Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 2)
Discussion
Digga said:
The UK becoming a third nation was, in the fan diagram of events, a not unlikely one. Fishermen are by no means the only recipients of the chaos caused by this abject lack of planning. I doubt heads will roll.
This expresses my thoughts well.The government should have known the implications of becoming a 3rd country and had a contingency plan in place to kick in as soon as negotiations were concluded.
That they didn't suggests one of two things.
A) they are incompetent
B) that having conflict with the EU is part of their plan.
Maybe both but I think just B).
JeffreyD said:
This expresses my thoughts well.
The government should have known the implications of becoming a 3rd country and had a contingency plan in place to kick in as soon as negotiations were concluded.
That they didn't suggests one of two things.
A) they are incompetent
B) that having conflict with the EU is part of their plan.
Maybe both but I think just B).
They signed a comprehensive FTA with the EU. Prior to that we have known for over a year UK would leave the CU and SM and a WTO exit was possible.The government should have known the implications of becoming a 3rd country and had a contingency plan in place to kick in as soon as negotiations were concluded.
That they didn't suggests one of two things.
A) they are incompetent
B) that having conflict with the EU is part of their plan.
Maybe both but I think just B).
They put in place what was required at the border to keep trade flowing, the only spanner in the works there was Macron closing the border, which created a displacement of trucks, despite that the vast majority of freight flowed and there have been no significant issues there since.
The shellfish issue is down to the UK exporters not meeting the requirements of the SM, that has been known would be the case for years, should there be a WTO exit or a deal that didn't include a different set of rules to what was in place already.
If your business could be impacted in such a way, would you wing it and hope, or look at your options in every scenario and look to investing? The rules on shellfish is an opportunity for the UK supplier to keep more money in their business, now the EU based processors cant do that value added job anymore.
When the demand returns post the pandemic, if they use the time and grant money well, they could be rolling in it supplying the EU restaurants with UK cleaned shellfish.
JeffreyD said:
I did forget
C) it's everyone else's fault and we've done a cracking job.
Sorry.
You stated they should have contingencies in place. You seem ignorant of the fact they did have such contingencies, one of which was used prior to the leave date due to Macron's idiocy closing the border and insisting on testing truck drivers before they could leave the UK with zero notice.C) it's everyone else's fault and we've done a cracking job.
Sorry.
Some industries have suffered delays in the initial period as they sorted out their systems, most freight has flowed freely, the overspill site used during the Macron screw up hasn't been needed since.
Other contingency measures haven't been used at all, such as the extra ferries and aircraft transport for essentials like pharma that were on standby.
jsf said:
JeffreyD said:
This expresses my thoughts well.
The government should have known the implications of becoming a 3rd country and had a contingency plan in place to kick in as soon as negotiations were concluded.
That they didn't suggests one of two things.
A) they are incompetent
B) that having conflict with the EU is part of their plan.
Maybe both but I think just B).
They signed a comprehensive FTA with the EU. Prior to that we have known for over a year UK would leave the CU and SM and a WTO exit was possible.The government should have known the implications of becoming a 3rd country and had a contingency plan in place to kick in as soon as negotiations were concluded.
That they didn't suggests one of two things.
A) they are incompetent
B) that having conflict with the EU is part of their plan.
Maybe both but I think just B).
They put in place what was required at the border to keep trade flowing, the only spanner in the works there was Macron closing the border, which created a displacement of trucks, despite that the vast majority of freight flowed and there have been no significant issues there since.
The shellfish issue is down to the UK exporters not meeting the requirements of the SM, that has been known would be the case for years, should there be a WTO exit or a deal that didn't include a different set of rules to what was in place already.
If your business could be impacted in such a way, would you wing it and hope, or look at your options in every scenario and look to investing? The rules on shellfish is an opportunity for the UK supplier to keep more money in their business, now the EU based processors cant do that value added job anymore.
When the demand returns post the pandemic, if they use the time and grant money well, they could be rolling in it supplying the EU restaurants with UK cleaned shellfish.
The Government announced the availability of grant aid to the industry for the purpose of modernising the fleet.
Under those circumstances why on earth sit back and do nothing. Just seems crazy to me.
crankedup said:
This is something that I struggle with, if I’m running a successful business selling shellfish to the export market and making a decent living. Seeing distinct threats to the business on the horizon, surely sit down and look at the possible scenarios and how to circumnavigate around each possible scenario. Sitting back and doing nothing seems crazy, and yet that is what has happened here it seems.
