PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   BREXIT (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/619673-brexit.html)

pug 13th Oct 2021 08:22


Originally Posted by SWBKCB (Post 11125713)
Do none of these companies pay big money to Trade Associations?



cos we can always apply pressure on the govt to change anything we don't like (say be engineering some sort of shortage...)

Yes but I thought people had had enough of experts? Havenít we seen various trade bodies lobbying the Government to not crash out without a deal - or a poor deal? Seems it didnít work.

I donít understand your second bit, care to elaborate? It reads as though youíre suggesting some sort of conspiracy.

Ninthace 13th Oct 2021 08:31

The trouble is the devil is in the detail and that is what has to be thrashed out to allow trade to continue. Take aviation as an example. Does the WTO cover the recognition and acceptance of the myriad of licences, permits, certificates and other paperwork required to operate an airline both to and from and within the EU? Does it nominate an arbitration authority?

Avionker 13th Oct 2021 09:02

It seems to me that the amount of time that was wasted, from the moment that Article 50 was triggered up to the point that the UK staggered out of the EU, must have had a negative effect on the eventual outcome.

How much more time could have been spent on actual negotiation and planning for Brexit if the whole process wasnít bedeviled by Tory infighting, General elections, a Tory leadership contest, etc., etc.

The Tory decision that the Government of the day, and no one else, should be solely responsible for the Brexit process was arrogance of the highest order.

As soon as the result of the referendum was known a cross party Brexit Committee should have been enacted, but of course that would have caused division within the Tory ranks, so was not considered.

Throughout the whole sorry process it has been Party before country as far as the Tories are concerned. Thatís what got us into it, thatís what hamstrung the negotiations and that is what continues to poison the UK/EU relationship.

SWBKCB 13th Oct 2021 09:17

This is going over old ground, but to retain access to the single market we'd had to accept Freedom of Movement and EU standards etc - it was always going to be a hardish Brexit because accepting either wasn't "getting Brexit done". To be honest I think we did well to get away with no tariffs...

Denti 13th Oct 2021 09:19


Originally Posted by pug (Post 11125708)
I get what youíre saying, but I think youíre taking a rather simplistic viewpoint.

Truth is nobody knew; my employer at the time of the referendum and for a couple of years after, were clear to their staff that they had no idea what Brexit would entail and therefore couldnít plan for it effectively. They are a big name company in the service sector, if I understand correctly what youíre suggesting then in your opinion they should have had a team of people studying WTO rules and planning for the Ďworstí.

I worked with a bigger company in the service sector as well, and they did prepare for a hard brexit for the original brexit date. All in all at a cost in the hundreds of millions. Because not to prepare for that would be simple negligence by the management team making them liable to shareholder lawsuits. And yes, they did use EU guidance, as well as standard WTO (not much in that sector) rules as the information required. Which meant they could continue to trade uninterrupted once brexit happened. They were prepared.

alfaman 13th Oct 2021 09:27


Originally Posted by SWBKCB (Post 11125713)
Do none of these companies pay big money to Trade Associations?

cos we can always apply pressure on the govt to change anything we don't like (say be engineering some sort of shortage...)

Not when that government is so arrogant as to presume they know all there is to know about it, whilst the evidence shows they don't. You can keep repeating the mantra that those companies "should have known", but know what? If they'd prepared for WTO that would have been wrong too.

alfaman 13th Oct 2021 09:29


Originally Posted by Denti (Post 11125738)
I worked with a bigger company in the service sector as well, and they did prepare for a hard brexit for the original brexit date. All in all at a cost in the hundreds of millions. Because not to prepare for that would be simple negligence by the management team making them liable to shareholder lawsuits. And yes, they did use EU guidance, as well as standard WTO (not much in that sector) rules as the information required. Which meant they could continue to trade uninterrupted once brexit happened. They were prepared.

That makes a degree of sense for a large company with the resources to draw on: but for small & medium, a cost of "millions of pounds" would have bankrupted them overnight. But, as our PM has been quoted as saying, "f%^k business"...

