|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 30, 2024 18:52:43 GMT
Her opening would have been so much better, if she had replaced the word 'wrong' with the word 'lying'.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 31, 2024 23:12:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 31, 2024 23:56:42 GMT
Rosie, brilliant as usual When Parody becomes someone else's reality
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Feb 1, 2024 0:06:16 GMT
Her opening would have been so much better, if she had replaced the word 'wrong' with the word 'lying'. Small price to pay to get a blue passport.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 1, 2024 0:23:38 GMT
Rosie, brilliant as usual When Parody becomes someone else's reality When I posted it, I didn't realise Leadsom had been doing the rounds this morning, saying virtually exactly the same thing! But in her case, it wasn't of course intended to be parody, christ alive these people have no shame ...
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 1, 2024 0:54:20 GMT
Rosie, brilliant as usual When Parody becomes someone else's reality When I posted it, I didn't realise Leadsom had been doing the rounds this morning, saying virtually exactly the same thing! But in her case, it wasn't of course intended to be parody, christ alive these people have no shame ... Yea I had the "pleasure" of watching Loathsome's justification bollocks earlier today When I saw Rosie's brilliant Parody which you posted , I almost, but not quite, spat out my fine Malt. Particular Genius was Rosie's Pfft gesture
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 1, 2024 10:21:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 1, 2024 15:02:39 GMT
The look on JRM'S face when he suddenly realises that the person who is at the actual coal face here, doesn't share his blind devotion to Brexit. The problem is, that people like JRM aren't remotely interested in hearing about the devastation it has caused to real people like this chap. It's almost like Brexit has become an article of religious ideology, which for him, can never be recanted, no matter the evidence staring him in the face.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 1, 2024 15:29:25 GMT
The look on JRM'S face when he suddenly realises that the person who is at the actual coal face here, doesn't share his blind devotion to Brexit. The problem is, that people like JRM aren't remotely interested in hearing about the devastation it has caused to real people like this chap. It's almost like Brexit has become an article of religious ideology, which for him, can never be recanted, no matter the evidence staring him in the face. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s an article of religious ideology for him. I simply think that he made a tonne of money pushing for it in the first place and he continues to make a tonne of money chatting crap about it now as well. If JRM was to lose money in this endeavor, he’d have been its staunchest contender from day one. It’s got nothing to do with sovereignty and everything to do with his bank balance.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 1, 2024 15:34:58 GMT
The look on JRM'S face when he suddenly realises that the person who is at the actual coal face here, doesn't share his blind devotion to Brexit. The problem is, that people like JRM aren't remotely interested in hearing about the devastation it has caused to real people like this chap. It's almost like Brexit has become an article of religious ideology, which for him, can never be recanted, no matter the evidence staring him in the face. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s an article of religious ideology for him. I simply think that he made a tonne of money pushing for it in the first place and he continues to make a tonne of money chatting crap about it now as well. If JRM was to lose money in this endeavor, he’d have been its staunchest contender from day one. It’s got nothing to do with sovereignty and everything to do with his bank balance. Oh absolutely, there's that as well!
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 1, 2024 15:52:47 GMT
The look on JRM'S face when he suddenly realises that the person who is at the actual coal face here, doesn't share his blind devotion to Brexit. The problem is, that people like JRM aren't remotely interested in hearing about the devastation it has caused to real people like this chap. It's almost like Brexit has become an article of religious ideology, which for him, can never be recanted, no matter the evidence staring him in the face. I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s an article of religious ideology for him. I simply think that he made a tonne of money pushing for it in the first place and he continues to make a tonne of money chatting crap about it now as well. If JRM was to lose money in this endeavor, he’d have been its staunchest contender from day one. It’s got nothing to do with sovereignty and everything to do with his bank balance. Like the Buffoon Tim Martin Mind you he did receive a Gong for Services to Stupidity, he is now Sir Tim
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 1, 2024 16:46:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 3, 2024 12:22:42 GMT
It's one of those you couldn't make it up scenarios you might see enacted in a satirical TV Show UK continues to produce Food and Agri-food to EU Standards under UK-EU Retained Law This week UK commenced Import Checks, paperwork only, of Food Imports from EU (33% of all food consumed in UK). This had been delayed 5 times and the Article Oggy Linked outlines some of the additional cost which will be passed on to Consumers From April this year, if it doesn't get delayed again, physical inspection of EU Food Imports will commence adding even more cost to be passed on to Consumers Because the DUP didn't like Brexit Deal, which they campaigned for, specifically the Protocol they have refused to participate in Government in NI for the last 2 years, meaning no Government can be formed. The Windsor Agreement Richi negotiated 1 year ago wasn't to their liking and refused to change their stance. Rishi's new plan, Safeguarding the Union, is that ALL UK Food destined for UK consumption must be labeled "Not for EU" Under the Windsor Agreement this was only to be for Food destined to remain in NI and would have sailed through a Green Lane. DUP objected to this, they like to object, because many GB Companies may have chosen simply not to supply the small NI Market and avoid the cost. Of course Food and Agri-food that will be Exporting to EU will require different labeling. Just a reminder that under UK and EU Laws Food is being produced to the same Standards The sketch I'm envisaging is one where a Brexit Buffoon, before Referendum, explains they are Voting for Brexit to get rid of all the EU Red Tape. Fast forward in the sketch and a Commentator explains to Brexiteer that far from removing Red Tape, Brexit has increased Red Tape and cost by a multiple. The final scene is Brexiteer having absorbed all this information smiles smugly and says, yes but we have Sovereignty.... to behave idiotically
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 4, 2024 9:12:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 4, 2024 10:10:24 GMT
This isn't the only recent case where Bad Enoch is accused of telling Porkies Britain’s top business minister Kemi Badenoch stands accused of misleading parliament over an upcoming cliff edge set to clobber car exports to Canada. The trade and business secretary told MPs on Monday there are “ongoing” negotiations with Canada to resolve looming tariffs threatening British vehicle exports despite trade talks between the two countries being put on ice. But Canadian officials say that isn't so. Badenoch paused the trade negotiations last Thursday and “there has been no discussion separately on rules of origin,” said a senior official at Global Affairs Canada, which manages the country's global relations. There's “nothing in the hopper for the future,” added the official. Tens of millions of pounds in British automotive exports are on the line after talks between London and Ottawa for a new trade deal collapsed last Thursday when Badenoch walked away from the negotiating table. British car manufacturers’ right to use EU parts in their vehicle exports — known as cumulation — hangs in the balance. Canada is a top 10 destination for British cars with exports worth £745.8 million (€874 million) annually. In two months, British carmakers will lose that privilege unless the two sides agree to extend the current rules under the U.K.-Canada trade deal rolled over after Brexit in 2021. If Badenoch can’t secure a deal by April 1 (How Appropriate )automakers face tens of millions of pounds in tariffs since their supply chain is embedded in the EU automotive industry. www.politico.eu/article/kemi-badenoch-accusation-cover-up-canada-trade-export-cliff-edge/This is part of a game of Chicken between UK and Canada Talks between the UK and Canada to replace the temporary rollover of EU/Canada Trade Deal have collapsed over whether Canada can export Hormone Treated Beef (Yummy) to UK. It would be preposterous that Canada would ever get that included in a Trade Deal with EU but it feels the much smaller UK will concede and have its tummy tickled by its former Colony Its possible that Canada could treat the Car Tariff issue separately but this would require Trudeau to get Parliamentary approval and anger his Farmers - so why would he. So it's not just UK Cheese not going to Canada but very likely UK Assembled Cars as they have too many components imported from EU to meet Rules of Origin requirements Brexit, the Gift that Keeps Giving
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 4, 2024 21:18:39 GMT
