SNP. Any uncertainty regarding the above is likely to result in a no vote. I dont see the people of Scotland voting to leave the UK, on the off chance that they may be able to join the EU,
EU poised to lock Britain out of its banking market, Andrew Bailey warns
Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey has warned that the European Union is poised to lock Britain out of its vast banking market, in a move that would push up the cost of finance for millions of consumers on both sides of the Channel.
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:-
1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
The EU did negotiate a far better price for the AZ, and Pfizer vaccines.
True. But they didn't get them Seems strange that there can be different pricing when this is supposedly "not for profit"
The authorisation process would have been identical.
But if we were still in the EU, we would have been forced to hand over our excess vaccine. Like every club, you have to look after your fellow members.
Of course anyone can call a thread anything they want. But calling it 1 thing and doing precisely the opposite is a bit strange
How do you think Brexit is going so far?
Better than I expected.
Not without any problems-but any sensible person would expect an amount of problems.
Northern Ireland is a major problem. But the upside for the UK is that this border problem will likely mean that any independent Scotland will not be admitted to the EU. For 2 reasons:-
1. Most current EU countries have not existed in their current form as long as the UK. Spain will not want to encourage their own separatist movements, etc 2. If anyone thinks the N.I border is problematic, imagine the problems in relation to the England/Scotland border.
Important to remember that no news means good news. The doomsayer wing of Remainers are as far removed from reality as the Farage wing.
The Guardian view on the Brexit aftermath: the price of dishonesty
Twice in as many years, Brexit has been declared “done” without being done. The UK’s membership of the EU formally expired in January 2020. The change in status was camouflaged by transitional arrangements that expired at the start of 2021. Even now, there is a three-month “grace period” waiving aspects of the Northern Ireland protocol of the final deal.
On Thursday, Mr Gove meets Maroš Šefčovič, his EU counterpart on the joint committee overseeing the protocol, and the dynamics are grimly familiar from every previous chapter of the Brexit process. The commission reminds the UK that it has signed a treaty and is bound by its provisions. Buyer’s remorse is not grounds to renege. The UK side insists that Brussels is failing to respect its neighbour and trying to dictate terms instead of conducting a dialogue between equals.
Mr Gove has felt emboldened in this row ever since 29 January, when Ursula von der Leyen, commission president, triggered (and then quickly un-triggered) emergency clauses to suspend the protocol in a dispute over cross-border flows of Covid vaccine. It is hard to overstate how reckless and counterproductive that move was. The article 16 mechanism is meant to be a last resort, not a standard tool in the diplomatic arsenal. By reaching for it so early, Ms von der Leyen squandered moral authority and goodwill on an issue where both are needed to coax the UK into normalisation of the new arrangements.
EU officials note that Boris Johnson threatened repudiation of the protocol last year, even before it had been ratified, so the squandering of goodwill started on the UK side. An argument about who started what bodes ill for the future operation of a delicate deal. It is true that Mr Johnson’s rhetoric around Northern Ireland has never reflected the reality of what he signs up to. In October 2019, when he completed the withdrawal agreement, he promised there would be no customs barriers in the Irish Sea. That was untrue, as Northern Irish businesses have discovered.
Across the UK, firms and consumers are discovering costs of Brexit that Mr Johnson denied. That denial was born of a failure to understand the trade-off between regulatory autonomy and market access. The prime minister swapped seamless trade for notional sovereignty and passed the cost on to unsuspecting businesses. Naturally, he wants to blame the EU for any pain. These are not teething troubles in implementation of the deal. They are the deal.
Alongside the economic adjustment, there needs to be political adjustment to the new relationship. The commission’s vaccine blunder has not helped. But the greater obstacle is British ministers’ unwillingness to accept that the rules they now find so objectionable are the same ones they so recently cheered as a triumph. Either they failed to understand the deal, or had no intention of keeping their word. Neither explanation reflects well on the prime minister or the Brexit he mis-sold to the country.
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:- 1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
He was getting a bit of stick on the Sky Press Preview, as his girlfriend and dog feature on one of the front pages tomorrow, after being photographed by the three photographers that he is employing, obviously at the expense of the taxpayer,
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:-
1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
Brexit blunder as UK agreed to law behind 'shellfish ban' in 2008
Last week, the EU told British fishermen they face being indefinitely banned from exporting live mussels, oysters, clams, cockles and scallops from UK waters because it is now a third country. Countries which don't meet the EU's standards have to purify their catch domestically before exporting. The process adds significant costs and delays and is particularly impacting fishermen in Wales and the south west of England.
