Brexit

[RTH10260]

from the country that bintends to ecome claims to be a leading force in world economy ...

Spanish woman removed from UK after returning from Christmas holiday
Woman was detained overnight and removed despite presenting Home Office documents showing her right to work and live in UK

Lisa O'Carroll
Sun 7 Jan 2024 12.17 CET

A 34-year-old Spanish woman was forcibly removed from the UK after returning from a Christmas holiday near Málaga despite presenting Brexit paperwork to border officials showing she has a right to live and work in the country.

She was flown back to Spain after being detained overnight in Luton airport on 26 December and told she was “wasting her time” if she thought the Home Office documentation she had showing her right to live in the UK was valid.

Alistair Strathern, the Labour MP for Mid Bedfordshire, said he was looking for answers from the Home Office about the case.

“I went home because my sister had a little baby girl, and literally four days later in Luton airport they took me to the detention room, took my stuff and my phone and told me to wait there. I was left there all night and then put on a plane,” said Maria, whose name has been changed.

The removal has left her in shock but also illustrates the jeopardy facing EU citizens whose applications to remain in the UK under the Brexit withdrawal agreement are yet to be concluded.

Maria’s husband flew out to Spain to help after British border officials warned her not to try to re-enter the country for a month.

She said: “I was supposed to be back at work but now my life has gone. All my stuff is in the UK: my dog, my car. I was doing this veterinary nursing apprenticeship, which was my dream.



https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... as-holiday

[Slim Cognito]

I read that and my first thought is how horrible that authorities would put her through that. Then I remember I live in Florida.

[RTH10260]

UK ‘used to be a leader on climate’, lament European lawmakers
MEPs react to ‘tragic’ findings revealing UK falling behind EU in key environmental policies since Brexit

Ajit Niranjan
Sat 20 Jan 2024 06.00 CET

European lawmakers have lamented the UK’s decision to weaken environmental rules since leaving the EU, after the Guardian revealed it is falling behind in almost every policy area.

One Green group MEP said the findings were “tragic” while a centre-right MEP said the divergences were “particularly bad” for companies that want to do business on both sides of the Channel.

Grace O’Sullivan, an Irish MEP with the Green group, said the backsliding was not surprising given the number of promises the UK government had broken since former environment secretary Michael Gove committed to a “green” Brexit. “While we are no angels in the EU for environmental protection, we have made significant steps in the last few years updating and improving our legislation.”

The Guardian analysis found that since Brexit, the UK has weakened its environment rules in key policy areas, from chemicals to climate. Among other measures, the EU has done more than the UK to ban harmful pesticides and substances, tax carbon emissions on imported goods, regulate batteries, and clean the air.

The two economies are expected to grow further apart in environmental ambition as the EU brings in new rules on industrial emissions, outdoor air quality, critical raw materials, water treatment, and electrical waste recycling.



https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -lawmakers

[Foggy]

electrical waste recycling

Yeah, like when I unplug something and a bunch of electrons spills down from the outlet to the floor, or worser, gets on the carpet.

Or sumpin'.

[RTH10260]

electrical waste recycling

Yeah, like when I unplug something and a bunch of electrons spills down from the outlet to the floor, or worser, gets on the carpet.

Or sumpin'.

I guess we commoners still use the term "low batteries" ...

[keith]

electrical waste recycling

Yeah, like when I unplug something and a bunch of electrons spills down from the outlet to the floor, or worser, gets on the carpet.

Or sumpin'.

I guess we commoners still use the term "low batteries" ...

As John McEnroe once said "you've got to be kidding me". Is this one of thise Poeisms or something?

Disposal of electrical waste is a huge problem. Circuit board recycling is fairly profitable but there isn't much call for dead refrigerators or toasters, or TV screens.

[Reddog]

electrical waste recycling

Yeah, like when I unplug something and a bunch of electrons spills down from the outlet to the floor, or worser, gets on the carpet.

Or sumpin'.

Couldn’t help it, that reminded me of this. Must be something to it.

Excerpt from humorist and cartoonist James Thurber’s “My Life and Hard Times,” 1933, Harper & Brothers:
“

She came naturally by her confused and groundless fears, for her own mother lived the latter years of her life in the horrible suspicion that electricity was dripping invisibly all over the house. It leaked, she contended, out of empty sockets if the wall switch had been left on.