It's one of those you couldn't make it up scenarios you might see enacted in a satirical TV Show UK continues to produce Food and Agri-food to EU Standards under UK-EU Retained Law This week UK commenced Import Checks, paperwork only, of Food Imports from EU (33% of all food consumed in UK). This had been delayed 5 times and the Article Oggy Linked outlines some of the additional cost which will be passed on to Consumers From April this year, if it doesn't get delayed again, physical inspection of EU Food Imports will commence adding even more cost to be passed on to Consumers Because the DUP didn't like Brexit Deal, which they campaigned for, specifically the Protocol they have refused to participate in Government in NI for the last 2 years, meaning no Government can be formed. The Windsor Agreement Richi negotiated 1 year ago wasn't to their liking and refused to change their stance. Rishi's new plan, Safeguarding the Union, is that ALL UK Food destined for UK consumption must be labeled "Not for EU" Under the Windsor Agreement this was only to be for Food destined to remain in NI and would have sailed through a Green Lane. DUP objected to this, they like to object, because many GB Companies may have chosen simply not to supply the small NI Market and avoid the cost. Of course Food and Agri-food that will be Exporting to EU will require different labeling. Just a reminder that under UK and EU Laws Food is being produced to the same Standards The sketch I'm envisaging is one where a Brexit Buffoon, before Referendum, explains they are Voting for Brexit to get rid of all the EU Red Tape. Fast forward in the sketch and a Commentator explains to Brexiteer that far from removing Red Tape, Brexit has increased Red Tape and cost by a multiple. The final scene is Brexiteer having absorbed all this information smiles smugly and says, yes but we have Sovereignty.... to behave idiotically
Absolutely perfectly put.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Feb 6, 2024 22:01:37 GMT
On bbc news website EU reverse plans to half pesticide use
The wonders of the European Union another surrender to a bunch of arsey farmers
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 6, 2024 23:32:12 GMT
On bbc news website EU reverse plans to half pesticide use The wonders of the European Union another surrender to a bunch of arsey farmers I suppose it depends on how you view the future of the Planet and whether or not it may or may not be in Danger or not. The EU ambition to reduce Pesticides by 50% was ambitions. It had been rejected by the EU Parliament but the Commission decided to plough on. And it was finally killed off by as you say protests by Arsey Farmers who objected to unfair competition from other Farmers outside EU as they would be unable to compete on an equal footing. Of course I shall be accused of whatabotury when I mention that 36 dangerous Pesticides are being used in UK Food Production that are banned in EU. What the Arsey Farmers have prevented is further divergence to UK norms. www.pan-uk.org/post-brexit-pesticide-divergence/I don't have the Scientific Knowledge to make a judgement of how dangerous or not these are to Health or Planet. I won't be around to see the outworkings of Climate Change, if it occurs as predicted and perhaps you disagree it will. Again beyond my knowledge although 96% of Scientists concur it will. It very hard to see a concerted even handed Global Respons, not to reverse, but to halt Global warming, again you can decide if such a threat exists.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Feb 7, 2024 10:55:42 GMT
On bbc news website EU reverse plans to half pesticide use The wonders of the European Union another surrender to a bunch of arsey farmers I suppose it depends on how you view the future of the Planet and whether or not it may or may not be in Danger or not. The EU ambition to reduce Pesticides by 50% was ambitions. It had been rejected by the EU Parliament but the Commission decided to plough on. And it was finally killed off by as you say protests by Arsey Farmers who objected to unfair competition from other Farmers outside EU as they would be unable to compete on an equal footing. Of course I shall be accused of whatabotury when I mention that 36 dangerous Pesticides are being used in UK Food Production that are banned in EU. What the Arsey Farmers have prevented is further divergence to UK norms. www.pan-uk.org/post-brexit-pesticide-divergence/I don't have the Scientific Knowledge to make a judgement of how dangerous or not these are to Health or Planet. I won't be around to see the outworkings of Climate Change, if it occurs as predicted and perhaps you disagree it will. Again beyond my knowledge although 96% of Scientists concur it will. It very hard to see a concerted even handed Global Respons, not to reverse, but to halt Global warming, again you can decide if such a threat exists. '96% of Scientists concur'. An awful lot to unpack in that overused propaganda.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Feb 7, 2024 22:48:23 GMT
My last post on 27th Jan stating that UK trade is at record levels did not go down well. I posted the latest government UK trade statistics published on 24th Jan stating figures for the year ending November. The latest monthly and quarterly statistics are always subject to later revision, rarely mentioned in the press, and we will have to wait till later in the year for a more exact picture of 2023 trade performance. I will cover this in my 2023 Brexit review later this year when all the figures are in. The UK In A Changing Europe (UKIACE) article "UK Trade Tracker Q3 2023" was posted in response to my last post. (1) This article begins by cherry-picking comparing Q2 2023 with Q2 2019. This first item compares chained volume measures and expresses them as a % of GDP. The result shows trade down by less than 1%. I prefer to quote annual (or year to date) actual figures and long term trends rather than monthly and quarterly values that fluctuate too greatly for a reliable comparison. The World Bank data shows UK exports for 2021 and 2022 at record levels. (2) Any comparison on trade between 2023 and 2019 must take due cognisance of energy inflation. In 2022, the UK spent about £63bn on crude oil, petrol, diesel, and other oil-based fuels, with another £49 billion spent on buying gas. The rest was spent on imports of coal and electricity – making a total of £117bn. (3) For comparison, in 2019, before the pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the UK spent £48bn on total energy imports. Roughly £40bn went on oil and £7bn on gas, while the rest went on coal and electricity. It is a consequence of this that the UK's trade deficit has increased significantly, because the UK has become a major net importer of oil and gas in recent decades. Yet the UKIACE make no mention of this major factor and lead the reader to presume the cause of the much larger negative trade balance is Brexit. UKIACE expressed results in terms of % GDP. World Bank data shows that for 2022 UK exports were 33.27% of GDP, which is the highest level since records begin.(4) 2022 GDP was $3089 bn (5), so exports were $1028 bn. In 2021 GDP was $3,142 bn, with exports 29.6% of GDP which was $930 bn. This is an increase of over 10% in a year, and 14% higher than 2019 exports of $902 bn. Dare I say again, UK trade is at record levels, with record exports in terms of % GDP and record imports due to the inflation of energy costs and food costs as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. Although the oil (and gas) market price has reduced since its peak in 2022, it is still significantly above the levels in 2019. As I pointed out in my last post, despite the reduction in energy prices, UK exports have continued to increase in 2023; imports have naturally reduced due to the reduction in energy prices. If in the event UK exports prove not to be a record in 2023 when the final figures are released I can state unequivocally now that it will not be due to Brexit. In 2023 the US was the top recipient of goods and services from the UK accounting for 20.9% . They were followed by 2nd Germany 6.9%, 3rd Netherlands 6.8% and 4th Ireland 6.6%; these last three accounting for over a fifth of UK exports. Germany's, the Netherlands', and Ireland's economies have all shrunk in 2023. It is inevitable that exports to three of the UK's major customers will have declined due to their reduced economies, not because of Brexit. This is another reason to leave the EU: to reduce the UK dependence on the EU economy, which is shrinking as a proportion of the world economy and growing more slowly than the rest of the developed world's economies. As long as the UK depends heavily on imports of oil and gas, the country will be subject to capricious fluctuations in the world energy market, unlike the US and Canada who have sailed through the recent energy crisis. The root cause of the UK's trade balance problem has been the decline in investment in North Sea oil and gas from c. £18 billion in 2014 to c. £4 billion in 2022, plus minimal investment in exploration and appraisal. (Incidentally this reduction in investment is the main reason for reduced UK investment post the 2016 Brexit referendum till 2020, not Brexit.) UK-EU Trade The second part of the UKIACE paper (1) presents a very misleading picture of UK trade with the EU. The inference is that leaving the EU means reducing trade with the EU, why? The UK enjoys one of the best FTA terms the EU has ever agreed with any other nation, free of tariffs and quotas on all goods. The UK left the EU to restore sovereignty and stop freedom of movement, not to stop trading with the EU. In terms of trade, leaving the EU means that the UK is now free to set up its own trading relationship with the rest of the world which will obviously take years to establish. The graph in the article clearly shows what happened to UK-EU trade when Brexit took place. There was a sharp increase in UK exports prior to the 2020 year end as businesses sought to export and build stocks in the EU as a precaution against the possibility of no trade agreement with the EU. (6) After Brexit there was a temporary sharp fall while stocks were depleted before the end of the 2020/21 financial year. This was misinterpreted as a collapse in exports by the anti-Brexit media. (7) Thereafter trade gradually returned to normal as exporters got used to the new trading situation. Food and drink exporters have expressed strong concerns about leaving the EU, but by the middle of last year the Food & Drink Federation were reporting very strong sales particularly to the EU. (8) To their credit the UKIACE do state "most businesses did not find the non-tariff