However, the Government argues the EU's move contradicts previous assurances that the temporary measure would end in April, with George Eustice, the Environment Secretary, arguing there is nothing in the regulations to prevent trade from continuing.
Mr Eustice said the ban was "quite unexpected and really indefensible", telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The truth is, there is no legal barrier to this trade continuing, both on animal health grounds and on public health grounds - there is legal provision within existing EU regulations to allow such trade to continue from the UK.
"We are just asking the EU to abide by their existing regulations and not to seek to change them."
Last night, Prime Minister Boris Johnson also refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its ban.
It appears, though, that Britain was fully aware of the restrictions, having voted for them in 2008.
Lib Dem North Somerset Councillor for Blagdon and Churchill Patrick Keating wrote on Twitter: "The 'ban' on the import of live molluscs is not specifically targeted at the UK as some sort of 'Brexit revenge'.
"The reality is that these restrictions apply to the import of aquaculture products from every non-EU country, as per Reg. No 1251/2008.
"This particular piece of legislation dates from 2008 - when the UK was a member state, and had votes in Council and Parliament.
"So, expressions of surprise that there are rules that apply to the import of shellfish from non-EU countries are somewhat disingenuous."
He added: "The failure here is of the Government to properly explain to this industry the reality of trading with the EU as a third country. These are the conditions that logically apply as a consequence of choosing not to be a member. The UK has put itself on the other side of existing barriers.
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:-
1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
The EU did negotiate a far better price for the AZ, and Pfizer vaccines.
True. But they didn't get them Seems strange that there can be different pricing when this is supposedly "not for profit"
The authorisation process would have been identical.
But if we were still in the EU, we would have been forced to hand over our excess vaccine. Like every club, you have to look after your fellow members.
Of course anyone can call a thread anything they want. But calling it 1 thing and doing precisely the opposite is a bit strange
How do you think Brexit is going so far?
Better than I expected.
Not without any problems-but any sensible person would expect an amount of problems.
Northern Ireland is a major problem. But the upside for the UK is that this border problem will likely mean that any independent Scotland will not be admitted to the EU. For 2 reasons:-
1. Most current EU countries have not existed in their current form as long as the UK. Spain will not want to encourage their own separatist movements, etc 2. If anyone thinks the N.I border is problematic, imagine the problems in relation to the England/Scotland border.
Important to remember that no news means good news. The doomsayer wing of Remainers are as far removed from reality as the Farage wing.
Brexit news - live: Half of exporters to EU reporting difficulties as Amsterdam surpasses London in trading
EU accuses UK of 'shortcomings' over implementation of Northern Ireland protocol
The EU has accused the UK government of "shortcomings" over implementing the Northern Ireland protocol, ahead of a meeting between the government and the bloc in London.
The protocol was the way in which a "hard border" was prevented on the island of Ireland following the agreement of a Brexit deal in December - but has resulted in some additional checks for goods travelling from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
In a letter to Michael Gove, the vice president of the European Commission, Maros Sefcovic, says while he recognises the progress being made on implementing the protocol, there are a "number of current shortcomings preventing the protocol and our practical arrangements from delivering on the ground".
Among the "teething problems", Mr Sefcovic says border entry posts are not yet operational, which he adds means that very few checks are being made on livestock and plants at the border.
Mr Sefcovic adds that the UK has not yet given border officials access to the relevant IT systems as agreed, and says the government has issued guidance that hauliers moving goods between Northern Ireland and Great Britain do not have to submit "equivalent information" to authorities - despite agreements on the contrary.
He says he wants the UK and the EU to work together in order to make the protocol work.
His remarks were published as a survey of UK exporters by the British Chambers of Commerce found that 49% were struggling to adapt to post-Brexit trading changes with the EU last month - prompting calls for more government support.
You really aren't giving Brexit a fair chance are you Mr Haysie?
Its only been 35 days or so, give it the almost 5 decades it took for the E U to hogtie us and I'm sure everything will be just fine.
Keep calm and put the kettle on.
I am very calm.
I was expecting queues of trucks here and there and some minor paperwork issues that could be resolved fairly quickly. I assumed we would be fairly well prepared, after spending billions of pounds on preparations. @Essexphil must have been expecting something completely different in the light of his comment on how it had gone so far. Maybe all out war with Europe was anticipated?
