Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Bigus

Brexit sunny uplands , but for an irish company , selling Austrian engines


❗NEWS❗ New partner appointed for the Republic of Irleland ����

BRP-Rotax is excited to announce that the company Murray Motorsport has been appointed as the authorized distributor for the Republic of Ireland for Rotax karting products as of January 01, 2021. Up to now the territory of Ireland has been served by the UK distributor JAG, who has established a sales- and service network serving Irish customers over the past years and managed that Rotax MAX categories have been part of the national championship organized by the ASN Motor-sport Ireland. With the UK leaving the European Union by end of 2020, JAG will not be able to serve the Irish market anymore. Therefore BRP-Rotax and JAG mutually agreed on the nomination of a new distributor for the territory of Ireland.

A big thank you to JAG ROTAX for their great support of the Irish customers in the past years and a warm welcome and lots of success for our new partner Murray Motorsport! ��

�� full statement:
https://www.rotax-kart.com/de/Community/Newsroom/2020

��: © 2020 Murray Motorsport

Rrrrrr2

View wrote: »

Those MNCs that refused to deal directly with Ireland and refused any Irish attempt to deal with any other region should have been prosecuted for anti-competitive/monopolistic behaviour decades ago. The fact that they weren’t is a major failing by our government agencies.

This is how it’s been for a long time alright- the U.K. and Ireland lumped together- often a token presence or representation in Ireland but the main office functions all ran and based in the U.K. with many companies. Its made sense up until as Ireland is such a small market and culturally similar

10000maniacs

Newsnight reporting that a deal is pretty likely now.
Jacob Rees Mogg will be announcing that the Commons will be sitting on Monday and Tuesday of next week. At least it's not Mark Francois.

robindch

Fun paper looking into the relationship between support for Brexit and predictors for prejudice in the areas of collective narcissism, right wing authoritarianism and social dominance:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02023/full#h5

Conclusion to the above wrote:

We argue that our analyses offer a novel perspective on the Brexit vote and the support for the referendum's outcome. They indicate that psychological predictors of xenophobia were related to the rejection of the U.K.'s membership in the European Union. Understanding whether prejudice motivated the Brexit vote or the Brexit vote legitimized and increased prejudice may be of lesser importance than understanding that individual predictors of prejudice are related to political choices that undermine diversity and harmonious intergroup relations.

The mobilization of xenophobic sentiments around Brexit also suggests that, at least to some extent, this political choice was motivated by affect rather than rational consideration of collective costs and benefits. The present results suggest that at least three categories of concerns that go beyond cost-benefit and risk calculations are relevant to the Brexit process: undermined national uniqueness (concern associated with collective narcissism), the threatened traditional status quo (concern associated with right wing authoritarianism), and threatened international status (concern associated with social dominance orientation).

Whether those concerns should be given precedence over the country's welfare and internal stability is the subject of ongoing political debates.

Professor Moriarty

10000maniacs wrote: »

Newsnight reporting that a deal is pretty likely now.
Jacob Rees Mogg will be announcing that the Commons will be sitting on Monday and Tuesday of next week. At least it's not Mark Francois.

Even if there is a deal, they have done untold damage to their reputation especially since Johnson took over. No European country respects them or trusts them now. They will be last on the list when it comes to investment. Self-sabotage as a result of hubris and arrogance.

Strazdas

robindch wrote: »

Fun paper looking into the relationship between support for Brexit and predictors for prejudice in the areas of collective narcissism, right wing authoritarianism and social dominance:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02023/full#h5

If you were to ask me to name the single most important driving force behind Brexit, I would plump for xenophobia. Everything else is secondary, even sovereignty.

Brexiteers do not like 'foreigners', that would be anyone who doesn't speak English as a first language. It's a strange phenomenon though ; they feel superior to Europeans and yet threatened by them at the same time. It's a bizarre mix of huge overinflated egos coupled with deep insecurity and paranoia (all in my humble opinion of course).

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Even if there is a deal, they have done untold damage to their reputation especially since Johnson took over. No European country respects them or trusts them now. They will be last on the list when it comes to investment. Self-sabotage as a result of hubris and arrogance.

Internationally, Johnson has done an appalling job as Foreign Secretary and as PM in terms of forging alliances abroad. He appears very much to be yesterday's man with racist attitudes akin to those of early twentieth century British Imperialists.

When Cameron had Obama weigh in on the 2016 referendum, why didn't Johnson just say that it was an internal matter for the British electorate? I know why of course but the result now is that he now has a pro-Irish American president who's keen to undo the damage done by his predecessor to contend with. The half-Kenyan thing... Johnson for all his myriad and legionary flaws is not stupid. Perhaps he fancied posturing.

Strazdas wrote: »

If you were to ask me to name the single most important driving force behind Brexit, I would plump for xenophobia. Everything else is secondary, even sovereignty.