Sallyann1234 13th Oct 2021 09:44


Originally Posted by Avionker (Post 11125732)
It seems to me that the amount of time that was wasted, from the moment that Article 50 was triggered up to the point that the UK staggered out of the EU, must have had a negative effect on the eventual outcome.

How much more time could have been spent on actual negotiation and planning for Brexit if the whole process wasnít bedeviled by Tory infighting, General elections, a Tory leadership contest, etc., etc.

The Tory decision that the Government of the day, and no one else, should be solely responsible for the Brexit process was arrogance of the highest order.

As soon as the result of the referendum was known a cross party Brexit Committee should have been enacted, but of course that would have caused division within the Tory ranks, so was not considered.

Throughout the whole sorry process it has been Party before country as far as the Tories are concerned. Thatís what got us into it, thatís what hamstrung the negotiations and that is what continues to poison the UK/EU relationship.

Which is all entirely correct, and it should shame the Conservative Party for decades to come.

But even if a your Brexit Committee had organised the negotiations, I doubt whether a better deal could have been done. For the simple reason that the EU were never going to allow special privileges to an ex-member who wanted to be in competition with in-members. And the impossible conundrum of where to place an Irish border. An honest Brexit Committee would have to finally say "This is the best we can do and it's not good enough." Perhaps that might have led to another referendum?

ATNotts 13th Oct 2021 09:58

Sallyann,

In some respects the deal could have been better, for example retaining EU standards for agriculture, food and fisheries and not ditching organisations such as EASA. It was pure Brexit dogma that ensured the baby was thrown out with the bathwater.

wiggy 13th Oct 2021 10:07


Originally Posted by ATNotts (Post 11125759)
Sallyann,

In some respects the deal could have been better, for example retaining EU standards for agriculture, food and fisheries and not ditching organisations such as EASA. It was pure Brexit dogma that ensured the baby was thrown out with the bathwater.

The problem of course many Brexiters have with retaining many EU standards/belonging in certain organizations is the ECJÖ.which funnily enough almost certainly remains a sticking point despite the concessions the appear to have EU offered night.

Sallyann1234 13th Oct 2021 10:11


Originally Posted by ATNotts (Post 11125759)
Sallyann,

In some respects the deal could have been better, for example retaining EU standards for agriculture, food and fisheries and not ditching organisations such as EASA. It was pure Brexit dogma that ensured the baby was thrown out with the bathwater.

Yes lots of things could have been better but where would you have stopped? The only really satisfactory compromise would be to have stayed in the EU.

pug 13th Oct 2021 10:12


Originally Posted by Denti (Post 11125738)
I worked with a bigger company in the service sector as well, and they did prepare for a hard brexit for the original brexit date. All in all at a cost in the hundreds of millions. Because not to prepare for that would be simple negligence by the management team making them liable to shareholder lawsuits. And yes, they did use EU guidance, as well as standard WTO (not much in that sector) rules as the information required. Which meant they could continue to trade uninterrupted once brexit happened. They were prepared.

Im not saying this didnít happen subsequently, obviously they did something and they appear to be still going very strong, but they may be one of the few in their sector where Brexit didnít really directly affect their business. The sentiments were that they didnít know what would happen, had no clear guidance but fortunately had the means to adapt. As has been pointed out, many smaller businesses did not have that benefit of scale and perhaps relied more on membership of the EU, perhaps more so than they themselves even realised.

I do hope that weíve hit rock bottom in terms of the current charlatans in Government and I believe things can only improve from here, I suspect people will realise just how much they were conned - regardless of which side of the Brexit fence they sit on.

ATNotts 13th Oct 2021 11:06


Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 (Post 11125770)
Yes lots of things could have been better but where would you have stopped? The only really satisfactory compromise would be to have stayed in the EU.

From a Brexiteer perspective probably the "stopping point" would have been membership of the Single Market, which in any event the EU wold never have given the UK outside of the EU without the UK accepting stuff like free movement of people and that would clearly of been a compromise too far, given the vote was in favour of "leave" and one of the drivers of that vote was taking back control of our borders, however vacuous a concept that was.

Krystal n chips 13th Oct 2021 11:16

Lord Frost,

That dynamic speech analysed.