What we have seen that I wasnt necessarily expecting is as follows,
A lack of queues of trucks, probably because our exports to the EU, are down by almost 70%. Although this may well change as more regulations are likely to cause further delays, at the end of the current grace period, from April onwards. Hundreds of British lorry drivers fined £300 for not having permit to drive through Kent. Furious Kent residents step up fight over Brexit lorry park. Boris Johnson warned of export slump, as two-thirds of lorries leaving UK empty. JD Sports claiming extra costs so far run into double digit millions, and may well set up a distribution centre inside the EU. Brexit worse than feared, says JD Sports boss. Cheshire cheesemaker says business left with £250,000 'Brexit hole'. Small companies just giving up and stopping exports to the EU. Haulage companies refusing to continue travelling to Europe. Brexit: 71 pages of paperwork for 1 lorry of fish. Shellfish companies giving up altogether and shutting their doors. Brexit blunder as UK agreed to law behind 'shellfish ban' in 2008. Fishing boats tied up and not operating. Consumers faced with substantial unexpected extra costs in respect of taxes etc on many products. Fury at 'Brexit tax' as retailers threaten to burn goods rather than pay higher costs. Our Government advising many companies to relocate staff to EU countries, to overcome difficulties, resulting in UK staff being laid off. Set up shop in Europe, government advisers tell Brexit-hit businesses. Amsterdam has surpassed London in share dealing. Chaos spread to meat industry as government blames empty shelves on Covid. Boris Johnson blamed seafood exporters ‘not filling in the right forms’ for post-Brexit sales crash. 'Big loss' for Britain as EU trade deal exposes some UK cars to tariffs. Vauxhall boss warned Brexit and engine ban have 'changed the rules'. GKN plans closure of UK automotive plant with loss of 500 jobs. Jersey potato farmers flew in workers from the Philippines to stop crops rotting in the fields and plug gap left by Romanian and Polish migrants after Brexit. EU citizens who left UK because of pandemic set to lose right to live in Britain. Roger Daltrey branded hypocrite after signing letter criticising Brexit deal's impact on touring. Labour accuses Boris Johnson of ‘dishonesty’ in denying Irish Sea border’s existence. After Brexit, Ireland and France cut out the middleman - Britain. Brexit: Irish Sea border issues foreseen when deal was done. Northern Ireland border staff withdrawn from duty over safety fears. Loyalist figure suggests ‘it may be time to fight physically for our freedoms within UK’. Boris Johnson’s claim we can’t close borders because of food imports branded ‘complete and utter nonsense’. As trade through the Channel Tunnel collapses border delays and tariffs mean Brexit is wreaking havoc on our businesses.
I am still very calm. To describe much of the above as teething problems is misleading. This will logically get worse at the end of the grace period. Worse again if some of the issues are resolved and traffic increases.
So thats my list. Here is your opportunity to post your list of Brexit benefits. Although I dont expect this to happen. You usually disappear when asked a question, or asked to answer a specific point.
An attempt has been made to include the success of the UK vaccine roll out as a Brexit benefit, but that is not true.
You really aren't giving Brexit a fair chance are you Mr Haysie?
Its only been 35 days or so, give it the almost 5 decades it took for the E U to hogtie us and I'm sure everything will be just fine.
Keep calm and put the kettle on.
I thought this one deserved a post of its own, as if it werent for the consequences, it would be so comical.
Last week the EU told British fisherman that they were banned from selling live shellfish from UK waters, into the EU.
George Eustace responded by touring a long list of tv studios, and radio stations,
Mr Eustice said the ban was "quite unexpected and really indefensible", telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The truth is, there is no legal barrier to this trade continuing, both on animal health grounds and on public health grounds - there is legal provision within existing EU regulations to allow such trade to continue from the UK.
"We are just asking the EU to abide by their existing regulations and not to seek to change them."
Last night, Prime Minister Boris Johnson also refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its ban.
It appears, though, that Britain was fully aware of the restrictions, having voted for them in 2008.
Lib Dem North Somerset Councillor for Blagdon and Churchill Patrick Keating wrote on Twitter: "The 'ban' on the import of live molluscs is not specifically targeted at the UK as some sort of 'Brexit revenge'.
"This particular piece of legislation dates from 2008 - when the UK was a member state, and had votes in Council and Parliament.
"So, expressions of surprise that there are rules that apply to the import of shellfish from non-EU countries are somewhat disingenuous."
He added: "The failure here is of the Government to properly explain to this industry the reality of trading with the EU as a third country. These are the conditions that logically apply as a consequence of choosing not to be a member. The UK has put itself on the other side of existing barriers.
Why do I think it has gone less badly than people feared? Let's see.