The Government announced the availability of grant aid to the industry for the purpose of modernising the fleet.
Under those circumstances why on earth sit back and do nothing. Just seems crazy to me.
Any idea what the availability of investment capital for the shellfish industry is?The Government announced the availability of grant aid to the industry for the purpose of modernising the fleet.
Under those circumstances why on earth sit back and do nothing. Just seems crazy to me.
If it's anything like the ones I know about it's very concentrated and not necessarily easy to get your hands on.
jsf said:
They put in place what was required at the border to keep trade flowing, the only spanner in the works there was Macron closing the border, which created a displacement of trucks, despite that the vast majority of freight flowed and there have been no significant issues there since.
The shellfish issue is down to the UK exporters not meeting the requirements of the SM, that has been known would be the case for years, should there be a WTO exit or a deal that didn't include a different set of rules to what was in place already.
TBF if by "they" we mean government, as a whole, then that is up for debate.The shellfish issue is down to the UK exporters not meeting the requirements of the SM, that has been known would be the case for years, should there be a WTO exit or a deal that didn't include a different set of rules to what was in place already.
It would seem there are many who think the Scottish government have been at least incompetent and at worst, downright devious in their lack of preparedness for changes in seafood exports.
See here: https://dailybusinessgroup.co.uk/2021/01/snp-hinde...
sunbeam alpine said:
jesusbuiltmycar said:
EU being petty what a surprise...
Or - EU applying the rules the UK (including Farage!) helped to create... Edited by jesusbuiltmycar on Tuesday 2nd March 12:16
I wonder if the UK will react/retaliate (e.g. but boarding EU fishing vessels to ensure they are adhering to the letter of the rules)? Chances are we won't be as petty..
crankedup said:
This is something that I struggle with, if I’m running a successful business selling shellfish to the export market and making a decent living. Seeing distinct threats to the business on the horizon, surely sit down and look at the possible scenarios and how to circumnavigate around each possible scenario. Sitting back and doing nothing seems crazy, and yet that is what has happened here it seems.
The Government announced the availability of grant aid to the industry for the purpose of modernising the fleet.
Under those circumstances why on earth sit back and do nothing. Just seems crazy to me.
How much money would you spend in a pandemic when lots of businesses are struggling and on their arses on things that you don't know whether you need or not "just in case" I wonder?The Government announced the availability of grant aid to the industry for the purpose of modernising the fleet.
Under those circumstances why on earth sit back and do nothing. Just seems crazy to me.
Would you want to wake up on Jan 1st to find that £100,000 (or whatever) investment simply wasn't needed?
jesusbuiltmycar said:
Do you think this tight adherence to bureaucracy & protectionism is going to make Brexiteers feel they made a mistake or feel vindicated?
I wonder if the UK will react/retaliate (e.g. but boarding EU fishing vessels to ensure they are adhering to the letter of the rules)? Chances are we won't be as petty..
It will split people but many will feel vindicated and many remainers will "blame" the EU and move across the floor as the other way. If there was a vote today I'd think it would be too close to call reliably.I wonder if the UK will react/retaliate (e.g. but boarding EU fishing vessels to ensure they are adhering to the letter of the rules)? Chances are we won't be as petty..
What did you think of the proposed ban on importing EU spring water? Is that a proportionate response to the shellfish issue?
Edited by JeffreyD on Tuesday 2nd March 13:05
jesusbuiltmycar said:
Do you think this tight adherence to bureaucracy & protectionism is going to make Brexiteers feel they made a mistake or feel vindicated?
The EU denies access to certain categories of seafood coming from 3rd countries which is harvested from Class B waters. Unfortunately for the UK, a large proportion of what is harvested comes from Class B waters.The EU is unable to allow access for the UK just because it used to be in the EU - if they did, other 3rd countries would be entitled to demand access on the same terms. The UK chose a Brexit which included leaving the CU and SM.
You got Brexit done. Some sectors of the UK economy got done at the same time.
sunbeam alpine said:
The EU denies access to certain categories of seafood coming from 3rd countries which is harvested from Class B waters. Unfortunately for the UK, a large proportion of what is harvested comes from Class B waters.
The EU is unable to allow access for the UK just because it used to be in the EU - if they did, other 3rd countries would be entitled to demand access on the same terms. The UK chose a Brexit which included leaving the CU and SM.
You got Brexit done. Some sectors of the UK economy got done at the same time.
This is the bit I really can't work out.The EU is unable to allow access for the UK just because it used to be in the EU - if they did, other 3rd countries would be entitled to demand access on the same terms. The UK chose a Brexit which included leaving the CU and SM.
