Jump to content


BFE Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. All existing agreements for trade will end if there is a no-deal Brexit. So for a while there will be no means of importing fresh perishable foods or medicines (delays too long so they'd have to travel by air, and a no-deal Brexit could mean there won't be agreements to do with aviation). In addition, since all cargo would have to be checked by Customs and extra paperwork done by Customs officials who don't exist and haven't been trained, vehicles arriving with goods from the EU (and everywhere else, as before) would spend much longer on the dockside or stacked on lorry parks somewhere before their port of departure. If you've been watching the news on TV I'm sure you'll have seen stories of lorries being parked on the M20, the creation of lorry parks along the same motorway, and the installation of portaloos so that lorry drivers parked up along the motorway can at least relieve some of the pressure! But that's on the UK side of the Channel. Similar problems could possibly arrive on the other side, too. For the car manufacturers the problems are at least two-fold. First, many parts are brought in from the EU to be assembled in the UK plants. Without a trade agreement, there will be import duties to pay on those parts when they enter the country. Sometimes, once those parts are assembled, they are exported again for work elsewhere. At that point, in theory there would be further import duties on the other side. If those assembled parts come back to the UK for a final assembly into the finished vehicle, tariffs are again applied. This is all making the car more expensive. Then if the car goes for export it will be subject to import duty once more. Paperwork to do with Customs Duties and VAT will also add to clerical expenses. The nett result is that the car becomes so pricey it doesn't compete in the market, and so the plant could be closed down. The second problem is in the delivery of goods to the UK plants. The factories are organised so that as soon as a lorry delivers a consignment of parts they are used more or less immediately. To do this, there must be regular reliable deliveries to feed the factory conveyor belt. It's a system called either Just In Time Delivery or Just In Time Manufacturing. If the lorries don't arrive on time, the whole system stops because the parts are missing. The plant becomes uneconomic, and so is again threatened with closure. Car manufacturers could ditch the UK as a manufacturing base and transfer the work to other countries where there are no import tariffs and no cross-Channel delays.
  2. Now how about responding to the more serious points which followed that first tiddly comment?
  3. Jonno said that no-one would have noticed if it hadn't been for the media. But that's how we all learn about everything! So it was a daft thing to say. And you know it! 😃
  4. Before leaving you to see to stuff in the garden, I just want you to contemplate the following ... It was written by a Remain campaigner called John Danzig, quoting an article in yesterday's Times newspaper. Today, tucked away on page 10 of the print edition of The Times was a little story (more prominent in the online edition) which was so shocking I had to read it twice. The short story, at the bottom of the page, claimed that, in the event of a no deal Brexit: • Chris Grayling, Transport Secretary, wants every adult to get a Brexit cash bonus. • Sajid Javid, Home Secretary, is planning emergency measures, including suspending workers’ rights, environmental regulations and auto-enrolment in workplace pensions. Actually, The Times story is so short, and so shocking, I will paste it here in full: ‘Every adult should be given a cash handout to mark Britain’s exit from the EU, Chris Grayling suggested at a special cabinet meeting. ‘The transport secretary’s proposal for a “Brexit bonus” came as ministers discussed this week how to respond to the possible economic shock of crashing out of the EU without an agreement. ‘The suggestion was met with astonishment by some colleagues, according to a witness. “Liz Truss’s face was a picture,” they said of the Treasury chief secretary. ‘Sajid Javid, the home secretary, laid out a series of pro-business emergency measures that he said would be necessary to keep the economy afloat. ‘A source said that these included suspending environmental regulations, workers’ rights and auto-enrolment in workplace pensions. “This was very much Saj auditioning to be no-deal chancellor,” said a colleague. ‘Mr Javid was said to be underwhelmed by Philip Hammond’s presentation on the Treasury response to a no-deal Brexit. The Chancellor said there would be no money for tax cuts. ‘Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, gave a “grim assessment” of the worst-case scenario, including a fall in house prices of 35% over three years.’ Brexit is no longer ‘Project Fear’. It’s ‘Project Madness’. And it’s really happening. Stripping Britons of basic rights because of Brexit should send alarm bells clanging in everyone’s head. I'll leave you to cogitate on that. That's the UK Cabinet discussing all that. Of course, we could just abandon all this nonsense and carry on living fed, medicated, and in peace with our allies, friends and neighbours.