There was supposed to be a meltdown at the borders. Lasted for about a minute. Widespread delay to food supplies. Tesco ran out of Brie for 1 day. Widespread medicine shortage. Hasn't happened (unless you are the EU) Car manufacturers to leave. Hasn't happened. Thousands of farmers going bankrupt. Hasn't happened. Prices to go up. Not happening, except supermarkets always hike prices post-Xmas Major hit to GDP. Hasn't happened yet. Thousands of businesses to close due to Brexit. The headline one, the Bridlington Lobster Company employed 3 (yes 3) people. I'm sure I'm not the only person glad to see a rule that forbids us shipping live creatures for slaughter. Fishermen and JD Sports will moan. That's a given.
Newspapers are desperately trying to create division. But it's all a bit dull.
The biggest benefit? People were promised (rightly or wrongly) a free vote on Brexit. They were also promised that politicians would implement the result. And they did.
I do not believe the electorate should vote on such things. But not to keep those promises would have been far worse than any temporary economic price.
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:- 1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
He was getting a bit of stick on the Sky Press Preview, as his girlfriend and dog feature on one of the front pages tomorrow, after being photographed by the three photographers that he is employing, obviously at the expense of the taxpayer,
That has nothing to do with whether or not he is an effective PM. He'll always be an entitled Old Etonian, who believes poor people should subsidise him. He will always be a divisive figure. But then so were a lot of very effective PMs.
You really aren't giving Brexit a fair chance are you Mr Haysie?
Its only been 35 days or so, give it the almost 5 decades it took for the E U to hogtie us and I'm sure everything will be just fine.
Keep calm and put the kettle on.
I thought this one deserved a post of its own, as if it werent for the consequences, it would be so comical.
Last week the EU told British fisherman that they were banned from selling live shellfish from UK waters, into the EU.
George Eustace responded by touring a long list of tv studios, and radio stations,
Mr Eustice said the ban was "quite unexpected and really indefensible", telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The truth is, there is no legal barrier to this trade continuing, both on animal health grounds and on public health grounds - there is legal provision within existing EU regulations to allow such trade to continue from the UK.
"We are just asking the EU to abide by their existing regulations and not to seek to change them."
Last night, Prime Minister Boris Johnson also refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its ban.
It appears, though, that Britain was fully aware of the restrictions, having voted for them in 2008.
Lib Dem North Somerset Councillor for Blagdon and Churchill Patrick Keating wrote on Twitter: "The 'ban' on the import of live molluscs is not specifically targeted at the UK as some sort of 'Brexit revenge'.
"This particular piece of legislation dates from 2008 - when the UK was a member state, and had votes in Council and Parliament.
"So, expressions of surprise that there are rules that apply to the import of shellfish from non-EU countries are somewhat disingenuous."
He added: "The failure here is of the Government to properly explain to this industry the reality of trading with the EU as a third country. These are the conditions that logically apply as a consequence of choosing not to be a member. The UK has put itself on the other side of existing barriers.
You couldnt make it up.
The EU bullies have picked on us again?
I dont think so.
But it says just as much about us as a nation.
You would hope that, if your business was selling live shellfish, you would have been aware of the 2008 legislation. And in the 4 or so years between the vote to leave and implementation made plans either to sell your stock in the UK or have a method of purifying the stock to meet EU standards.
But no, it's all the Government's fault.
Likewise, the EU seems to have been far more able to export to us than the other way round. Very easy to blame the Government again. But some of the blame is the fact that UK business has not adapted as quickly.
I am at something of a loss as to why you create a thread called "Brexit Benefits", and then give nothing but examples of perceived disadvantages, rather than any benefits. There have undoubtedly been problems, but the sky hasn't exactly fallen in, has it?
So, in the interests of debate as to possible benefits of Brexit, 2 simple questions:- 1. Do you think Boris has been a more effective PM since we left the EU? 2. Do you think that, if we were still in the EU, we would have been allowed to be so far ahead in vaccinations?
He was getting a bit of stick on the Sky Press Preview, as his girlfriend and dog feature on one of the front pages tomorrow, after being photographed by the three photographers that he is employing, obviously at the expense of the taxpayer,
That has nothing to do with whether or not he is an effective PM. He'll always be an entitled Old Etonian, who believes poor people should subsidise him. He will always be a divisive figure. But then so were a lot of very effective PMs.
His stupidity prevents him from being an effective PM. This is just another example of that stupidity.
Comments
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/eu-citizens-left-uk-because-163019486.html
On 17 October 2019 Boris Johnson was in ebullient form.
He had just sealed the Brexit withdrawal deal with the EU.
At a Brussels press conference, the prime minister hailed the agreement as marking the beginning of a "very exciting" time for the UK.
"I want to stress that this is a great deal for our country, for the UK," he said.