She would go around screwing in bulbs, and if they lighted up she would hastily and fearfully turn off the wall switch and go back to her [popular magazines] Pearson’s or Everybody’s, happy in the satisfaction that she had stopped not only a costly but a dangerous leakage. Nothing could ever clear this up for her.”

[RTH10260]

New Brexit checks ‘pose existential threat’ to UK fruit and flower growers
Exclusive: NFU warns blanket import checks from April could fuel long delays and damage future crops

Jack Simpson
Mon 22 Jan 2024 06.00 CET

The UK’s fruit and flower growers face an “existential threat” from new post-Brexit border checks that could damage business and affect next year’s crops, the country’s biggest farming body has said.

The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) warned that changes to import rules in April, which will impose checks at the border for nearly all young plants coming into the country, could cause long delays and result in plants being damaged or destroyed.

Martin Emmett, the NFU’s chair of the horticulture and potatoes board, said: “There is a concern that border control points can pose an existential threat to horticultural businesses in this country.”

Emmett, whose company Farplants grows about £20m of product, with just over half starting life in the EU, said: “Having unusable deliveries is what terrifies growers, and any unnecessary delays could result in stock destruction, and that ultimately impacts on businesses in the most profound way imaginable.”

UK growers are reliant on the EU for young plants that start life in countries such as the Netherlands before being imported into the UK for planting.

Most soft fruit plants, including strawberries and raspberries, are imported as young plants, while significant numbers of tomatoes, fruit trees and nursery plants also start life in European countries equipped with large greenhouses and better conditions.

Under current rules, imported plants are held at nurseries and farms in controlled conditions before some are checked by government inspectors, with checks often prioritised based on risk.

However, under new rules scheduled to come in on 30 April, the government intends to check 100% of consignments coming through the new border posts.

This has led to widespread discontent among growers, who have concerns about the ability of these border posts to handle this volume of imports.




https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... er-growers

[RTH10260]

the British minister for new Brexit opportunities must have missed to show the farmers the fresh opportunity to raise seedling themselves

[Volkonski]

Serves the UK right for trying to raise non-native plants like tomatoes and potatoes.

[Volkonski]

UK halts trade negotiations with Canada over hormones in beef ban

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68 ... press.coop

The UK has stopped its trade talks with Canada, after nearly two years of negotiations on a post-Brexit agreement.

Trade between the two countries currently takes place under the terms of a deal the UK rolled over from its time as an EU member.

A time-limited agreement allowed the UK to continue to sell cars and cheese without high import taxes.

But talks about extending these as part of a new deal have now broken down.
It marks the first time the UK has formally suspended talks with a trade partner since formally leaving the EU trading regime in 2021.

It will also mean the UK's trading terms with Canada will now be worse than when it was part of the EU's deal with the country.

British car companies now face the prospect of higher tariffs - import charges - to sell into the Canadian market from the start of April.

Higher Canadian tariffs on British cheese had already kicked in earlier this month, after the previous terms expired at the end of 2023.

Talks between the two countries on reaching a bespoke agreement have been taking place since March 2022.

Canada's government had been facing political pressure from domestic cheese producers.

It had also been pushing for the UK to relax a ban on hormone-treated beef, which its producers say effectively shuts them out of the British market.

A spokeswoman for Canada's trade ministerMary Ng said she was "disappointed" at the pause in talks, and had communicated this to UK Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch.

"Their decision to continue to maintain market access barriers for our agriculture industry and unwillingness to reach a mutual agreement has only stalled negotiations," the spokeswoman added.

[RTH10260]

Hundreds of thousands of EU citizens ‘wrongly fined for driving in London Ulez’
Exclusive: EU states accuse TfL of huge data breach over clean air zone penalties, with many given to compliant vehicles

Anna Tims
Fri 26 Jan 2024 06.00 CET

Hundreds of thousands of EU citizens were wrongly fined for driving in London’s Ulez clean air zone, according to European governments, in what has been described as “possibly one of the largest data breaches in EU history”.

The Guardian can reveal Transport for London (TfL) has been accused by five EU countries of illegally obtaining the names and addresses of their citizens in order to issue the fines, with more than 320,000 penalties, some totalling thousands of euros, sent out since 2021.

The Liberal Democrats’ transport spokesperson in the London assembly has called for an immediate investigation, saying the issue could damage the UK capital’s reputation as being open to visitors.