  5. Is that a veiled hint that the media should be censored? Scary opinion! Combined with the news that the Conservatives are banning anti-Brexit members from their party conference, I'm experiencing a disturbing day for democracy. I don't have time to answer fully your earlier post, Jonno, as it asks so many questions which aren't simple to respond to and need statistical evidence to make the points. That will take some time to put together. I could, of course, adopt your method and simply deny or play down one's opponent's points. However, your suggestion that everyone knows what the EU did to UK fishing is quite remarkable. They may think they know. But a whole chunk of the UK's fishing allowance was sold to other EU countries, and the vast majority of the seafood caught by UK fishermen is sold to other EU countries. I think the UK fishing industry may well have been harder hit when the UK lost the Cod War with Iceland. Aren't there signs that UK fishermen, who voted for Leave, are changing their minds now? A lot of your earlier post, Jonno, seems to be saying that there's nothing to worry about and that all the negatives that have surfaced over the last two years are exaggerated. If what you are saying is true, or even partly true, why are we not hearing this from the government? Why are we not hearing this from the Leave organisations? Instead, the government is issuing all sorts of guidance on how to get over the problems, and an agreement which Liam Fox told us would be the easiest trade agreement ever is looking ever more difficult, ever more unlikely. Your dismissal of stockpiling of medicines and food is extraordinary. The government has issued advice that households should be considering this. There are no less than six leaflets issued on the regulation of medicines and medical equipment in the event of a no-deal. It all sounds very costly! And I don't think that the millions of diabetics in the UK - or their relatives and friends - will be at all comforted by your arguments. On driving, we know that UK licence-holders will need an IDP, and two different ones for some countries including Spain. However, "If, after exit day, you become resident in an EU country you would not have the automatic right under EU law to exchange your UK licence for a driving licence from the EU country you’re living in. Depending on the laws of the EU country you move to, you may need to take a new driving test in that country." That'll be fun! I have read only this morning of one UK importer of EU wines who has just received a letter from HMRC telling him some of the new arrangements his business will have to set up in order to continue trading. I've read the letter, but it's a very condensed version of the government "no-deal" leaflet (mainly as it deals with a potential Brexit agreement scenario). Either way, the UK will be a Third Country. The no-deal leaflet (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trading-with-the-eu-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/trading-with-the-eu-if-theres-no-brexit-deal) shows that he would have to devote much more time and expense in dealing with all the paperwork and import duties. His response: "I'll close my business." This post is already too long, so I'm going to stop there. I have a life!
  6. I agree to some degree about regurgitation on this thread, but am a bit confused by your mention of the red-top media, as to me these would be mainly The Sun and The Mirror, though despite not having red tops The Express and The Daily Mail tend to fall into that category. And if you want a good rant, those papers are your first port of call! Of the four, only The Mirror isn't rabidly pro-Brexit - although the Mail does have a new editor who is pro-Remain, as I'm sure you know. All that said, there is fresh news about Brexit every day, and latest events or points of view have largely determined the topics that I've introduced from time to time, always giving links to reports I've come across for those who like to read more widely. The release of government "How to plan for a no-deal Brexit" leaflets are hugely significant. Johnson's "suicide vest" comment was extraordinary. Raab's faux pas noteworthy. Grayling's letter to the EU27 grossly incompetent. Raab chastising businesses for blaming poor performance on Brexit quite astonishing. Land-Rover-Jaguar's boss giving the bottom line worrying. Weatherspoon's boss refusing to stock Jägermeister and other European drinks provocative. Stockpiling of food and medicines truly shocking. The photo of the arch-Brexiteers revealing. Their refusal to publish any plan of their own after saying they would extraordinary. Barnier's steadfastness boringly honest and/or frustrating. The news is absolutely plastered with fascinating developments about Brexit. Should we not talk of these things? Should we not talk about the most important issue facing the UK since WWII? You complain, Jonno, that discussion here has been low-level stuff. Well, please do give us some meat to chew on! (But if you want discussion, it will have to be at a level which we can all understand). I complained on here myself about superficial discussion on Question Time on Thursday. Yes, sure, let's make people think more deeply! Regarding abuse, I can only agree with you, Jonno. Reading, as I do, Remain and Leave groups on the social media, I have seen that it is rife on both sides, and I very much regret that. Unfortunately, as we know, feelings and tensions are very high on both sides of the debate, and, as others have pointed out, a disunited kingdom is going to be a really difficult country to live in and perhaps worse to govern. And the biggest problem remains Northern Ireland, for which it seems there is still not even a glimmering of a solution. Supporting the Leave side of the argument, recent developments in Hungary and Italy, and the rise of the far-right generally, can be seen to pose a threat to European unity. The attachment of the UK Tories to the Polish government and their association with the far-right in the European Parliament (rather than the centre-right) have also been noteworthy. So when Leavers say that the EU will collapse, is there the possibility that they are right? ************ Whilst writing, I have to agree with G4rth that this thread has succeeded in keeping Brexit away from other threads on the Board. And on that point, I have noticed that whilst there has been lots of talk about driving licences and potential aviation difficulties, and threats to Eurostar, I've seen and heard nothing pertaining to our ferries and any effect Brexit may have on them. I don't mean in terms of custom, but, for instance, engineers' qualifications and their mutual recognition (often part of the aviation discussions), bridge crew qualifications, maintenance issues, safety issues, environmental/technical problems etc. Any contributions there?