barriers, such as new paperwork and potential delays at border checks, to be so much of a hindrance". This was less so with smaller companies where non-tariff barriers have been more of a hindrance, but the UK is only now, at long last, introducing similar controls on EU imports. Time will tell how things pan out once a level playing field has been re-established . Since Brexit, UK producers have had to contend with export red tape to the EU and at the same time compete with imports from the EU that have had minimal new controls put in place. With the UK now introducing controls, UK producers will be better positioned to compete with imports from the EU. Indeed many EU exporters to the UK may cease exporting to the UK, which will help British producers and better secure UK employment. Another factor impacting on UK-EU trade figures is the Rotterdam-Antwerp Effect (9), which distorts figures by an unknown amount by for example crediting exports to the EU that were going to the rest of the world via those ports. Since leaving the EU those exports are now assigned to the true country of destination. One of the major changes in the UK economy since the Brexit referendum has been the huge investment it port logistics, which will reduce the UK dependence on Rotterdam. Regrettably the anti-Brexit media continues to print misleading articles falsely blaming Brexit. On Sunday 4th February a link was posted on this thread to the Guardian article in which it stated: " In 2022, 46% of pharmaceutical exports went to the EU. She warned that Britain’s previously thriving pharmaceutical sector was now in a trade deficit because we have to import so much more medicine than before – the latest 2022 figures show a $5bn deficit globally, compared with a surplus of $9.7bn in 2010." Whilst not actually saying so, the inference is quite clear that Brexit is responsible for a drop in pharmaceutical exports. The Cambridge Industrial Innovation Policy published an article last June (10 ) that states "This represents a decline from a $9.7 billion surplus in 2010 to a $1 billion trade deficit in pharmaceuticals in 2020." Obviously the UK pharmaceutical trade balance started a decline well before 2020 and mostly occurred before the UK left the EU. Furthermore the Guardian article suggests a decline in the UK pharmaceutical industry (using the terms "previously thriving") and greater import penetration. Imports from the EU have actually declined. (11) Imports from the whole world were also in decline prior to the pandemic which led to a surge in imports. (12) Again, nothing to do with Brexit. Prior to the 2016 referendum, revenue of pharmaceutical preparations and products manufacturing in the UK was in decline but since then has been growing. (13) It is true that exports of pharmaceuticals declined prior to the pandemic, focussing on domestic demand and displacing imports. Contrary to the inference in the Guardian article, the UK pharmaceuticals industry is very healthy increasing revenue and projected to continue to do so. (14) Trade Balance The third aspect on trade covered by the UKIACE paper is the UK's high total trade deficit. This issue is one of the most financially damaging aspects of the UK's membership of the EU, The report show the deficit reaching 3% of GDP; once again actual numbers are not quoted. The overall trade deficit was £67 bn in 2022. The UK had a trade deficit with the EU of £83 billion in 2022 and a trade surplus of £16 billion with non-EU countries. (15) How long can Britain sustain this negative trade balance? UKIACE state "A trade deficit is not in itself a bad thing, it can lead to cheaper good prices, and can indicate a strong consumer market." I strongly disagree with that statement and have quoted the following from Investopedia in the past: "Trade deficits can create substantial problems in the long run. The worst and most obvious problem is that trade deficits can facilitate a sort of economic colonization. If a country continually runs trade deficits, citizens of other countries acquire funds to buy up capital in that nation. That can mean making new investments that increase productivity and create jobs. However, it may also involve merely buying up existing businesses, natural resources, and other assets. If this buying continues, foreign investors will eventually own nearly everything in the country."
It is vital that the UK re-establishes trade equilibrium. That clearly cannot happen within the EU, where some countries like France are protectionist and other countries are receiving regional aid (e.g. Poland > 10 bn Euros pa (16)). Another adverse impact of a large continuous negative trade balance is a steady devaluation of a country's currency. This might stimulate exports and makes imports more expensive but in the long run means inflation and the country is poorer. Trade Global Context The fourth aspect on trade covered by the UKIACE paper is trade openness under the heading of global context. Once again actual values aren't used and a graph of trade volume divided by GDP for the G7 countries using an index of 100% for each country for Quarter 4 2018. This cherry-picking methodology is used to try and show the UK in the worst light. Despite an improved balance of trade in services in that quarter, the UK’s current account balance deficit widened to 4.4% of GDP due to a large increase in goods imported. These factors increased trade openness to a high level for Q4 2018, but it is not the sort of openness that is healthy for the economy. The term “openness” may be somewhat misleading, since a low ratio does not necessarily imply high barriers to foreign trade, but may be due to factors such as size of the economy and geographic remoteness from potential trading partners. Island countries and countries with few borders tend to have lower trade openness and be more self-sufficient. High dependence on imports cannot be regarded as healthy; what happens when the supply is turned off, as has been the case recently with Russian gas and coal to Germany? A period of bad weather in Spain last year led to a shortage of tomatoes due to the UK's high dependence on imports, but anti-Brexit media were quick to blame Brexit. At 69% for 2022 (17), the UK's trade openness can be considered highly satisfactory, but as reference 17 shows the value can fluctuate from year to year, and even more so from quarter to quarter. Comparing against a single quarter as UKIACE have done may be factual but is highly misleading. (As is the case of the counterfactuals and doppelgänger that the anti Brexit media keep publishing.) The UK's 69% for 2022 compares with Germany 100%, Italy 75%, France 73%, Canada 67%, Japan 47%, and United States 25% in 2021. (18) If the World Bank data is consulted in reference 18, it can be seen that most countries experienced a very sharp increase in 2022 which was due to energy trade price inflation. It will not be till much later in the year that the World Bank will publish 2023 data. The values indicate that the US and Japan are far more self-sufficient economies than the rest of the G7, whilst Germany's high figure is attributable to it being at the heart of the EU economy and sharing borders with nine countries. The India Trade Deal Having worked for Tata for seven years and acted in a consultancy capacity in India for a brief time, I could write at length, but since there is no UK-India trade deal I see little point in speculating. UKIACE seem to be inferring the government is dragging its heels coming to an agreement, but personally I prefer they take their time and get the best deal available. The EU has been in trade negotiations with India, on and off and on again, since 2007, i.e. over 16 years, whereas UK-India trade negotiations commenced on 17th January 2022. Summary UK trade continues to be very healthy and annually at record levels. The trade deficit has been at record levels due to the energy crisis forcing world energy prices to record levels. In the case of the UK this was made even worse being a major food importer due to the world inflated prices of food as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. (Russia and Ukraine are major producers of sunflower oil used extensively in food processing.) The UKIACE report is full of misleading statements and quotes, with graphs showing convoluted statistics to try and convey a false negative view of post Brexit UK trade. References (1) ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/September-Trade-Tracker.pdf(2) data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.EXP.GNFS.CD?locations=GB(3) oeuk.org.uk/uk-energy-import-bills-more-than-doubled-to-117-billion-in-2022-and-could-hit-similar-highs-this-year-a-new-offshore-energies-uk-report-will-warn/(4) tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports-of-goods-and-services-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html#:~:text=Exports%20of%20goods%20and%20services%20(%25%20of%20GDP)%20in%20United,compiled%20from%20officially%20recognized%20sources. (5) tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp(6) www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/12/18/lorry-queues-stretch-20-miles-dover-business-leaders-warn-firms/(7) www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/22/data-shows-collapse-of-uk-food-and-drink-exports-post-brexit(8) www.fdf.org.uk/fdf/resources/publications/trade-reports/trade-snapshot-h1-2023/(9) globalbritain.co.uk/64-the-rotterdam-antwerp-effect-the-netherlands-distortion/(10) www.ciip.group.cam.ac.uk/reports-and-articles/selling-less-and-buying-more-the-worsening-trade-balance-of-the-uk-pharmaceutical-industry/#:~:text=This%20represents%20a%20decline%20from,while%20its%20imports%20have%20increased (11) www.statista.com/statistics/497337/united-kingdom-uk-import-value-pharmaceutical-products-from-the-european-union/(12) www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-kingdom/imports-medicinal-and-pharmaceutical-product(13) www.statista.com/statistics/328117/turnover-of-pharmaceutical-products-and-preparations-manufacture/(14) www.statista.com/outlook/hmo/pharmaceuticals/united-kingdom#revenue(15) commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02815/#:~:text=The%20UK%20had%20a%20trade,with%20the%20previous%20three%20months. (16) www.statista.com/statistics/1135294/poland-s-contributions-to-and-receipts-from-the-eu-budget/(17) data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS?locations=GB(18) data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 7, 2024 23:11:06 GMT