"And what it means is that we in the UK can come out of the EU as one United Kingdom - England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, together.
"And it means we can decide our future together, we can take back control, as the phrase goes, of our money, our borders, our laws, together."
Prescient study
Meanwhile civil servants were doing the work of turning the deal into domestic UK law - what would become the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill.
Just four days after Mr Johnson's Brussels triumph, the Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) had produced an analysis of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.
It is that piece of work which shows that the problems with the Irish Sea border were foreseen virtually from the moment the deal was signed.
The DExEU civil servants produced a prescient study that almost precisely describes the issues which have come into sharp focus over the past week.
The Northern Ireland part of the deal - the Protocol - keeps Northern Ireland in the EU's single market for goods and EU customs rules are enforced at its ports.
That is to prevent a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland but at the expense of a new trade border within the UK.
The DExEU report was clear about what this meant: "Goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland will be required to complete both import declarations and Entry Summary Declarations because the UK will be applying the EU's custom code in Northern Ireland.
"This will result in additional administrative costs to businesses.
"Businesses that do not currently trade outside the EU will incur familiarisation costs as they have not had to engage with customs processes."
'Disproportionate effects'
It went on to explain that the heaviest burden would fall on small businesses.
"The proposals will have an effect on all UK businesses that move goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, irrespective of the business's size.
"Economic theory suggests that a 'one size fits all' approach for business trade requirements is likely to have a disproportionate effect on small and micro businesses (SMBs) in particular.
"There would be both fixed and variable costs for firms as a consequence of the Protocol, consequently these costs are likely to be a larger proportion of SMBs' operating costs and therefore disproportionately affect them."
It is the trade in food and plant products from Great Britain to Northern Ireland that has faced the greatest disruption since 1 January.
The DExEU report devotes a lengthy section to that issue and again spelled out the implications.
"There will be additional documentation required on all agri-food goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland to ensure that they comply with the necessary regulations," it stated.
"These could include Export Health Certificates for products of animal origin, fish and live animals; and phytosanitary certificates for plants.
"This would result in an additional administrative cost to businesses moving goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland."
'Symbolically separated'
DExEU was not the only government department with a clear view of what was coming.
During the 2019 UK general election campaign the Labour Party released a leaked Treasury presentation.
The language in the document was even blunter.
It said: "The Withdrawal Agreement has the potential to separate Northern Ireland in practice from whole swathes of the UK's internal market."
It also correctly anticipated the way in which the Protocol would be perceived by many unionists: "Northern Ireland symbolically separated from the union/economic union undermined."
What is the Northern Ireland Protocol?
Five steps that led to an Irish Sea border
UK and EU in 'constructive' talks on NI trade row
Northern Ireland is of little interest to most voters or journalists in Great Britain so the issue sank without trace during the election campaign.
After winning that election, the government did act to mitigate the looming impacts of the Protocol.
Some potential requirements for new processes on Northern Ireland-Great Britain trade were negotiated away in further talks with the EU.
About £500m is being spent on a Trader Support Service to help with customs and a Movement Assistance Service to help with the certification costs of agri-food goods.
There are "grace periods", meaning some of the new processes are being phased in.
But the fundamental character of the Protocol has not changed since those DExEU officials explained it all more than 15 months ago.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-55952459
I was looking for the NewsNight report on Brexit last night, but couldnt find it.
A slight swing from the result in 2014.
Although a very small majority.
The main two factors that seem to have fuelled this change, is their dislike of the Tories, in particular Boris Johnson, and Brexit.
Should Brexit continue to go badly, and Boris remaining in office is likely to add fuel to the fire.
Although any uncertainty regarding the need for a border with England, the likelihood of EU membership, and any currency issues may sew the seeds of doubt amongst the Scots.
So if the EU came out and confirmed that Scotland would be accepted into the EU prior to a referendum. is likely to boost the number in favour of independence.
Also if Boris was still in power, some certainty regarding a currency, and a smart border would help the SNP.
Any uncertainty regarding the above is likely to result in a no vote.
I dont see the people of Scotland voting to leave the UK, on the off chance that they may be able to join the EU,
Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey has warned that the European Union is poised to lock Britain out of its vast banking market, in a move that would push up the cost of finance for millions of consumers on both sides of the Channel.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/eu-poised-to-lock-britain-out-of-its-banking-market-andrew-bailey-warns/ar-BB1dzMtB?ocid=msedgntp
Twice in as many years, Brexit has been declared “done” without being done. The UK’s membership of the EU formally expired in January 2020. The change in status was camouflaged by transitional arrangements that expired at the start of 2021. Even now, there is a three-month “grace period” waiving aspects of the Northern Ireland protocol of the final deal.