  7. Crumbs, Gareth! I don't think I've read any accusations anywhere that Leave voters didn't mean to vote leave. I'm sure they did intend to vote leave. But it's the same story as always: we were all badly informed. So I don't understand the second part of your post, either. Sorry if I'm being dim!
  8. I'm a little amused by the thought that it will be the number of non-voters which determines whether this thread will remain open, just as the number of abstainees determined the outcome of the referendum! I don't really know why it is advisable to close this thread. If it annoys some folks, they are quite free to ignore it. But for those who wish to express an opinion, let it stay open. I don't read the gossip columns in the papers, but I've never asked for them to be closed down. I have a sneaky feeling that the "close it" voters will be nearly all Leave voters, and the "keep it going" voters will be nearly all Remainers.
  9. Well, thanks for letting me know what I believe. Where did I say that I believe that stuff about house prices? I merely quoted Carney. He says it could happen, yet you interpret me quoting that info as me saying it will! As for the numbers of jobs being created, I suggest you study the way newspapers express things, and I think you'll conclude I am right about them using different words to reflect their political standpoint. After all, we all do that! It's not that I don't trust numbers of jobs being created, it's simply that saying "dozens" means nothing more than the number will be over 24. If Chanel were going to create 300 or 400 jobs, the newspapers would be reporting that as "hundreds". I hope that Ed is right, but I fear he isn't. But like everyone else, I just don't know. I don't understand how a country can potentially lose a great trading agreement with the biggest trading bloc in the world without a fairly severe setback to its own economy. And I don't accept that the EU needs to trade with us. Yes, sure, it's better all round if they do, but their need is far less than the UK's need to trade with them, and so they will always have the upper hand in trade negotiations.
  10. I don't think it would be a "few" dozen. Newspaper-speak means that if 42 jobs were created, they would write "scores". If it were 32, they would write "tens". If it were 202, "hundreds". So probably, we're talking of perhaps 24 to 40 jobs. Presumably, the staff concerned would mainly be dealing with export orders from their French warehouses as well as sales to London parfumiers and department stores.
  11. Yes, that is good news, Ed. You'll see from the article, though, that the choice of London was made largely because of the increasing spend of affluent people in London. Sadly, only a few of those will be UK residents, I suspect. I don't think Chanel will bring great employment opportunities to London, though - the article mentions "dozens" of jobs, but how many dozen? I think Londoners - genuine Londoners - will be more concerned about Carney's worst-case scenario which is occupying the main headlines, with the BBC page including this: "mortgage rates could spiral, the pound and inflation could fall, and countless homeowners could be left in negative equity." Or is that just "project fear" again? I mentioned last night's Question Time in an earlier post, suggesting that it might be interesting. It was awful. Debate at a highly superficial level. I despair.
  12. I'm sure everyone here has heard of the government's no-deal advice leaflets. If you're interested, but haven't received the advice by email, you can find further info here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/how-to-prepare-if-the-uk-leaves-the-eu-with-no-deal Question Time might be interesting in a couple of minutes.
  13. Yes, I applied for an IDP here in France about ten days ago. We are advised that a French licence may not be acceptable in the UK after March 2019. Judging from the photo (you may have seen it) of Rees-Mogg, Johnson and IDS with their heads in their hands looking like their game has collapsed, I think wortley might be right in his conclusion that the UK government may be painting a really dark picture of a no-deal Brexit so as to soften up the electorate for what is really to come. Today HMG warned (amongst other things) that UK-made vehicles may not be valid for sale in the EU (https://theworldnews.net/gb-news/no-deal-brexit-uk-made-cars-will-not-be-apos-valid-for-sale-apos-in-eu-government-document-admits) Even so, both sides (EU and UK) are still attempting to lay down the law in their attempts at one-upmanship. (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/13/france-may-stop-trains-and-planes-from-uk-under-no-deal-brexit?CMP=share_btn_tw) What is so hard to imagine is that May found a replacement for Davies who is as useless as Davies was. The UK Parliament watchdog is probing Jacob Rees Mogg's hard Brexit lobby group (the ERG) over its "other sources of funding". More dark money? (https://opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/james-cusick-jenna-corderoy-peter-geoghegan/parliament-watchdog-probes-rees-mogg-s-hard). Is this why the arch Brexiteers were feeling so wretched? Meanwhile, Carney is saying that a no-deal could be as bad as the 2008 financial crisis. (Yeah, that saw our incomes go down fast!) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/13/no-deal-brexit-could-be-as-bad-as-2008-financial-crash-carney-says?CMP=share_windows_facebook. And, of course, your licence may not be valid either. Why is the government planning for a disaster it could prevent? None of these misfortunes could happen if they just gave Brexit up as a bad job.
  14. Thanks, Ed, for posting that article. There are criticisms in the article, too, of scrubbers, which (as has been posted on here more than once) simply dump the sulfur in the seas. (I really dislike this "modern" spelling of "sulphur"). It's good to see that certain ports and fleets are working to beat this kind of pollution, and the adoption of LNG engines should help enormously.
  • Create New...