My last post on 27th Jan stating that UK trade is at record levels did not go down well. I posted the latest government UK trade statistics published on 24th Jan stating figures for the year ending November. The latest monthly and quarterly statistics are always subject to later revision, rarely mentioned in the press, and we will have to wait till later in the year for a more exact picture of 2023 trade performance. I will cover this in my 2023 Brexit review later this year when all the figures are in. The UK In A Changing Europe (UKIACE) article "UK Trade Tracker Q3 2023" was posted in response to my last post. (1) This article begins by cherry-picking comparing Q2 2023 with Q2 2019. This first item compares chained volume measures and expresses them as a % of GDP. The result shows trade down by less than 1%. I prefer to quote annual (or year to date) actual figures and long term trends rather than monthly and quarterly values that fluctuate too greatly for a reliable comparison. The World Bank data shows UK exports for 2021 and 2022 at record levels. (2) Any comparison on trade between 2023 and 2019 must take due cognisance of energy inflation. In 2022, the UK spent about £63bn on crude oil, petrol, diesel, and other oil-based fuels, with another £49 billion spent on buying gas. The rest was spent on imports of coal and electricity – making a total of £117bn. (3) For comparison, in 2019, before the pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the UK spent £48bn on total energy imports. Roughly £40bn went on oil and £7bn on gas, while the rest went on coal and electricity. It is a consequence of this that the UK's trade deficit has increased significantly, because the UK has become a major net importer of oil and gas in recent decades. Yet the UKIACE make no mention of this major factor and lead the reader to presume the cause of the much larger negative trade balance is Brexit. UKIACE expressed results in terms of % GDP. World Bank data shows that for 2022 UK exports were 33.27% of GDP, which is the highest level since records begin.(4) 2022 GDP was $3089 bn (5), so exports were $1028 bn. In 2021 GDP was $3,142 bn, with exports 29.6% of GDP which was $930 bn. This is an increase of over 10% in a year, and 14% higher than 2019 exports of $902 bn. Dare I say again, UK trade is at record levels, with record exports in terms of % GDP and record imports due to the inflation of energy costs and food costs as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. Although the oil (and gas) market price has reduced since its peak in 2022, it is still significantly above the levels in 2019. As I pointed out in my last post, despite the reduction in energy prices, UK exports have continued to increase in 2023; imports have naturally reduced due to the reduction in energy prices. If in the event UK exports prove not to be a record in 2023 when the final figures are released I can state unequivocally now that it will not be due to Brexit. In 2023 the US was the top recipient of goods and services from the UK accounting for 20.9% . They were followed by 2nd Germany 6.9%, 3rd Netherlands 6.8% and 4th Ireland 6.6%; these last three accounting for over a fifth of UK exports. Germany's, the Netherlands', and Ireland's economies have all shrunk in 2023. It is inevitable that exports to three of the UK's major customers will have declined due to their reduced economies, not because of Brexit. This is another reason to leave the EU: to reduce the UK dependence on the EU economy, which is shrinking as a proportion of the world economy and growing more slowly than the rest of the developed world's economies. As long as the UK depends heavily on imports of oil and gas, the country will be subject to capricious fluctuations in the world energy market, unlike the US and Canada who have sailed through the recent energy crisis. The root cause of the UK's trade balance problem has been the decline in investment in North Sea oil and gas from c. £18 billion in 2014 to c. £4 billion in 2022, plus minimal investment in exploration and appraisal. (Incidentally this reduction in investment is the main reason for reduced UK investment post the 2016 Brexit referendum till 2020, not Brexit.) UK-EU Trade The second part of the UKIACE paper (1) presents a very misleading picture of UK trade with the EU. The inference is that leaving the EU means reducing trade with the EU, why? The UK enjoys one of the best FTA terms the EU has ever agreed with any other nation, free of tariffs and quotas on all goods. The UK left the EU to restore sovereignty and stop freedom of movement, not to stop trading with the EU. In terms of trade, leaving the EU means that the UK is now free to set up its own trading relationship with the rest of the world which will obviously take years to establish. The graph in the article clearly shows what happened to UK-EU trade when Brexit took place. There was a sharp increase in UK exports prior to the 2020 year end as businesses sought to export and build stocks in the EU as a precaution against the possibility of no trade agreement with the EU. (6) After Brexit there was a temporary sharp fall while stocks were depleted before the end of the 2020/21 financial year. This was misinterpreted as a collapse in exports by the anti-Brexit media. (7) Thereafter trade gradually returned to normal as exporters got used to the new trading situation. Food and drink exporters have expressed strong concerns about leaving the EU, but by the middle of last year the Food & Drink Federation were reporting very strong sales particularly to the EU. (8) To their credit the UKIACE do state "most businesses did not find the non-tariff barriers, such as new paperwork and potential delays at border checks, to be so much of a hindrance". This was less so with smaller companies where non-tariff barriers have been more of a hindrance, but the UK is only now, at long last, introducing similar controls on EU imports. Time will tell how things pan out once a level playing field has been re-established . Since Brexit, UK producers have had to contend with export red tape to the EU and at the same time compete with imports from the EU that have had minimal new controls put in place. With the UK now introducing controls, UK producers will be better positioned to compete with imports from the EU. Indeed many EU exporters to the UK may cease exporting to the UK, which will help British producers and better secure UK employment. Another factor impacting on UK-EU trade figures is the Rotterdam-Antwerp Effect (9), which distorts figures by an unknown amount by for example crediting exports to the EU that were going to the rest of the world via those ports. Since leaving the EU those exports are now assigned to the true country of destination. One of the major changes in the UK economy since the Brexit referendum has been the huge investment it port logistics, which will reduce the UK dependence on Rotterdam. Regrettably the anti-Brexit media continues to print misleading articles falsely blaming Brexit. On Sunday 4th February a link was posted on this thread to the Guardian article in which it stated: " In 2022, 46% of pharmaceutical exports went to the EU. She warned that Britain’s previously thriving pharmaceutical sector was now in a trade deficit because we have to import so much more medicine than before – the latest 2022 figures show a $5bn deficit globally, compared with a surplus of $9.7bn in 2010." Whilst not actually saying so, the inference is quite clear that Brexit is responsible for a drop in pharmaceutical exports. The Cambridge Industrial Innovation Policy published an article last June (10 ) that states "This represents a decline from a $9.7 billion surplus in 2010 to a $1 billion trade deficit in pharmaceuticals in 2020." Obviously the UK pharmaceutical trade balance started a decline well before 2020 and mostly occurred before the UK left the EU. Furthermore the Guardian article suggests a decline in the UK pharmaceutical industry (using the terms "previously thriving") and greater import penetration. Imports from the EU have actually declined. (11) Imports from the whole world were also in decline prior to the pandemic which led to a surge in imports. (12) Again, nothing to do with Brexit. Prior to the 2016 referendum, revenue of pharmaceutical preparations and products manufacturing in the UK was in decline but since then has been growing. (13) It is true that exports of pharmaceuticals declined prior to the pandemic, focussing on domestic demand and displacing imports. Contrary to the inference in the Guardian article, the UK pharmaceuticals industry is very healthy increasing revenue and projected to continue to do so. (14) Trade Balance The third aspect on trade covered by the UKIACE paper is the UK's high total trade deficit. This issue is one of the most financially damaging aspects of the UK's membership of the EU, The report show the deficit reaching 3% of GDP; once again actual numbers are not quoted. The overall trade deficit was £67 bn in 2022. The UK had a trade deficit with the EU of £83 billion in 2022 and a trade surplus of £16 billion with non-EU countries. (15) How long can Britain sustain this negative trade balance? UKIACE state "A trade deficit is not in itself a bad thing, it can lead to cheaper good prices, and can indicate a strong consumer market." I strongly disagree with that statement and have quoted the following from Investopedia in the past: "Trade deficits can create substantial problems in the long run. The worst and most obvious problem is that trade deficits can facilitate a sort of economic colonization. If a country continually runs trade deficits, citizens of other countries acquire funds to buy up capital in that nation. That can mean making new investments that increase productivity and create jobs. However, it may also involve merely buying up existing businesses, natural resources, and other assets. If this buying continues, foreign investors will eventually own nearly everything in the country."