You got Brexit done. Some sectors of the UK economy got done at the same time.
Even if there's a "well you used to be members we can trust you on this" agreement it still has to be defined somewhere as an agreement.
And that's before the other 3rd countries thing.
We chose to become a 3rd country with certain things agreed and that wasn't one of them.
That's kind of the point really.
JeffreyD said:
It will split people but many will feel vindicated and many remainers will "blame" the EU and move across the floor as the other way. If there was a vote today I'd think it would be too close to call reliably.
Some who voted remain now feel, in retrospect, in regard to the way the EU has conducted itself in Brexit negotiations, that their opinion of the organisation has altered for the worse. Equally, there is plenty of blame for the UK government and public sector for things going less smoothly than they might have.JeffreyD said:
What did you think of the proposed ban on importing EU spring water? Is that a proportionate response to the shellfish issue?
TBF shipping plastic bottles full of a ubiquitous commodity was a 90's-00's business and, if we are all honest, and idiotic and environmentally loony state of affairs anyway.b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: This is the bit I really can't work out.
Even if there's a "well you used to be members we can trust you on this" agreement it still has to be defined somewhere as an agreement.
And that's before the other 3rd countries thing.
We chose to become a 3rd country with certain things agreed and that wasn't one of them.
That's kind of the point really.
It's the perfect illustration of how the EU operates as a protectionist block.Even if there's a "well you used to be members we can trust you on this" agreement it still has to be defined somewhere as an agreement.
And that's before the other 3rd countries thing.
We chose to become a 3rd country with certain things agreed and that wasn't one of them.
That's kind of the point really.
They are quite happy to use a lower standard for members of the block than they are for external suppliers. The restriction is not on grounds of safety or quality, it's about control of the market.
It certainly kills the pretense some use of the EU being a trading body working for the consumer in the EU. Often this kind of policy makes products more expensive and keeps out equally good or even higher quality product.
jsf said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: This is the bit I really can't work out.
Even if there's a "well you used to be members we can trust you on this" agreement it still has to be defined somewhere as an agreement.
And that's before the other 3rd countries thing.
We chose to become a 3rd country with certain things agreed and that wasn't one of them.
That's kind of the point really.
It's the perfect illustration of how the EU operates as a protectionist block.Even if there's a "well you used to be members we can trust you on this" agreement it still has to be defined somewhere as an agreement.
And that's before the other 3rd countries thing.
We chose to become a 3rd country with certain things agreed and that wasn't one of them.
That's kind of the point really.
They are quite happy to use a lower standard for members of the block than they are for external suppliers. The restriction is not on grounds of safety or quality, it's about control of the market.
It certainly kills the pretense some use of the EU being a trading body working for the consumer in the EU. Often this kind of policy makes products more expensive and keeps out equally good or even higher quality product.
JeffreyD said:
I did forget
C) it's everyone else's fault and we've done a cracking job.
Sorry.
You're being deliberately obtuse.C) it's everyone else's fault and we've done a cracking job.
Sorry.
It can be shades of all three options you post.
One of the reasons I voted out was that I want smaller government. The necessary QPQ of that is that we as citizens etc don't give excuses for govt to interfere.
If we cannot look out for ourselves within what are well defined frameworks, then that does exactly that.
The vast majority of countries in the world are not members of the EU. If my livelihood had become that entwined with the EU, I'd have been spending every waking hour since 23rd June looking at how everywhere else handles its trade with the EU and looking at what I could do to replicate the best of that.
Had a total FTA with zero friction (not such thing) then come about, I'd have wasted some sleepless nights...but would likely be better placed for trading globally generally.
(A) has also been evident at times. And (B) possibly doesn't hurt but I suspect is a by-product rather than a root cause. Various other options creep in too.
JeffreyD said:
It will split people but many will feel vindicated and many remainers will "blame" the EU and move across the floor as the other way. If there was a vote today I'd think it would be too close to call reliably.
What did you think of the proposed ban on importing EU spring water? Is that a proportionate response to the shellfish issue?
both that and the shellfish issue are petty.What did you think of the proposed ban on importing EU spring water? Is that a proportionate response to the shellfish issue?
Edited by JeffreyD on Tuesday 2nd March 13:05
Murph7355 said:
The vast majority of countries in the world are not members of the EU.
Many countries are parts of trading blocks, for example the US is a member of USMCA.Can you detail which economically successful countries are not part of trade block?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_bloc
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff