Customs declarations and brexit

[Trainee neophyte]

an imminent election in Scotland, which could result in independence.

My limited understanding of Scottish independence, mostly obtained from Craig Murray's blog is that until Nicolas Sturgeon is forced out there will never be any kind of independence - she is too enamoured of the perks of being First Minister, funded by the rest of the UK. Or she may be controlled opposition run by London. Either way, despite endless talk of leaving, she apparently has no enthusiasm to actually make it happen, hence the contrived ousting of Salmond using anonymous claims of sexual misconduct. Allegedly, anyway. Read Mr Murray's blog for more detail, but note that he is extremely active in Scottish independence and may have one or two axes to grind. I read his stuff more because he is the only person on the planet who seems to remember that Julian Assange is still being held in solitary confinement, without trial. Scottish independence is not on my list of important subjects.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I don't understand, those things weren't part of the referendum.

What part are you claiming is dishonest?

Of course they weren't part of the referendum - that was exactly my point.

The EEC/EU has lied perpetually since its inception about its intentions - stupid people still think its a cosy little trading association and not the political union it was designed from day one to become, and is becoming more so by the day. From the German press in January -

In the end — as Germany’s most respected politician today, Wolfgang Schaeuble, the President of our Bundestag Parliament, admits — the urge is to align fiscal and budget policies. This will centralise the EU to such an extent that not only separate national governments, but even the nations themselves will become a thing of the past, at least in all practical and legal senses.

I await the "Ah, yes, but ..."s

 

[Jacob]

Of course they weren't part of the referendum - that was exactly my point.

The EEC/EU has lied perpetually since its inception about its intentions - stupid people still think its a cosy little trading association and not the political union it was designed from day one to become, and is becoming more so by the day. From the German press in January -

In the end — as Germany’s most respected politician today, Wolfgang Schaeuble, the President of our Bundestag Parliament, admits — the urge is to align fiscal and budget policies. This will centralise the EU to such an extent that not only separate national governments, but even the nations themselves will become a thing of the past, at least in all practical and legal senses.

I await the "Ah, yes, but ..."s

It wasn't "designed from day one" it evolved out of a series of decisions, good, bad and indifferent.
That individuals or groups had their own ideas about how it should develop was perfectly OK - they weren't necessarily going to be implemented not least because we were major players ourselves, part of the decision making process.
Feebly dropping out and leaving them to get on with all these awful things seems to be about the most unimaginative and ineffective thing we could have done. Also irresponsible, if they really have all these weird intentions.

Nothing much to show for Brexit so far, in spite of 5 years of negotiations and the oven ready deal, so brexiters have to resort to ever more abstract and improbable justifications of their position! No wonder so many of them want us to shut up!

PS ".....even the nations themselves will become a thing of the past, at least in all practical and legal senses....." was certainly working to the advantage of Ireland, with re-unification coming in by the back door unannounced and uncontested, and there are/were other hot spots and divisions in Europe, now ameliorated.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/168/the-western-balkans

 

[Doug B]

And, having interviewed and employed tens of people over the years, I would respectfully say that if you think it's not your fault if you employ someone and they turn out to be bad then you really shouldn't be doing any recruitment!

yes but when I have employed folks in the past I’ve not been limited to two candidates both with little or no qualifications for the job in hand supplied from parties with dubious past history & felt somehow duty bound to pick one of them.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

It wasn't "designed from day one ...

Sorry - poor choice of word. Intended would have been better.

 

[sploo]

yes but when I have employed folks in the past I’ve not been limited to two candidates both with little or no qualifications for the job in hand supplied from parties with dubious past history & felt somehow duty bound to pick one of them.

Then pick the option based on the evidence at hand. E.g. on one side you had career economists and trade experts saying "it'll likely be bad", and on the other side you had a bunch of politicians whose economic politics saw them opposed to measures such as social services... and yet they were standing in front of a bus claiming they could put money into the NHS.

I mean, one of them was IDS, who at the time was best known in the public eye for killing the disabled as part of his running of the DWP.

Essentially, it would be like the head of the National Rifle Association in the US standing on a platform of strict gun control; it wouldn't require extensive political knowledge to think "something's probably fishy here".

 

[Doug B]

Then pick the option based on the evidence at hand. E.g. on one side you had career economists and trade experts saying "it'll likely be bad", and on the other side you had a bunch of politicians whose economic politics saw them opposed to measures such as social services... and yet they were standing in front of a bus claiming they could put money into the NHS.