It is vital that the UK re-establishes trade equilibrium. That clearly cannot happen within the EU, where some countries like France are protectionist and other countries are receiving regional aid (e.g. Poland > 10 bn Euros pa (16)). Another adverse impact of a large continuous negative trade balance is a steady devaluation of a country's currency. This might stimulate exports and makes imports more expensive but in the long run means inflation and the country is poorer. Trade Global Context The fourth aspect on trade covered by the UKIACE paper is trade openness under the heading of global context. Once again actual values aren't used and a graph of trade volume divided by GDP for the G7 countries using an index of 100% for each country for Quarter 4 2018. This cherry-picking methodology is used to try and show the UK in the worst light. Despite an improved balance of trade in services in that quarter, the UK’s current account balance deficit widened to 4.4% of GDP due to a large increase in goods imported. These factors increased trade openness to a high level for Q4 2018, but it is not the sort of openness that is healthy for the economy. The term “openness” may be somewhat misleading, since a low ratio does not necessarily imply high barriers to foreign trade, but may be due to factors such as size of the economy and geographic remoteness from potential trading partners. Island countries and countries with few borders tend to have lower trade openness and be more self-sufficient. High dependence on imports cannot be regarded as healthy; what happens when the supply is turned off, as has been the case recently with Russian gas and coal to Germany? A period of bad weather in Spain last year led to a shortage of tomatoes due to the UK's high dependence on imports, but anti-Brexit media were quick to blame Brexit. At 69% for 2022 (17), the UK's trade openness can be considered highly satisfactory, but as reference 17 shows the value can fluctuate from year to year, and even more so from quarter to quarter. Comparing against a single quarter as UKIACE have done may be factual but is highly misleading. (As is the case of the counterfactuals and doppelgänger that the anti Brexit media keep publishing.) The UK's 69% for 2022 compares with Germany 100%, Italy 75%, France 73%, Canada 67%, Japan 47%, and United States 25% in 2021. (18) If the World Bank data is consulted in reference 18, it can be seen that most countries experienced a very sharp increase in 2022 which was due to energy trade price inflation. It will not be till much later in the year that the World Bank will publish 2023 data. The values indicate that the US and Japan are far more self-sufficient economies than the rest of the G7, whilst Germany's high figure is attributable to it being at the heart of the EU economy and sharing borders with nine countries. The India Trade Deal Having worked for Tata for seven years and acted in a consultancy capacity in India for a brief time, I could write at length, but since there is no UK-India trade deal I see little point in speculating. UKIACE seem to be inferring the government is dragging its heels coming to an agreement, but personally I prefer they take their time and get the best deal available. The EU has been in trade negotiations with India, on and off and on again, since 2007, i.e. over 16 years, whereas UK-India trade negotiations commenced on 17th January 2022. Summary UK trade continues to be very healthy and annually at record levels. The trade deficit has been at record levels due to the energy crisis forcing world energy prices to record levels. In the case of the UK this was made even worse being a major food importer due to the world inflated prices of food as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. (Russia and Ukraine are major producers of sunflower oil used extensively in food processing.) The UKIACE report is full of misleading statements and quotes, with graphs showing convoluted statistics to try and convey a false negative view of post Brexit UK trade. References (1) ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/September-Trade-Tracker.pdf(2) data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.EXP.GNFS.CD?locations=GB(3) oeuk.org.uk/uk-energy-import-bills-more-than-doubled-to-117-billion-in-2022-and-could-hit-similar-highs-this-year-a-new-offshore-energies-uk-report-will-warn/(4) tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports-of-goods-and-services-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html#:~:text=Exports%20of%20goods%20and%20services%20(%25%20of%20GDP)%20in%20United,compiled%20from%20officially%20recognized%20sources. (5) tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp(6) (7) (8) assets/resources/publications/reports/trade-reports/trade-snapshot-h1-2023.PDF (9) globalbritain.co.uk/64-the-rotterdam-antwerp-effect-the-netherlands-distortion/(10) www.ciip.group.cam.ac.uk/reports-and-articles/selling-less-and-buying-more-the-worsening-trade-balance-of-the-uk-pharmaceutical-industry/#:~:text=This%20represents%20a%20decline%20from,while%20its%20imports%20have%20increased (11) www.statista.com/statistics/497337/united-kingdom-uk-import-value-pharmaceutical-products-from-the-european-union/(12) www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/united-kingdom/imports-medicinal-and-pharmaceutical-product(13) www.statista.com/statistics/328117/turnover-of-pharmaceutical-products-and-preparations-manufacture/(14) www.statista.com/outlook/hmo/pharmaceuticals/united-kingdom#revenue(15) commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02815/#:~:text=The%20UK%20had%20a%20trade,with%20the%20previous%20three%20months. (16) www.statista.com/statistics/1135294/poland-s-contributions-to-and-receipts-from-the-eu-budget/(17) data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS?locations=GB(18) data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZSTrade should always be at record levels year on year. Due to inflation and our population increasing. A devalued currency also means we spend more on imports for fewer products. My wife’s job is to negotiate trade deals for DBT as a senior government lawyer. Her and her colleagues all agree things were many times better in the EU from a trading perspective compared with being outside the EU. Not one single person she is aware of think trade has improved because of brexit for the UK.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 8, 2024 0:57:36 GMT
That's a lot to unpack which I will do so later For now I'll just concentrate on your Summary Summary UK trade continues to be very healthy and annually at record levels. As UK Inflation has increased by 21.6% since UK Brexited we would be in even worse doo-doo if they weren't at record Nominal Levels
In Real Terms UK Trade has reduced substantially since BrexitSurprisingly you mention Inflation several times as a factor but never in this context Something else you fail to mention is that UK Exports are inflated due to UK Importing LNG from US and Qatar for onward transfer to EU as EU has stopped buying Pipeline Gas from Russia. This is commonly known as Reload but is included in "Exports" and "Trade"The trade deficit has been at record levels due to the energy crisis forcing world energy prices to record levels. In the case of the UK this was made even worse being a major food importer due to the world inflated prices of food as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. (Russia and Ukraine are major producers of sunflower oil used extensively in food processing.) The Record Trade Deficit with EU £88Bn in 2022 has bugger all to do with Energy Prices in fact it is helped by the above mentioned LNG
In 2022 UK Exports to EU fell by 6% mainly as a result of Non Tariff Barriers ((Red Tape/Cost/Agrevation) while Imports Increased by 17%
As you like quoting Records the Trade Deficit with EU for Q3 2023 hit another record £32.9Bn. Full year results pending, it won't be pretty.The UKIACE report is full of misleading statements and quotes, with graphs showing convoluted statistics to try and convey a false negative view of post Brexit UK trade. As is your commentary which I'll reply to later.
By the way the TCA which UK negotiated and your so proud of is the First Trade Agreement in History that increased Trade Barriers not reduced them
Even Turkey has a Customs Agreement with EU
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 8, 2024 3:03:55 GMT
GDP has increased 1.7% since Q4 of 2019 and some are trying to say that the UK is doing well in anything? 😂 The govt have stated that they expect 12 million people to be in poverty this year: commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07096/ (and that will be while trying to cook the book to make them sound better). Income inequality has continued to rise since Brexit as well while the distribution of wealth share has also shifted in favour of the top 10%. At some point, these wonderful Brexit benefits should be felt by the average person in the population, right?
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 8, 2024 4:08:43 GMT
GDP has increased 1.7% since Q4 of 2019 and some are trying to say that the UK is doing well in anything? 😂 The govt have stated that they expect 12 million people to be in poverty this year: commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07096/ (and that will be while trying to cook the book to make them sound better). Income inequality has continued to rise since Brexit as well while the distribution of wealth share has also shifted in favour of the top 10%. At some point, these wonderful Brexit benefits should be felt by the average person in the population, right? Its quite Bizarre isn't it, it's like winning the one- legged Man Arse Kicking Contest One particular gem from the link you posted
Since relative low income compares low-income households to median income, the fact that income is set to fall for everyone means that relative low income is likely to fall between 2022/23 and 2023/24.
However, the Resolution Foundation expects relative child poverty to return to its upward trend at the end of the cost of living crisis and reach its highest levels since 1998/88 in 2027/28.