Since Brexit, the UK is banned from automatic access to personal details of EU residents. Transport authorities in Belgium, Spain, Germany and the Netherlands have confirmed to the Guardian that driver data cannot be shared with the UK for enforcement of London’s ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), and claim registered keeper details were obtained illegally by agents acting for TfL’s contractor Euro Parking Collection.

In France, more than 100 drivers have launched a lawsuit claiming their details were obtained fraudulently, while Dutch lorry drivers are taking legal action against TfL over £6.5m of fines they claim were issued unlawfully.

According to the Belgian MP Michael Freilich, who has investigated the issue on behalf of his constituents, TfL is treating European drivers as a “cash cow” by using data obtained illegitimately to issue unjustifiable fines.

Many of the penalties have been issued to drivers who visited London in Ulez-compliant vehicles and were not aware they had to be registered with TfL’s collections agent Euro Parking at least 10 days before their visit.

Failure to register does not count as a contravention, according to Ulez rules, but some drivers have nonetheless received penalties of up to five-figure sums. TfL said the fines were justified because it was unable to confirm whether foreign vehicles had contravened emissions standards if they were not registered.

Some low-emission cars have been misclassed as heavy goods diesel vehicles and fined under the separate low-emission zone (Lez) scheme, which incurs penalties of up to £2,000 a day. Hundreds of drivers have complained that the fines arrived weeks after the early payment discount and appeals deadlines had passed.

One French driver was fined £25,000 for allegedly contravening Lez and Ulez rules, despite the fact his minibus was exempt.




https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... breach-tfl

[RTH10260]

[RTH10260]

New Brexit food checks likely to mean less choice, warn delis
Guild of Fine Food fears European suppliers of specialist produce will stop supplying UK because of red tape

Jack Simpson
Wed 31 Jan 2024 01.01 CET

Thousands of delicatessens and other specialist food shops have said new border rules that come in from Wednesday are likely to mean reduced choice of products for consumers.

The Guild of Fine Food (GFF), which represents 12,000 businesses, has raised fears that European suppliers of specialist foods such as cheeses and meats will stop supplying the UK as a result of the additional red tape for imported goods.

John Farrand, managing director at the GFF, said: “I’m just worried that we are going to end up buying and selling only mass produced products. Are we going to see the end of smaller, more interesting products, which are ultimately better for the planet?”

The government is introducing the biggest changes to the way the UK imports food and plant products from the EU since it left the single market in January 2021.

The changes, known as the Border Target Operating Model, will require all imports of medium and high risk products, which include meat and dairy and the majority of plants, to be sent with export health certificates from Wednesday.

On 30 April, these products will receive physical checks at the border before they can enter the UK.

The new requirements have caused widespread concern that they could result in some smaller suppliers giving up on supplying the UK because of the extra costs.

Farrand said while large supermarkets and large exporting businesses would have the financial base and resources to continue ensuring supply, smaller retailers and wholesalers would not.




https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... warn-delis

[Uninformed]

To me, possibly the most worrying aspect of the Brexit saga (the ill effects of which will continue to worsen for years to come) is that the media in general were, and to to a lesser extent still are, all but silent in pointing out the obvious flaws in the categorical statements made by the government and Brexit proponents, and parroted by some of the media. The same can be said about the treatment of immigration related issues, especially the Rwanda agreement(s).

O’Brien is right that the amount of “gaslighting” (I prefer the term “lying”) has caused people to doubt their ability to determine what is real.

[RTH10260]

this just up

[Volkonski]

What happened to those post-Brexit farm subsidies?

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/business ... subsidies/

One of the changes we were promised on leaving the EU was to alter the old EU subsidies. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) paid £3.5bn each year to our farmers. Books have been written about the CAP and the various plans starting with US Marshall plan, followed by the EU’s Mansholt and MacSharry plans. We ended up with the Basic Payment Scheme (BPS) paying individual landowners £100/yr/acre, to ‘look after’ that land. The more land you had, the more you got.

Many of us criticised the benefits for big landowners, such as the Duke of Westminster, who creamed off £400,000 per annum, and his neighbour, our sovereign, who pocketed £300,000. When I stated that “they did nothing for this” in The Landworker magazine, the Duke’s farm manager challenged me, saying that he provided jobs, so I should be pleased.

I offered to meet up at the local hunting, shooting, fishing hostelry, but he didn’t reply. Land ownership in the UK is the most unequal in Europe, and that’s the way our leaders appear to like it. During the Polish presidency, the EU planned to limit CAP to £250,000 per annum for any one farmer, but David Cameron, our PM at the time, was quickly on his way to Brussels to help stop the limit being introduced.