On Thursday, Mr Gove meets Maroš Šefčovič, his EU counterpart on the joint committee overseeing the protocol, and the dynamics are grimly familiar from every previous chapter of the Brexit process. The commission reminds the UK that it has signed a treaty and is bound by its provisions. Buyer’s remorse is not grounds to renege. The UK side insists that Brussels is failing to respect its neighbour and trying to dictate terms instead of conducting a dialogue between equals.
Mr Gove has felt emboldened in this row ever since 29 January, when Ursula von der Leyen, commission president, triggered (and then quickly un-triggered) emergency clauses to suspend the protocol in a dispute over cross-border flows of Covid vaccine. It is hard to overstate how reckless and counterproductive that move was. The article 16 mechanism is meant to be a last resort, not a standard tool in the diplomatic arsenal. By reaching for it so early, Ms von der Leyen squandered moral authority and goodwill on an issue where both are needed to coax the UK into normalisation of the new arrangements.
EU officials note that Boris Johnson threatened repudiation of the protocol last year, even before it had been ratified, so the squandering of goodwill started on the UK side. An argument about who started what bodes ill for the future operation of a delicate deal. It is true that Mr Johnson’s rhetoric around Northern Ireland has never reflected the reality of what he signs up to. In October 2019, when he completed the withdrawal agreement, he promised there would be no customs barriers in the Irish Sea. That was untrue, as Northern Irish businesses have discovered.
Across the UK, firms and consumers are discovering costs of Brexit that Mr Johnson denied. That denial was born of a failure to understand the trade-off between regulatory autonomy and market access. The prime minister swapped seamless trade for notional sovereignty and passed the cost on to unsuspecting businesses. Naturally, he wants to blame the EU for any pain. These are not teething troubles in implementation of the deal. They are the deal.
Alongside the economic adjustment, there needs to be political adjustment to the new relationship. The commission’s vaccine blunder has not helped. But the greater obstacle is British ministers’ unwillingness to accept that the rules they now find so objectionable are the same ones they so recently cheered as a triumph. Either they failed to understand the deal, or had no intention of keeping their word. Neither explanation reflects well on the prime minister or the Brexit he mis-sold to the country.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/the-guardian-view-on-the-brexit-aftermath-the-price-of-dishonesty/ar-BB1dzKBO?ocid=msedgntp
Brexit: DUP boycott Brexit discussion with Irish TDs
DUP assembly members have stayed away from a discussion about Brexit and the Good Friday Agreement as part of their opposition to the NI Protocol.
Members of Stormont's executive committee were hearing evidence virtually from TDs (Irish members of parliament) and MPs.
The Democratic Unionist Party said it would stop north-south activities.
It comes as NI businesses have told a Westminster committee they need an extension of Brexit "grace periods".
MPs on Westminster's NI Affairs Committee were also examining the protocol, taking evidence from logistics companies.
These relate to the 'Irish Sea border', where some EU rules relating to customs and product standards are not yet fully enforced on GB-NI trade.
The UK government has asked the EU for extensions on rules, with the two sides planning to discuss the issue on Thursday.
The first of the grace periods are set to expire at the end of March, which would mean new processes for supermarkets and parcel companies.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56013330
The boss of one of Britain's big retailers says Brexit has turned out to be "considerably worse" than he feared.
Peter Cowgill, chairman of JD Sports, said the red tape and delays in shipping goods to mainland Europe meant "double-digit millions" in extra costs.
He told the BBC JD Sports may open an EU-based distribution centre to ease the problems, which would mean creating jobs overseas and not in the UK.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55997641
A firm which sells live lobsters and crabs to Europe has announced it is to close as a result of new post-Brexit regulations.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-55987138
Last week, the EU told British fishermen they face being indefinitely banned from exporting live mussels, oysters, clams, cockles and scallops from UK waters because it is now a third country. Countries which don't meet the EU's standards have to purify their catch domestically before exporting. The process adds significant costs and delays and is particularly impacting fishermen in Wales and the south west of England.
However, the Government argues the EU's move contradicts previous assurances that the temporary measure would end in April, with George Eustice, the Environment Secretary, arguing there is nothing in the regulations to prevent trade from continuing.
Mr Eustice said the ban was "quite unexpected and really indefensible", telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The truth is, there is no legal barrier to this trade continuing, both on animal health grounds and on public health grounds - there is legal provision within existing EU regulations to allow such trade to continue from the UK.
"We are just asking the EU to abide by their existing regulations and not to seek to change them."