As they say, lies, damn lies and statistics Because income is set to go down the crapper for everyone and measured against the Median it gives the delusion that Poverty is reducing. Smoke and Mirrors like much of Mr Coke's posts.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Feb 10, 2024 10:58:58 GMT
The UK government is correct to extend import controls to EU products. The UK is the fourth largest importer in the world (1) and potentially very vulnerable to defective or fraudulent goods. It is essential to protect British consumers from defective produce, unsafe food, disease etc., no matter where the source. The EU enjoys some of the highest standards in the world but is still subject to food borne disease, the most frequent being salmonella.(2) Eleven years ago, Ireland was blamed for the horse meat in beef burgers scandal in products from producers like Dalepak in Yorkshire, owned by ABP Food Group. ABP blamed its continental suppliers, with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland saying these were in the Netherlands and Spain. It later said horse meat had entered its chain through suppliers in Poland. (3) In 2019, the WHO reported that every minute, 44 people (more than 23 million per year) fall sick from eating contaminated food in Europe, and an estimated 4700 per year lose their lives. The WHO stated Europe is not alone, unsafe food is a worldwide problem. (4) Food recalls by producers are commonplace, the main reason being unauthorised substances found in food. This is hardly surprising given the vast amount of pesticides and chemicals used in food production. (5) Authorities are working hard to get on top of the problem and increasing the list of banned substances, but the number of incidents is getting worse, not better. 2022 was a record bad year and 2023 was worse. (6) Regrettably this week the EU Commission has had to reverse action on reducing the list of permitted pesticides due to pressure from EU farmers and the French President. Last year the leader of the NFU complained of inadequate checks on imports from the EU: "We have the massive risk of African Swine Fever in Europe, and to not be investing in our defences for keeping our biosecurity and animal and plant health safe, I think is just a dereliction of duty.” (7) Of course a lot of the problem can be mistakes, lack of controls, oversight, etc. but it is also the case that criminals are at work making money out of food fraud. We have experienced false date labelling in the UK (8) Last year a criminal network was uncovered active across several EU member states. (9) Food Safety reported recently that €30 million Euros worth of illicit foods weighing 8,000 tons were seized by Europol between December 2022 and April 2023. The introduction of tighter controls, even if they cause some inconvenience is in the best interests of the health and safety of the British public, particularly the most vulnerable such as those suffering illness, the elderly, and the young, and not forgetting those who suffer allergic reactions to some foodstuffs. Furthermore the UK’s failure to control EU imports in the same way as it does on other trading partners is technically in violation of WTO trade rules as it effectively grants the EU preferential treatment over other countries. British producers and suppliers are placed at a competitive disadvantage having to conform with EU rules when they export. I have focussed on food because it impacts us all and the controls now being introduced relate to animal and plant products coming from the EU. The UK imports a huge amount of food from the EU, but the problem of defective goods extends to a counterfeit goods. Sometimes we may take a blind eye to a fake branded product, on the grounds that the genuine article is often way over priced and selling its brand name. Sometimes though the issue can be very serious, such as pharmaceuticals. which are amongst common counterfeit goods. One-third of these counterfeit drugs have no active ingredient in them which can have fatal consequences. (10) The revolution to e commerce makes the public more vulnerable to fraudsters. According to a study led by the European Union’s Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), counterfeit bags, clothing, smart-phones and fraudulent drugs cost the European economy a loss of €60 billion each year. (11) Do we want the UK exposed to this? Euractiv have claimed that "6.8% of EU imports are counterfeit and pirated goods."
It is a fact that the EU sets some of the highest standards in the world, however, member states are responsible for the timely and correct application, implementation and enforcement of EU law We can trust many of the 27 countries products in the EU but there are some countries like Hungary that we cannot trust. (12) China is the main source of fake goods to Europe and Germany is the biggest importer of fake goods and there is a risk they could be passed on to the UK. (13) A report by the European Union’s Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) cites Spain in a group of EU nations that includes Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Hungary, as the worst offenders for producing counterfeit children’s toys, which are potentially dangerous. (14) The UK is lucky to be an island state. History teaches us it protects us from invasion, but there are other forms of invasion in this day and age by criminals who engage in trafficking animals and animal products like ivory. (15) There will no doubt continue to be a hue and cry from those opposed to Brexit about delays, red tape, increased costs etc. and, as usual, problems will be highly exaggerated. It should be understood that there are three levels of risk subject to the appropriate level of control. For example plants and live animals count as high risk and have the maximum controls. Cut flowers, meat, non-pasteurised milk, eggs and some fish are examples of medium risk, whilst much fruit and vegetables,processed meats, and cheese made from pasteurised milk will be exempt from extensive documentation. I expect there will be a learning curve for many, and things will settle down over the coming months as they did with UK exports to the EU. I hope I have convinced everyone that introducing comprehensive import controls, whether those imports of from North America, Far East, the Commonwealth, or indeed Europe are essential to protect British consumers, no matter what the cost to tax payers. It is equally important to protect British businesses; our farmers are foremost at welcoming import controls. (16) Only last month Farmers Weekly reported vast quantities of illegally imported meat are being seized at Dover. I believe there will be minimal impact on consumers as increased import costs from the EU will result in increased sales by UK producers, and consumers will switch to imports from elsewhere in the world. The cost of extra food controls on EU food imports is 0.5% of the UK's food import bill, by the crudest calculation. This is not a high price for greater health and safety. There will be benefits to UK producing companies and in fact the Cabinet Office have stated the inflation rate will be increased by less than 0.2% over three years. The introduction of these controls may reduce choice and hurt import businesses, but on balance it is a Brexit benefit to British consumers and production businesses, jobs, and above all, health. References (1) www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-trade-in-numbers/uk-trade-in-numbers-web-version(2) freshproduce.org.uk/statistics/european-food-borne-disease-statistics-2021(3) www.irishtimes.com/health/2023/01/07/a-decade-on-how-the-horsemeat-scandal-changed-the-way-the-world-thinks-of-food-safety/(4) www.who.int/news/item/05-06-2019-23-million-people-falling-ill-from-unsafe-food-each-year-in-europe-is-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg#:~:text=Every%20minute%2C%2044%20people%20%E2%80%93%20more,per%20year%20lose%20their%20lives (5) swissdecode.com/blog/food-recalls-in-europe-september-2021(6) www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/06/eu-food-and-beverage-recalls-rise-in-early-2023/(7) www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/17/uk-risks-disastrous-food-scandal-lax-post-brexit-border-controls-nfu-chief-minette-batters(8) www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/28/uks-top-supplier-of-supermarket-chicken-fiddles-food-safety-dates(9) www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/27-food-fraudsters-arrested-in-lithuania-and-italy(10) www.walkermorris.co.uk/in-brief/cracking-down-on-counterfeits/(11) www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/eu-loses-e60-billion-annually-to-counterfeits/(12) www.intellinews.com/hungary-remains-most-corrupt-country-in-eu-transparency-international-finds-310132/(13) www.redpoints.com/blog/which-country-imports-the-most-counterfeits-in-europe/(14) english.elpais.com/elpais/2015/12/15/inenglish/1450185596_103267.html(15) www.europol.europa.eu/crime-areas/environmental-crime/illicit-trafficking-in-endangered-animal-species(16) www.fwi.co.uk/business/farmer-relief-as-border-controls-on-imports-from-eu-begin(17) www.fwi.co.uk/news/crime/unprecedented-volumes-of-illegal-meat-seized-at-dover
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 10, 2024 14:44:19 GMT
The UK government is correct to extend import controls to EU products. The UK is the fourth largest importer in the world (1) and potentially very vulnerable to defective or fraudulent goods. It is essential to protect British consumers from defective produce, unsafe food, disease etc., no matter where the source. The EU enjoys some of the highest standards in the world but is still subject to food borne disease, the most frequent being salmonella.(2) Eleven years ago, Ireland was blamed for the horse meat in beef burgers scandal in products from producers like Dalepak in Yorkshire, owned by ABP Food Group. ABP blamed its continental suppliers, with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland saying these were in the Netherlands and Spain. It later said horse meat had entered its chain through suppliers in Poland. (3) In 2019, the WHO reported that every minute, 44 people (more than 23 million per year) fall sick from eating contaminated food in Europe, and an estimated 4700 per year lose their lives. The WHO stated Europe is not alone, unsafe food is a worldwide problem. (4) Food recalls by producers are commonplace, the main reason being unauthorised substances found in food. This is hardly surprising given the vast amount of pesticides and chemicals used in food production. (5) Authorities are working hard to get on top of the problem and increasing the list of banned substances, but the number of incidents is getting worse, not better. 2022 was a record bad year and 2023 was worse. (6) Regrettably this week the EU Commission has had to reverse action on reducing the list of permitted pesticides due to pressure from EU farmers and the French President. Last year the leader of the NFU complained of inadequate checks on imports from the EU: "We have the massive risk of African Swine Fever in Europe, and to not be investing in our defences for keeping our biosecurity and animal and plant health safe, I think is just a dereliction of duty.” (7) Of course a lot of the problem can be mistakes, lack of controls, oversight, etc. but it is also the case that criminals are at work making money out of food fraud. We have experienced false date labelling in the UK (8) Last year a criminal network was uncovered active across several EU member states. (9) Food Safety reported recently that €30 million Euros worth of illicit foods weighing 8,000 tons were seized by Europol between December 2022 and April 2023. The introduction of tighter controls, even if they cause some inconvenience is in the best interests of the health and safety of the British public, particularly the most vulnerable such as those suffering illness, the elderly, and the young, and not forgetting those who suffer allergic reactions to some foodstuffs. Furthermore the UK’s failure to control EU imports in the same way as it does on other trading partners is technically in violation of WTO trade rules as it effectively grants the EU preferential treatment over other countries. British producers and suppliers are placed at a competitive disadvantage having to conform with EU rules when they export. I have focussed on food because it impacts us all and the controls now being introduced relate to animal and plant products coming from the EU. The UK imports a huge amount of food from the EU, but the problem of defective goods extends to a counterfeit goods. Sometimes we may take a blind eye to a fake branded product, on the grounds that the genuine article is often way over priced and selling its brand name. Sometimes though the issue can be very serious, such as pharmaceuticals. which are amongst common counterfeit goods. One-third of these counterfeit drugs have no active ingredient in them which can have fatal consequences. (10) The revolution to e commerce makes the public more vulnerable to fraudsters. According to a study led by the European Union’s Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), counterfeit bags, clothing, smart-phones and fraudulent drugs cost the European economy a loss of €60 billion each year. (11) Do we want the UK exposed to this? Euractiv have claimed that "6.8% of EU imports are counterfeit and pirated goods."