Brexiteers do not like 'foreigners', that would be anyone who doesn't speak English as a first language. It's a strange phenomenon though ; they feel superior to Europeans and yet threatened by them at the same time. It's a bizarre mix of huge overinflated egos coupled with deep insecurity and paranoia (all in my humble opinion of course).

I disagree. Don't get me wrong, xenophobia certainly exists. I saw Cornwall mentioned somewhere here recently. One of my best friends is Cornish and she has an appallingly low opinion of the place. The way she'd tell it, xenophobia and racism are the order of the day down there. She brought a Belgian friend of ours down there one weekend. As part of the itinerary, they went to some local meeting or other in the town hall where he was ogled at by the locals as if he were a talking penguin. The way it was relayed to me suggests that it might have been the first time any of these people had met a non-English person.

Parts of this country are just horrendously deprived and have been economically abandoned for decades. I think the "strategy" has been to outsource responsibility to Brussels, foreigners, trade unions and the Labour party while ensuring that the Tories were the only game in town. That plan was turned on its head when UKIP made gains in 2014 so Cameron promised a referendum the following year. The mistake is that the EU, which people in this country have been told was to blame for all of its ills was now something their conceited PM naively expected them to want to remain in simply because he was telling them to.

I've met too many people who voted to leave to keep out the Indians and the Muslims. I think it was fine when the country was enjoying the boom years but when people started seeing foreign names on the covers of books, on TV and online in the roles of experts while they had been denuded of opportunities and investment for decades, a line was crossed for many. A Pole sweeping a street is fine. A Pole doing your root canals is not or your accounts.

I see Brexit primarily as an expression of nativist rage, harnessed by unscrupulous financiers, press barons and Tory MP's. Xenophobia was an important but not the most important element of it.

Snickers Man

robindch wrote: »

A warning against which was made, pointedly, by Dwight D Eisenhower in his final public speech as US President in January, 1961:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_address

Dwight Eisenhower wrote:

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States corporations.

Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

See it "in the flesh", as it were right here!

Lumen

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I see Brexit primarily as an expression of nativist rage, harnessed by unscrupulous financiers, press barons and Tory MP's. Xenophobia was an important but not the most important element of it.

Isn't nativism just an expression of xenophobia as political policy?

Strazdas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I disagree. Don't get me wrong, xenophobia certainly exists. I saw Cornwall mentioned somewhere here recently. One of my best friends is Cornish and she has an appallingly low opinion of the place. The way she'd tell it, xenophobia and racism are the order of the day down there. She brought a Belgian friend of ours down there one weekend. As part of the itinerary, they went to some local meeting or other in the town hall where he was ogled at by the locals as if he were a talking penguin. The way it was relayed to me suggests that it might have been the first time any of these people had met a non-English person.

Parts of this country are just horrendously deprived and have been economically abandoned for decades. I think the "strategy" has been to outsource responsibility to Brussels, foreigners, trade unions and the Labour party while ensuring that the Tories were the only game in town. That plan was turned on its head when UKIP made gains in 2014 so Cameron promised a referendum the following year. The mistake is that the EU, which people in this country have been told was to blame for all of its ills was now something their conceited PM naively expected them to want to remain in simply because he was telling them to.

I've met too many people who voted to leave to keep out the Indians and the Muslims. I think it was fine when the country was enjoying the boom years but when people started seeing foreign names on the covers of books, on TV and online in the roles of experts while they had been denuded of opportunities and investment for decades, a line was crossed for many. A Pole sweeping a street is fine. A Pole doing your root canals is not or your accounts.

I see Brexit primarily as an expression of nativist rage, harnessed by unscrupulous financiers, press barons and Tory MP's. Xenophobia was an important but not the most important element of it.

Interesting points, but isn't incorrectly blaming 'foreigners' for your own country's ills a form of xenophobia anyway? Yes, they have been gaslighted for years by their corrupt politicians and press, but if they dislike non nationals, aren't they still xenophobes at heart?

ancapailldorcha

Lumen wrote: »

Isn't nativism just an expression of xenophobia as political policy?

Arguably, yes. Perhaps I should have said nationalist rage rather than nativist rage.

Strazdas wrote: »

Interesting points, but isn't incorrectly blaming 'foreigners' for your own country's ills a form of xenophobia anyway? Yes, they have been gaslighted for years by their corrupt politicians and press, but if they dislike non nationals, aren't they still xenophobes at heart?

Well, 17.4 million people voted to leave. While I think it's fair to say that most probably aren't fond of free movement for EU citizens, I doubt there are that many rabid xenophobes here. For most people, I imagine that immigration is a bit like trade or sovereignty, it's just a talking point to avoid them sounding ridiculous by saying that they dislike EU regulations but can't name any.

Henryq.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Have you dealt with customs forms, tariffs, and VAT at point of entry?