I mean, one of them was IDS, who at the time was best known in the public eye for killing the disabled as part of his running of the DWP.

Essentially, it would be like the head of the National Rifle Association in the US standing on a platform of strict gun control; it wouldn't require extensive political knowledge to think "something's probably fishy here".

Ah so either way I end up with an option I don’t want.

 

[sploo]

Ah so either way I end up with an option I don’t want.

Well, one of those offered you an option you wanted, but wasn't only not true but also caused significantly more damage. The other was a status quo you didn't like, which had a number of abstract negatives that don't really exist.

So, I agree that neither choice was attractive if you preferred out, but only one was damaging for pretty much everyone.

 

[doctor Bob]

And, having interviewed and employed tens of people over the years, I would respectfully say that if you think it's not your fault if you employ someone and they turn out to be bad then you really shouldn't be doing any recruitment!

Don't beat yourself up about it, lady luck says you'll get one right in the end. Could be your manner?
Recruiting is difficult, often the initial period with the new employee is complex and takes some getting used to, settling in as such, usually it's best to give it time rather than **** on to them in the first 2 weeks. A few existing employees get the hump because it's not how "Joe" used to do it, very difficult to win these people over, they always want Joe back. I try and get rid of the ones which group together and moan, need a team.

 

[RobinBHM]

Well, one of those offered you an option you wanted, but wasn't only not true but also caused significantly more damage. The other was a status quo you didn't like, which had a number of abstract negatives that don't really exist.

So, I agree that neither choice was attractive if you preferred out, but only one was damaging for pretty much everyone.

sadly the brexit debate hardly discussed how the EU works, the positives and negatives of membership

making a case for the status quo is difficult when very few people actually know what the status quo is....and still dont.

brexit debate was won with emotive slogans not information, facts, evidence.

I agree this country needs to move on, its done now......but the only way to move on is to understand reality.

Blaming the Northern Ireland issue as a fault of the EU -is not a solution. The solution is for brexiters to start to understand how he Single Market works and what changes need to be made to solve the border issue. All the time we keep banging the "wont accept any rules from Brussels" we wont move forward.

It is brexers who are actually the negative ones and cant move forward.

 

[MarkDennehy]

Sorry - poor choice of word. Intended would have been better.

I mean, even then that view is problematical since the idea of an "EU federal state" was being debated publicly before I was born so it was hardly a secret that it was an option - but the path from there to here was a series of negotiated treaties which were not mandatory and which were all (eventually) agreed to unanimously by the member states (even if a number of times there had to be re-negotiations because some member states didn't like the content of them, like when Ireland voted no in our referendum on the Lisbon treaty and when the Danes voted no in their referendum on the Maastrict treaty).
It's a bit hard for the EU to be a nefarious plot to secretly entangle the UK in a federal state against its will when the EU can't compel the UK to sign treaties for forty years in order to accomplish that.

Now should you guys have had a referendum for each treaty the way most member states did? I mean, I'd say yes, but I'm used to us having to have a referendum for any such treaty over here, and we've gotten used to referendums and we run them a little differently to the way the UK has run theirs (for example, there's no public body in the UK charged with delivering a pamphlet to every registered voter setting forth the vote and the choices without bias). Also, that's something between yourselves and your government because, and this is mildly ironic, the UK is a soverign nation and the EU can't order it to hold a referendum to ratify an EU treaty if the UK government doesn't want to do that.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

for example, there's no public body in the UK charged with delivering a pamphlet to every registered voter setting forth the vote and the choices without bias ...

The government wouldn't have dared publish an unbiased pamphlet. It would have destroyed its case. A senior Labour politician at the time was asked why the remain camp didn't make a better case for staying in and he replied because for most people it couldn't. (Unfortunately I can't remember his name.)

 

[sploo]

The government wouldn't have dared publish an unbiased pamphlet. It would have destroyed its case. A senior Labour politician at the time was asked why the remain camp didn't make a better case for staying in and he replied because for most people it couldn't. (Unfortunately I can't remember his name.)

Out of interest, what do you believe (roughly) that unbiased, fact based, pamphlets would have contained; for both sides of the argument?

 

[WannabeeCarpenter]

Late to the party here....

I work for a major UK/EU food brand and am possibly about to lose a large Irish client because of the duties & documentation now required for us to ship products. The client has agreed to cover the duties for a short time but after that is expecting my Co to pay them. If we do that it'll hugely reduce our margins almost to the point of being unprofitable.