It is a fact that the EU sets some of the highest standards in the world, however, member states are responsible for the timely and correct application, implementation and enforcement of EU law We can trust many of the 27 countries products in the EU but there are some countries like Hungary that we cannot trust. (12) China is the main source of fake goods to Europe and Germany is the biggest importer of fake goods and there is a risk they could be passed on to the UK. (13) A report by the European Union’s Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) cites Spain in a group of EU nations that includes Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Hungary, as the worst offenders for producing counterfeit children’s toys, which are potentially dangerous. (14) The UK is lucky to be an island state. History teaches us it protects us from invasion, but there are other forms of invasion in this day and age by criminals who engage in trafficking animals and animal products like ivory. (15) There will no doubt continue to be a hue and cry from those opposed to Brexit about delays, red tape, increased costs etc. and, as usual, problems will be highly exaggerated. It should be understood that there are three levels of risk subject to the appropriate level of control. For example plants and live animals count as high risk and have the maximum controls. Cut flowers, meat, non-pasteurised milk, eggs and some fish are examples of medium risk, whilst much fruit and vegetables,processed meats, and cheese made from pasteurised milk will be exempt from extensive documentation. I expect there will be a learning curve for many, and things will settle down over the coming months as they did with UK exports to the EU. I hope I have convinced everyone that introducing comprehensive import controls, whether those imports of from North America, Far East, the Commonwealth, or indeed Europe are essential to protect British consumers, no matter what the cost to tax payers. It is equally important to protect British businesses; our farmers are foremost at welcoming import controls. (16) Only last month Farmers Weekly reported vast quantities of illegally imported meat are being seized at Dover. I believe there will be minimal impact on consumers as increased import costs from the EU will result in increased sales by UK producers, and consumers will switch to imports from elsewhere in the world. The cost of extra food controls on EU food imports is 0.5% of the UK's food import bill, by the crudest calculation. This is not a high price for greater health and safety. There will be benefits to UK producing companies and in fact the Cabinet Office have stated the inflation rate will be increased by less than 0.2% over three years. The introduction of these controls may reduce choice and hurt import businesses, but on balance it is a Brexit benefit to British consumers and production businesses, jobs, and above all, health. References (1) www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-trade-in-numbers/uk-trade-in-numbers-web-version(2) freshproduce.org.uk/statistics/european-food-borne-disease-statistics-2021(3) www.irishtimes.com/health/2023/01/07/a-decade-on-how-the-horsemeat-scandal-changed-the-way-the-world-thinks-of-food-safety/(4) www.who.int/news/item/05-06-2019-23-million-people-falling-ill-from-unsafe-food-each-year-in-europe-is-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg#:~:text=Every%20minute%2C%2044%20people%20%E2%80%93%20more,per%20year%20lose%20their%20lives (5) swissdecode.com/blog/food-recalls-in-europe-september-2021(6) www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/06/eu-food-and-beverage-recalls-rise-in-early-2023/(7) www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/17/uk-risks-disastrous-food-scandal-lax-post-brexit-border-controls-nfu-chief-minette-batters(8) www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/28/uks-top-supplier-of-supermarket-chicken-fiddles-food-safety-dates(9) www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/27-food-fraudsters-arrested-in-lithuania-and-italy(10) www.walkermorris.co.uk/in-brief/cracking-down-on-counterfeits/(11) www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/eu-loses-e60-billion-annually-to-counterfeits/(12) www.intellinews.com/hungary-remains-most-corrupt-country-in-eu-transparency-international-finds-310132/(13) www.redpoints.com/blog/which-country-imports-the-most-counterfeits-in-europe/(14) english.elpais.com/elpais/2015/12/15/inenglish/1450185596_103267.html(15) www.europol.europa.eu/crime-areas/environmental-crime/illicit-trafficking-in-endangered-animal-species(16) www.fwi.co.uk/business/farmer-relief-as-border-controls-on-imports-from-eu-begin(17) www.fwi.co.uk/news/crime/unprecedented-volumes-of-illegal-meat-seized-at-doverYour points on Food Inspection are valid Can you explain therefore why it was delayed 5 times and took more than 3 years to implement them? EU Implemented immediately It is a requirement under WTO Most Favoured Nation Rules to inspect all or none so UK was in breach of WTO for that period The only thing currently being inspected is the paperwork. It is planned to being Physical Inspections in April but in view of previous delays I won't hold my breath. Physical Inspections on Food from Ireland I believe are not planned to start until October Its also valid to point out even in the most highly regulated Food Standards Regime like EU outbreaks of Disease can occur. The European Food Safety Authority EFSA monitors very closely and keeps a Database and Alerts for all EU Countries Individual Food Safety Authorities Of course since Brexit UK no longer has access to this Database which is a big disadvantage This Article outlines the difficulties UK National Reference Laboratory has encountered since Brexit due to non sharing of information www.foodingredientsfirst.com/news/food-safety-communication-between-uk-and-eu-regulators-restricted-since-brexit.htmlYes it' was unfortunate that pressure was placed on EU to step back from even further measures in banning Pesticides. The EU Farmers feared they were not competing on an even playing field where foods using these Pesticides could be imported cheaper UK Pesticide Action Network is very concerned that since Brexit very harmful Pesticides can now be used in UK but not EU www.thegrocer.co.uk/sourcing/uk-allowing-harmful-pesticides-use-since-brexit-says-group/683238.article
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Feb 10, 2024 15:37:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 10, 2024 20:05:38 GMT
Take Back Control of our Borders.... 22 Miles Inland 😂
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 11, 2024 10:37:52 GMT
Mr Coke wrote: beat me to it by half an hour! What's more there even more promised: uk.news.yahoo.com/uk-farmers-vow-mount-more-170113999.html UK farmers should have done it decades ago. UK food self sufficiency has been in decline since the 1980s due to UK supermarkets preferring to buy subsidised continental food and at the same time screw British farmers out of a living. Not only do continental farmers get massive subsidies which they are now bitter and rebelling about losing, they have destroyed the environment with intensive farming, the main cause of river pollution, and engaging in foul employment practices. Thank God we are getting rid of the CAP. www.eyes-on-europe.eu/migrant-work-and-agricultural-slavery-in-italy/#:~:text=To%20reduce%20costs%2C%20inexpensive%20labour,migrants%20recruited%20by%20local%20farmers. www.rosalux.de/en/publication/id/41102/slaves-in-europes-fieldsI have moved your post from French thread to where it belongs and now my reply On an initial First Reading you could be forgiven for thinking you had a St Paul moment Mr Coke and converted to the senselessness of Brexit, then I considered your post was an attempt at irony, but eventually concluded you are just reshaping the facts to suit your argument EU Farmers and UK Farmers are protesting for One overring reason. Unfair Competition Ideologically EU has always promoted the highest Standards in Food Production and recognising Farming unlike many Industries is subject to Climate has sought to underwrite a Guaranteed Income Level via CAP. You Don't like it, I get that. Britain has always had a policy of sourcing Cheap Food from abroad. Within EU that was more difficult due to CAP and mostly severing links with the Commonwealth. Ukraine has been restricted by the Black Sea Conflict in exporting grain. It has found new markets in EU and UK. Both EU and UK Farmers are protesting that this competition is unfair as they have been grown using much more Pesticides than are allowed in either EU or UK giving higher yields. EU Farmers further grievance is that EU Commission wanted to further alter the playing field with even more restrictions on Pesticides, now withdrawn. UK Farmers didn't have this grievance in fact the reverse as UK has relaxed the Standards and allowed more use of Pesticides since Brexit If you simply read the Articles you and I have linked, without reinterpretation, I'm sure you have, UK Farmers grievances and the reasons for protest go far beyond those of their EU counterparts. 1. They object to Cheap Food Imports from Australia and New Zealand which have now commenced under those Trade Agreements. This was predicted by the Minister who negotiated these Trade Agreements and pronounced them crap for UK Farmers - EU Farmers obviously don't have this disadvantage 2. They are protesting that the replacement Schemes for your hated CAP is inferior and places them at a disadvantage vis a vis EU Farmers 3. They protest that since Brexit they are at a further competitive disadvantage to EU Farmers who have had unfettered access to UK Market without any checks and controls as the UK Government are on record as saying they were fearful of Food Security it they imposed checks. On the other hand UK Farmers that supplied Food and Agri-food to EU had Non Tariff checks and SPS Documentation Cost from Day 1 We shall see in May, if they proceed, if the Inland Border Checks conducted 22 Miles away from Dover at Sevington has any effect on the Food Supply in UK. The Government estimate on additional Cost is £330M per annum