Customs entry forms cost per line item if some agent does it for you, and your sanity if you do your own. Certificate of Origin, and CE marking all adds to the spice.

Tariffs cost you money which you may or may not be able to pass on.

VAT at point of entry drains your bank account, and can make your company go into debt.

I doubt anyone who has dealt with this stuff would do it willingly.

That was my point

I don't think there will be all the red tape above

Peregrinus

Henryq. wrote: »

That was my point

I don't think there will be all the red tape above

Why not?

Henryq.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Why not?

Well we don't know yet, I'm sure the negotiators are working in the practicalities of UK-EU trade

I'm expecting a few early hiccups and then relatively seamless movement in of goods

I don't see this mass of paperwork for every container happening at all

54and56

View wrote: »

Those MNCs that refused to deal directly with Ireland and refused any Irish attempt to deal with any other region should have been prosecuted for anti-competitive/monopolistic behaviour decades ago. The fact that they weren’t is a major failing by our government agencies.

There's nothing illegal about manufacturers deciding what grouping of geographical territories best suit their needs. From a manufacturers perspective Ireland can be a small market which doesn't justify having its own distributor as those relationships all require time and resource to manage. Economically it can be better to have a single distributor for Ireland and the UK and in some cases there are Irish companies who have the distributorship for both Ireland and the UK although most of the time it is indeed the other way round.

Brexit will remove a lot of the alignment which allowed Ireland and the UK to be grouped together so there will be opportunities for Irish companies to negotiate distributorships for RoI and in many cases NI also.

FWIW I've been on both sides of the table at different times over my career representing both manufacturers and distributors and during a few years spent in SE Asia you'd be surprised how many European manufacturers would appoint a distributor for China and lump in countries like Vietnam and Thailand etc as part of the deal. It was almost always a poor and lazy strategy which effectively meant the manufacturer wasn't active in those secondary markets which in SE Asia can be quite substantial.

Peregrinus

Henryq. wrote: »

Well we don't know yet, I'm sure the negotiators are working in the practicalities of UK-EU trade

I'm expecting a few early hiccups and then relatively seamless movement in of goods

I don't see this mass of paperwork for every container happening at all

Then you've not been paying attention. The FTA which the UK goverment wants and is bargaining for does not remove, and does not seek to remove, much of the paperwork that Brexit will trigger. They're focussed on getting a zero tariff trade deal which would mean that UK goods imported into EU would not attract tariffs (and vice versa) but they are not at all interested in avoiding the regulatory compliance obligations to which goods imported into the EU are subject. Those obligations will apply. And they are bureaucratic and burdensome.

I mean, the UK government projects that the deal it wants will require the hiring of 50,000 new customs clearance agents to handle the new paperwork and obligations associated with EU/UK trade. Those agents will have to be paid for. And the processes and checks that they will implementing will have to be paid for and will take time. And all of this will be costs borne by importers and exporters, and reflected in the price of traded goods.

listermint

Henryq. wrote: »

Well we don't know yet, I'm sure the negotiators are working in the practicalities of UK-EU trade

I'm expecting a few early hiccups and then relatively seamless movement in of goods

I don't see this mass of paperwork for every container happening at all

They're a third country. All of this happens for third countries today. So it will happen for them. This isn't a new path it's a well beaten path.


Third


Country.

Henryq.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Then you've not been paying attention. The FTA which the UK goverment wants and is bargaining for does not remove, and does not seek to remove, much of the paperwork that Brexit will trigger. They're focussed on getting a zero tariff trade deal which would mean that UK goods imported into EU would not attract tariffs (and vice versa) but they are not at all interested in avoiding the regulatory compliance obligations to which goods imported into the EU are subject. Those obligations will apply. And they are bureaucratic and burdensome.

I mean, the UK government projects that the deal it wants will require the hiring of 50,000 new customs clearance agents to handle the new paperwork and obligations associated with EU/UK trade. Those agents will have to be paid for. And the processes and checks that they will implementing will have to be paid for and will take time. And all of this will be costs borne by importers and exporters, and reflected in the price of traded goods.

It remains to be seen how trade will be affected

There's projections and predictions but no-one can be certain yet

listermint

Henryq. wrote: »

It remains to be seen how trade will be affected

There's projections and predictions but no-one can be certain yet

No that's not remotely accurate. The UK will be a third country. It doesn't matter what trade deal there is items transiting through will be treated as a third country.

I hope you are not running a business with this thought process. It's concerning.

Peregrinus

Henryq. wrote: »

It remains to be seen how trade will be affected

There's projections and predictions but no-one can be certain yet

We're not working in an abstract vacuum here, or having to speculate much. The rules about imports from third countries are already in place and in operation. The only thing that's changing is that the UK is placing itself under these rules. It's not difficult to model how the rules that already exist will affect the trade that already exists.