Given there appears to have been some proposed amendments since, we await tomorrow's Excess screaming about how the EU have cravenly capitulated to the resurgent UK as the new global super power....except the rag has to bear in mind the readership's vocabulary limitations.

Rip it up and start again: Frost numbs the senses with spoiled teenager act | John Crace | The Guardian

And just to add to the mix, who better than the other contender in the "Liar vs Liar " contest (ongoing) with DC making his contribution. The problem, is, he's almost certainly correct about how Boris conducted matters in his unstinting efforts to ensure the cult was enshrined in the highest office in the land, and there's no doubt about him being a liar and completely untrustworthy, it's just that DC isn't the paragon he makes himself out to be.

Brexit: Irish deputy PM Leo Varadkar warns nations UK might not keep its word - BBC News

wowzz 13th Oct 2021 13:57


Originally Posted by SWBKCB (Post 11125686)
My point is that this seems to have come as a surprise to M&S who had years to prepare. There is an arguement about the admin burden on SME's, but not for the likes of M&S who seems to have more than enough staff to make their own suppliers jump through administratively burdensome hoops. Talk about pots and kettles.

But M&S were prepared, and were able to export sandwiches etc to France, but the sheer weight of admin, vet's bills etc, just made the whole business uneconomic. Have you actually ever seen the requirements for exporting food stuffs to the EU ?


Just a spotter 13th Oct 2021 14:00

While Mr.Varadkar appears to be quite the bÍte noire amongst certain editorial staff at The Express, this story will no doubt futher inflame their nationalistic sensitivities.

That said, and the historical precedent with regard to Perfidious Albion has been mentioned before on this particular thread, in terms of upping the political ante, by directly calling out HMGov's behavior and the comments of Dominic Cummings, I suspect Mr.Varadkar has unleased the diplomatic equivalent of a WMD with this one.

From The Irish Times, 13th October 2021

He said the British administration was currently going around the world trying to negotiate new trade agreements.

“Surely the message must go out to all countries around the world that this is a British government that doesn’t necessarily keep its word and doesn’t necessarily honour the agreements it makes.

“And you shouldn’t make any agreements with them until such time as you’re confident that they keep their promises, and honour things, for example, like the protocol,” he said.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...ises-1.4699285

JAS

Sallyann1234 13th Oct 2021 14:14

And

Theresa May's former chief of staff, Lord Gavin Barwell, has, meanwhile, warned the UK's proposal for changing the Northern Ireland protocol has "no chance of success and is going to do even further damage to our relationship with our nearest neighbours".

"My problem is if you agree something and fight an election saying what a fantastic deal this is - and then almost immediately afterwards you start to try and unpick the thing - the danger is the people you negotiating with think you didn't agree it in good faith in first place, and that makes it much more challenging when you try to renegotiate it," he told an Institute for Government event.
This is doing irreparable damage to our reputation abroad. How do we ever expect to do trade deals now?

nomilk 13th Oct 2021 14:52


Originally Posted by wowzz (Post 11125852)
But M&S were prepared, and were able to export sandwiches etc to France, but the sheer weight of admin, vet's bills etc, just made the whole business uneconomic. Have you actually ever seen the requirements for exporting food stuffs to the EU ?

Exactly, it is a matter of "will my business make money this way"? M&S has the people, but they want to be paid for their work. Extra costs, no business ...

wowzz 13th Oct 2021 15:19


Originally Posted by nomilk (Post 11125874)
Exactly, it is a matter of "will my business make money this way"? M&S has the people, but they want to be paid for their work. Extra costs, no business ...

But it was the need for other non M&S personnel, such as vets, that caused the issue.

nomilk 13th Oct 2021 17:06


Originally Posted by wowzz (Post 11125889)
But it was the need for other non M&S personnel, such as vets, that caused the issue.

I think with M&S the issue was that they could not load everything, sandwich to pork pie to cheese, into one lorry, because the mixed loading made the paperwork too complicated. Had they had just a truckload full of pork pies, they would have been alright. So also the personnel needed on M&S side to do the customs forms on top of not enough vets at the ports (not the responsibility of M&S) added all up to "let's forget it".


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:54.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.