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Feb 11, 2024 14:38:31 GMT
The UK government is correct to extend import controls to EU products. The UK is the fourth largest importer in the world (1) and potentially very vulnerable to defective or fraudulent goods. It is essential to protect British consumers from defective produce, unsafe food, disease etc., no matter where the source. The EU enjoys some of the highest standards in the world but is still subject to food borne disease, the most frequent being salmonella.(2) Eleven years ago, Ireland was blamed for the horse meat in beef burgers scandal in products from producers like Dalepak in Yorkshire, owned by ABP Food Group. ABP blamed its continental suppliers, with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland saying these were in the Netherlands and Spain. It later said horse meat had entered its chain through suppliers in Poland. (3) In 2019, the WHO reported that every minute, 44 people (more than 23 million per year) fall sick from eating contaminated food in Europe, and an estimated 4700 per year lose their lives. The WHO stated Europe is not alone, unsafe food is a worldwide problem. (4) Food recalls by producers are commonplace, the main reason being unauthorised substances found in food. This is hardly surprising given the vast amount of pesticides and chemicals used in food production. (5) Authorities are working hard to get on top of the problem and increasing the list of banned substances, but the number of incidents is getting worse, not better. 2022 was a record bad year and 2023 was worse. (6) Regrettably this week the EU Commission has had to reverse action on reducing the list of permitted pesticides due to pressure from EU farmers and the French President. Last year the leader of the NFU complained of inadequate checks on imports from the EU: "We have the massive risk of African Swine Fever in Europe, and to not be investing in our defences for keeping our biosecurity and animal and plant health safe, I think is just a dereliction of duty.” (7) Of course a lot of the problem can be mistakes, lack of controls, oversight, etc. but it is also the case that criminals are at work making money out of food fraud. We have experienced false date labelling in the UK (8) Last year a criminal network was uncovered active across several EU member states. (9) Food Safety reported recently that €30 million Euros worth of illicit foods weighing 8,000 tons were seized by Europol between December 2022 and April 2023. The introduction of tighter controls, even if they cause some inconvenience is in the best interests of the health and safety of the British public, particularly the most vulnerable such as those suffering illness, the elderly, and the young, and not forgetting those who suffer allergic reactions to some foodstuffs. Furthermore the UK’s failure to control EU imports in the same way as it does on other trading partners is technically in violation of WTO trade rules as it effectively grants the EU preferential treatment over other countries. British producers and suppliers are placed at a competitive disadvantage having to conform with EU rules when they export. I have focussed on food because it impacts us all and the controls now being introduced relate to animal and plant products coming from the EU. The UK imports a huge amount of food from the EU, but the problem of defective goods extends to a counterfeit goods. Sometimes we may take a blind eye to a fake branded product, on the grounds that the genuine article is often way over priced and selling its brand name. Sometimes though the issue can be very serious, such as pharmaceuticals. which are amongst common counterfeit goods. One-third of these counterfeit drugs have no active ingredient in them which can have fatal consequences. (10) The revolution to e commerce makes the public more vulnerable to fraudsters. According to a study led by the European Union’s Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), counterfeit bags, clothing, smart-phones and fraudulent drugs cost the European economy a loss of €60 billion each year. (11) Do we want the UK exposed to this? Euractiv have claimed that "6.8% of EU imports are counterfeit and pirated goods."
It is a fact that the EU sets some of the highest standards in the world, however, member states are responsible for the timely and correct application, implementation and enforcement of EU law We can trust many of the 27 countries products in the EU but there are some countries like Hungary that we cannot trust. (12) China is the main source of fake goods to Europe and Germany is the biggest importer of fake goods and there is a risk they could be passed on to the UK. (13) A report by the European Union’s Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) cites Spain in a group of EU nations that includes Romania, Bulgaria, Greece and Hungary, as the worst offenders for producing counterfeit children’s toys, which are potentially dangerous. (14) The UK is lucky to be an island state. History teaches us it protects us from invasion, but there are other forms of invasion in this day and age by criminals who engage in trafficking animals and animal products like ivory. (15) There will no doubt continue to be a hue and cry from those opposed to Brexit about delays, red tape, increased costs etc. and, as usual, problems will be highly exaggerated. It should be understood that there are three levels of risk subject to the appropriate level of control. For example plants and live animals count as high risk and have the maximum controls. Cut flowers, meat, non-pasteurised milk, eggs and some fish are examples of medium risk, whilst much fruit and vegetables,processed meats, and cheese made from pasteurised milk will be exempt from extensive documentation. I expect there will be a learning curve for many, and things will settle down over the coming months as they did with UK exports to the EU. I hope I have convinced everyone that introducing comprehensive import controls, whether those imports of from North America, Far East, the Commonwealth, or indeed Europe are essential to protect British consumers, no matter what the cost to tax payers. It is equally important to protect British businesses; our farmers are foremost at welcoming import controls. (16) Only last month Farmers Weekly reported vast quantities of illegally imported meat are being seized at Dover. I believe there will be minimal impact on consumers as increased import costs from the EU will result in increased sales by UK producers, and consumers will switch to imports from elsewhere in the world. The cost of extra food controls on EU food imports is 0.5% of the UK's food import bill, by the crudest calculation. This is not a high price for greater health and safety. There will be benefits to UK producing companies and in fact the Cabinet Office have stated the inflation rate will be increased by less than 0.2% over three years. The introduction of these controls may reduce choice and hurt import businesses, but on balance it is a Brexit benefit to British consumers and production businesses, jobs, and above all, health. References (1) www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-trade-in-numbers/uk-trade-in-numbers-web-version(2) freshproduce.org.uk/statistics/european-food-borne-disease-statistics-2021(3) www.irishtimes.com/health/2023/01/07/a-decade-on-how-the-horsemeat-scandal-changed-the-way-the-world-thinks-of-food-safety/(4) www.who.int/news/item/05-06-2019-23-million-people-falling-ill-from-unsafe-food-each-year-in-europe-is-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg#:~:text=Every%20minute%2C%2044%20people%20%E2%80%93%20more,per%20year%20lose%20their%20lives (5) swissdecode.com/blog/food-recalls-in-europe-september-2021(6) www.foodsafetynews.com/2023/06/eu-food-and-beverage-recalls-rise-in-early-2023/(7) www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/17/uk-risks-disastrous-food-scandal-lax-post-brexit-border-controls-nfu-chief-minette-batters(8) www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/28/uks-top-supplier-of-supermarket-chicken-fiddles-food-safety-dates(9) www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/27-food-fraudsters-arrested-in-lithuania-and-italy(10) www.walkermorris.co.uk/in-brief/cracking-down-on-counterfeits/(11) www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/eu-loses-e60-billion-annually-to-counterfeits/(12) www.intellinews.com/hungary-remains-most-corrupt-country-in-eu-transparency-international-finds-310132/(13) www.redpoints.com/blog/which-country-imports-the-most-counterfeits-in-europe/(14) english.elpais.com/elpais/2015/12/15/inenglish/1450185596_103267.html(15) www.europol.europa.eu/crime-areas/environmental-crime/illicit-trafficking-in-endangered-animal-species(16) www.fwi.co.uk/business/farmer-relief-as-border-controls-on-imports-from-eu-begin(17) www.fwi.co.uk/news/crime/unprecedented-volumes-of-illegal-meat-seized-at-doverThis seems very impressive and reads almost like a speech from a junior DEFRA minister in the current administration. You highlight some of the problems with quality control and provenance, which have always existed before the EU and before Brexit. The original point, that the pre-brexit statements were inaccurate, has not been addressed. Neither have the pressing needs of the UK public for regular supplies of affordabel, quality products (esp. food) been mentioned. It's all very well to say that UK consumers need to be protected but as mal-nutrition and "victorian illnesses" become more prevalent - more controls at this time are only going to push up costs and reduce choice.
|
|