Last night, Prime Minister Boris Johnson also refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its ban.
It appears, though, that Britain was fully aware of the restrictions, having voted for them in 2008.
Lib Dem North Somerset Councillor for Blagdon and Churchill Patrick Keating wrote on Twitter: "The 'ban' on the import of live molluscs is not specifically targeted at the UK as some sort of 'Brexit revenge'.
"The reality is that these restrictions apply to the import of aquaculture products from every non-EU country, as per Reg. No 1251/2008.
"This particular piece of legislation dates from 2008 - when the UK was a member state, and had votes in Council and Parliament.
"So, expressions of surprise that there are rules that apply to the import of shellfish from non-EU countries are somewhat disingenuous."
He added: "The failure here is of the Government to properly explain to this industry the reality of trading with the EU as a third country. These are the conditions that logically apply as a consequence of choosing not to be a member. The UK has put itself on the other side of existing barriers.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/brexit-blunder-as-uk-agreed-to-law-behind-shellfish-ban-in-2008/ar-BB1dzddk?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/ben-habib-erupts-in-furious-brexit-clash-with-arch-remainer-femi-over-northern-ireland/ar-BB1dA54z?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/brexit-news-live-half-of-exporters-to-eu-reporting-difficulties-as-amsterdam-surpasses-london-in-trading/ar-BB1dADZE?ocid=msedgntp
The EU has accused the UK government of "shortcomings" over implementing the Northern Ireland protocol, ahead of a meeting between the government and the bloc in London.
The protocol was the way in which a "hard border" was prevented on the island of Ireland following the agreement of a Brexit deal in December - but has resulted in some additional checks for goods travelling from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
In a letter to Michael Gove, the vice president of the European Commission, Maros Sefcovic, says while he recognises the progress being made on implementing the protocol, there are a "number of current shortcomings preventing the protocol and our practical arrangements from delivering on the ground".
Among the "teething problems", Mr Sefcovic says border entry posts are not yet operational, which he adds means that very few checks are being made on livestock and plants at the border.
Mr Sefcovic adds that the UK has not yet given border officials access to the relevant IT systems as agreed, and says the government has issued guidance that hauliers moving goods between Northern Ireland and Great Britain do not have to submit "equivalent information" to authorities - despite agreements on the contrary.
He says he wants the UK and the EU to work together in order to make the protocol work.
His remarks were published as a survey of UK exporters by the British Chambers of Commerce found that 49% were struggling to adapt to post-Brexit trading changes with the EU last month - prompting calls for more government support.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/eu-accuses-uk-of-shortcomings-over-implementation-of-northern-ireland-protocol/ar-BB1dArXR?ocid=msedgntp
I was expecting queues of trucks here and there and some minor paperwork issues that could be resolved fairly quickly.
I assumed we would be fairly well prepared, after spending billions of pounds on preparations.
@Essexphil must have been expecting something completely different in the light of his comment on how it had gone so far. Maybe all out war with Europe was anticipated?
What we have seen that I wasnt necessarily expecting is as follows,
A lack of queues of trucks, probably because our exports to the EU, are down by almost 70%.
Although this may well change as more regulations are likely to cause further delays, at the end of the current grace period, from April onwards.
Hundreds of British lorry drivers fined £300 for not having permit to drive through Kent.
Furious Kent residents step up fight over Brexit lorry park.
Boris Johnson warned of export slump, as two-thirds of lorries leaving UK empty.
JD Sports claiming extra costs so far run into double digit millions, and may well set up a distribution centre inside the EU.
Brexit worse than feared, says JD Sports boss.
Cheshire cheesemaker says business left with £250,000 'Brexit hole'.
Small companies just giving up and stopping exports to the EU.
Haulage companies refusing to continue travelling to Europe.
Brexit: 71 pages of paperwork for 1 lorry of fish.
Shellfish companies giving up altogether and shutting their doors.
Brexit blunder as UK agreed to law behind 'shellfish ban' in 2008.
Fishing boats tied up and not operating.
Consumers faced with substantial unexpected extra costs in respect of taxes etc on many products.
Fury at 'Brexit tax' as retailers threaten to burn goods rather than pay higher costs.
Our Government advising many companies to relocate staff to EU countries, to overcome difficulties, resulting in UK staff being laid off.
Set up shop in Europe, government advisers tell Brexit-hit businesses.
Amsterdam has surpassed London in share dealing.
Chaos spread to meat industry as government blames empty shelves on Covid.
Boris Johnson blamed seafood exporters ‘not filling in the right forms’ for post-Brexit sales crash.