The level of paperwork needed to ship certain products is now beyond ridiculous and in many cases it attracts substantial costs. It even goes as far as needing the parameters of pasteurisation temperatures and certificates signed by vets where animal derivatives are an ingredient.

We/the general consumer have/has no idea what's involved and/or how it's going to impact on the cost of some goods we buy, especially food.

 

[RobinBHM]

Late to the party here....

I work for a major UK/EU food brand and am possibly about to lose a large Irish client because of the duties & documentation now required for us to ship products. The client has agreed to cover the duties for a short time but after that is expecting my Co to pay them. If we do that it'll hugely reduce our margins almost to the point of being unprofitable.

The level of paperwork needed to ship certain products is now beyond ridiculous and in many cases it attracts substantial costs. It even goes as far as needing the parameters of pasteurisation temperatures and certificates signed by vets where animal derivatives are an ingredient.

We/the general consumer have/has no idea what's involved and/or how it's going to impact on the cost of some goods we buy, especially food.

Im sorry to hear that -its is unfortunately a story being repeated throughout the country.

the impact is worst for SMEs.

 

[RobinBHM]

As Ive mentioned, I have a gripe with those claiming "we must move on"....for the simple reason until the truth is told, we cant find solutions

here is a news article so typical of the misinformation put out by sections of the media:
'My profit has been wiped out by a £250,000 cost': EU's new export rules leave small British firms struggling
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/m...les-leave-small-British-firms-struggling.html
it is blatant gaslighting.

For clarity, these are not new rules. They are existing rules. What has changed is the UK has moved from being in the Single Market to becoming a 3rd country.


I wonder if any brexiters on this forum would agree that the way to move forward is for honesty to replace the emotive sloganeering.

Until people accept the truth about the reality of trade barriers between NI and GB we cant build any solutions

 

[Noel]

As Ive mentioned, I have a gripe with those claiming "we must move on"....for the simple reason until the truth is told, we cant find solutions

here is a news article so typical of the misinformation put out by sections of the media:
'My profit has been wiped out by a £250,000 cost': EU's new export rules leave small British firms struggling
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/m...les-leave-small-British-firms-struggling.html
it is blatant gaslighting.

For clarity, these are not new rules. They are existing rules. What has changed is the UK has moved from being in the Single Market to becoming a 3rd country.


I wonder if any brexiters on this forum would agree that the way to move forward is for honesty to replace the emotive sloganeering.

Until people accept the truth about the reality of trade barriers between NI and GB we cant build any solutions

One of the DM commenters, Big Dave, has the answer, seems reasonable.........:



Dave, Chorleywood, about an hour ago

So WE ban EU goods, that will learn THEM. What part of Britain First do these communist continentals not understand? All the best, UKIPPER Dave (Continuity UKIP)

 

[doctor Bob]

here is a news article so typical of the misinformation put out by sections of the media:
'My profit has been wiped out by a £250,000 cost': EU's new export rules leave small British firms struggling
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/m...les-leave-small-British-firms-struggling.html
it is blatant gaslighting.

400 bikes a day, 146000 bikes per year, extra cost £1.70 per bike. something is not right if on £300 -£700 bikes your profit is 0.3%.

Looking at their accounts they make a lot more than £250000 a year.
Just a crappy story all round.
I think the right and left media are guilty of over egging it, Guardian, Mail, LBC (totally unlistenable to at present, James o'Brian awful, David Lammy shameful)

As are we all, very very binary, demands, demands, demands ............... I've been very busy with family stuff past week. Coming back to this thread for a peak every now and again, have we got anywhere, have u sorted it yet.

 

[WannabeeCarpenter]

Im sorry to hear that -its is unfortunately a story being repeated throughout the country.

the impact is worst for SMEs.

Oh I get that completely and they're the ones I feel for the most. I've sold to Independent retailers for 25 years and they're my passion.....

 

[Daniel2]

400 bikes a day, 146000 bikes per year, extra cost £1.70 per bike. something is not right if on £300 -£700 bikes your profit is 0.3%.

Looking at their accounts they make a lot more than £250000 a year.
Just a crappy story all round.
I think the right and left media are guilty of over egging it, Guardian, Mail, LBC (totally unlistenable to at present, James o'Brian awful, David Lammy shameful)

As are we all, very very binary, demands, demands, demands ............... I've been very busy with family stuff past week. Coming back to this thread for a peak every now and again, have we got anywhere, have u sorted it yet.

Consensus is imminent, I'm sure.