What remains to be seen is whether the UK and the EU will conclude and FTA and, if they do, exactly how much relief it will provide from the application of the rules. But since the UK is not looking for much relief, other than relief from tariffs, we can reasonably assume that the FTA won't provide much relief, other than relief from tariffs.

ambro25

Henryq. wrote: »

It remains to be seen how trade will be affected

There's projections and predictions but no-one can be certain yet

You short replies and their form suggest that some denial in going on.

I agree with you that how UK-EU27 trade will be affected medium- and long term remains to be seen, subject to the eventual deal. Short term-wise, just look at @vivamjm tweets now.

But no CU membership nor SM membership for the UK, makes the extra paperwork described earlier by Peregrinus and others, inevitable. Because that is what international trade outside of integrated trading geopolitical blocs is made of, operationally (and it is this highly-complex operational context, that international trade treaties like the CU/SM/etc are designed to mitigate and reduce).

Leroy42

I think Henryq posts are a very clear example of the thinking of many in the UK.

Despite all previous evidence and examples, they continue on the idea of 'nobody really knows'. That allows all negatives to be dismissed on the basis thatvsince it hasn't happened there is always the possibility that it might be different.

This approach goes against almost every other decision process they make.

And still the Brexiteers have been unable to provide anything, other than the nebulous Sovereignty, to explain why any of this is even remotely a good idea.

CelticRambler

Henryq. wrote: »

Well we don't know yet, I'm sure the negotiators are working in the practicalities of UK-EU trade

I'm expecting a few early hiccups and then relatively seamless movement in of goods

I don't see this mass of paperwork for every container happening at all

So you're saying all that, which has to be done by the Swiss, including the lorries queued up at the customs control points to be checked, is all a mirage? The Swiss have a closer relationship with the EU than the one the UK is looking for, so what makes you so certain that Britain - already fined for allowing non-conforming Chinese crap into the Single Market while they were members - will be treated differently to any other non-EU, non-SM country?

mrunsure

CelticRambler wrote: »

So you're saying all that, which has to be done by the Swiss, including the lorries queued up at the customs control points to be checked, is all a mirage? The Swiss have a closer relationship with the EU than the one the UK is looking for, so what makes you so certain that Britain - already fined for allowing non-conforming Chinese crap into the Single Market while they were members - will be treated differently to any other non-EU, non-SM country?

Brexiteers use Switzerland as an example of a country that is doing OK despite being outside the customs union with the resulting higher costs and paperwork.

CelticRambler

mrunsure wrote: »

Brexiteers use Switzerland as an example of a country that is doing OK despite being outside the customs union with the resulting higher costs and paperwork.

Well, that's good. Hopefully that means that we can look forward to the UK joining Schengen, allowing Freedom of Movement, and aligning themselves with the vast majority of EU rules.

I wonder if anyone's told Johnson or Frost?

View

mrunsure wrote: »

Brexiteers use Switzerland as an example of a country that is doing OK despite being outside the customs union with the resulting higher costs and paperwork.

They do indeed while leaving out the rather important bit that Switzerland is highly integrated into the E.U. via its Schengen membership and a myriad of bilateral EU-Switzerland agreements which replicate the EEA arrangements that the other three EFTA countries have.

It’s all bit akin to us saying that as a sovereign nation we have the right to declare war on China while ignoring both the disparity in the size of military forces and the geographical logistics of conducting such a war. :-)

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think Henryq posts are a very clear example of the thinking of many in the UK.

Despite all previous evidence and examples, they continue on the idea of 'nobody really knows'. That allows all negatives to be dismissed on the basis thatvsince it hasn't happened there is always the possibility that it might be different.

This approach goes against almost every other decision process they make.

And still the Brexiteers have been unable to provide anything, other than the nebulous Sovereignty, to explain why any of this is even remotely a good idea.

I think this is exactly why Brexit needs to happen ASAP. There will be no acceptance of Brexit and therefore no evolution of the debate until it does and people see the garden of England become the concrete toilet of England for no reason at all.

Sam Russell

I saw that the UK Gov are establishing a lorry park (a Farage Garage) near Stranraer to cope with delays going through the two ports there. It will hold 540 trucks.

Now 400,000 trucks go this route each year, so this represents 5 hours worth of trucks.

Hmmmm .... I think that they will have problems. I would suggest those trucks that can might go via Dublin do, or not go at all.

lawred2

Henryq. wrote: »

That was my point

I don't think there will be all the red tape above

Because the UK will rejoin the EU?

mrunsure

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think this is exactly why Brexit needs to happen ASAP. There will be no acceptance of Brexit and therefore no evolution of the debate until it does and people see the garden of England become the concrete toilet of England for no reason at all.

I'm worried that Covid will be used as a catch all excuse to any economic ills which are really because of Brexit.