'Big loss' for Britain as EU trade deal exposes some UK cars to tariffs.
Vauxhall boss warned Brexit and engine ban have 'changed the rules'.
GKN plans closure of UK automotive plant with loss of 500 jobs.
Jersey potato farmers flew in workers from the Philippines to stop crops rotting in the fields and plug gap left by Romanian and Polish migrants after Brexit.
EU citizens who left UK because of pandemic set to lose right to live in Britain.
Roger Daltrey branded hypocrite after signing letter criticising Brexit deal's impact on touring.
Labour accuses Boris Johnson of ‘dishonesty’ in denying Irish Sea border’s existence.
After Brexit, Ireland and France cut out the middleman - Britain.
Brexit: Irish Sea border issues foreseen when deal was done.
Northern Ireland border staff withdrawn from duty over safety fears.
Loyalist figure suggests ‘it may be time to fight physically for our freedoms within UK’.
Boris Johnson’s claim we can’t close borders because of food imports branded ‘complete and utter nonsense’.
As trade through the Channel Tunnel collapses border delays and tariffs mean Brexit is wreaking havoc on our businesses.
I am still very calm.
To describe much of the above as teething problems is misleading.
This will logically get worse at the end of the grace period.
Worse again if some of the issues are resolved and traffic increases.
So thats my list.
Here is your opportunity to post your list of Brexit benefits.
Although I dont expect this to happen.
You usually disappear when asked a question, or asked to answer a specific point.
An attempt has been made to include the success of the UK vaccine roll out as a Brexit benefit, but that is not true.
I await your response with interest.
Last week the EU told British fisherman that they were banned from selling live shellfish from UK waters, into the EU.
George Eustace responded by touring a long list of tv studios, and radio stations,
Mr Eustice said the ban was "quite unexpected and really indefensible", telling BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The truth is, there is no legal barrier to this trade continuing, both on animal health grounds and on public health grounds - there is legal provision within existing EU regulations to allow such trade to continue from the UK.
"We are just asking the EU to abide by their existing regulations and not to seek to change them."
Last night, Prime Minister Boris Johnson also refused to rule out a trade war with Brussels if it didn't back down on its ban.
It appears, though, that Britain was fully aware of the restrictions, having voted for them in 2008.
Lib Dem North Somerset Councillor for Blagdon and Churchill Patrick Keating wrote on Twitter: "The 'ban' on the import of live molluscs is not specifically targeted at the UK as some sort of 'Brexit revenge'.
"This particular piece of legislation dates from 2008 - when the UK was a member state, and had votes in Council and Parliament.
"So, expressions of surprise that there are rules that apply to the import of shellfish from non-EU countries are somewhat disingenuous."
He added: "The failure here is of the Government to properly explain to this industry the reality of trading with the EU as a third country. These are the conditions that logically apply as a consequence of choosing not to be a member. The UK has put itself on the other side of existing barriers.
You couldnt make it up.
The EU bullies have picked on us again?
I dont think so.
There was supposed to be a meltdown at the borders. Lasted for about a minute.
Widespread delay to food supplies. Tesco ran out of Brie for 1 day.
Widespread medicine shortage. Hasn't happened (unless you are the EU)
Car manufacturers to leave. Hasn't happened.
Thousands of farmers going bankrupt. Hasn't happened.
Prices to go up. Not happening, except supermarkets always hike prices post-Xmas
Major hit to GDP. Hasn't happened yet.
Thousands of businesses to close due to Brexit. The headline one, the Bridlington Lobster Company employed 3 (yes 3) people. I'm sure I'm not the only person glad to see a rule that forbids us shipping live creatures for slaughter.
Fishermen and JD Sports will moan. That's a given.
Newspapers are desperately trying to create division. But it's all a bit dull.
The biggest benefit? People were promised (rightly or wrongly) a free vote on Brexit. They were also promised that politicians would implement the result. And they did.
I do not believe the electorate should vote on such things. But not to keep those promises would have been far worse than any temporary economic price.
He'll always be an entitled Old Etonian, who believes poor people should subsidise him. He will always be a divisive figure. But then so were a lot of very effective PMs.
You would hope that, if your business was selling live shellfish, you would have been aware of the 2008 legislation. And in the 4 or so years between the vote to leave and implementation made plans either to sell your stock in the UK or have a method of purifying the stock to meet EU standards.
But no, it's all the Government's fault.
Likewise, the EU seems to have been far more able to export to us than the other way round. Very easy to blame the Government again. But some of the blame is the fact that UK business has not adapted as quickly.
This is just another example of that stupidity.