The Brexit campaign told farmers that they would keep their subsidies. My local MP, Nigel Evans, stood prior to the referendum with Boris Johnson to promise farmers that “subsidies would stay 100% guaranteed”. Hence, many farmers cheered for Brexit.

The National Farmers’ Union council was overwhelmingly in support of ‘Remain’, but decided not to campaign, as it would upset some of their larger farmers. The reality was that in 2020, Johnson’s government announced a complete phaseout of Basic Farm Payments by 2027.

Before and after the referendum, Michael Gove ran round ‘promising the earth’ to farmers and many environmental groups were supportive. But there was no real plan. After a few years, the first plan was thrown out by the agriculture minister George Eustice, on the grounds of too much red tape.

All the ‘green’ ideas were complex, especially for small farmers. Even Michael Heseltine said they were OK for his farms as he had management systems, but hopeless for small farmers who knew best how to breed cows and sheep. The government department has a bad track record on paying out BPS – being fined heavily by EU for incompetence, when all they had to do was count static land. Anything that moved was going to be too complex.

And so, over the next five years, the nightmare of the Environment Land Management Schemes (ELMS) developed. ELMS consists of three strands: the Landscape Recovery Scheme, the Sustainable Farming Incentive, and the Countryside Stewardship Plus scheme. Each strand was originally planned to receive £1bn. But ‘the environment’ means an awful lot of different things.

PM Johnson said in the Commons: “What we are going to do is use the new freedoms we have after leaving the CAP to support farmers to beautify the landscape”. This view of a romanticised countryside is nothing new. But it does not improve the sustainability of present-day UK farming in terms of energy intensive chemical inputs and dependence on other people’s land and labour.

[RTH10260]

Huge look back in media today, cause it is four years since the UK left the EU

[Volkonski]

Brits left baffled by Brexit’s ‘not for EU’ food labels
Post-Brexit rules requiring foods to carry ‘not for EU’ labels spark confusion — and, in some cases, outright disgust — from UK shoppers.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-brex ... ood-label/

A woman picks up a packet of “Ardennes-style pâté” before dropping it in disgust. “I’m throwing it out,” she tweets, adding, “We are now eating any old shit.”

Is the pâté past its sell-by date? In fact, the answer lies in a small, post-Brexit detail on the packaging.

New rules requiring foods to carry “not for EU” labels are already sparking confusion — and, in some cases, outright disgust — from U.K. shoppers, as experts warn the new policy risks leaving Brits in the dark and wrongly suggesting the items are produced to lower standards.

Since October last year, all meat and some dairy products moving from Great Britain to be sold in Northern Ireland have been required to carry the labels. The move, introduced as part of the Windsor Framework between the U.K. and EU, is meant to ensure goods aren’t moved onward into the Republic of Ireland, an EU member country.

But the British government is going further.

From October 2024, all meat and dairy products sold across the U.K. will also have to carry the labels, to ensure food sold in Great Britain can also be sold in Northern Ireland. The requirement will be applied to more products from July 2025.

Although the U.K.-wide requirements are not implemented until later this year, some supermarkets in England appear to already be using the labeling system in preparation for the rollout, much to the confusion of shoppers, several of whom have taken to X, formerly Twitter, to share their consternation.

One shopper contemplating buying some milk wrote: “My milk now says ‘not for EU’ on it — can you confirm that this is just because of U.K. red tape and that it still complies with EU safety standards? I’d hate to think it’s ‘special’ Brexit milk that’s not safe for Europeans.”

Another posted a picture of some ham in Sainsbury’s, moaning: “We presume not meeting EU food safety standards. Good enough for little Englanders who thrive on second-rate everything though.”

[RTH10260]

IMHO I think this is exactly what the UK government wants it to look like, that once food unfit for EU standards hits the street sooner or later the UK does not get in trouble with the EU by accidental export. Cause the UK is lowering their standards and letting "contaminated" produce into the country from world wide. Apart that companies do not want to invest into separate packaging lines solely for the small N.Irland market.

[RTH10260]

BUT But but the new world wide opportunities ...

‘It’s all a bit marginal’: claims of Brexit trade perks don’t add up, say firms
A business department report trumpeting the four-year benefits of leaving the EU does not match the reality faced by companies

James Tapper and Toby Helm, Political Editor
Sun 4 Feb 2024 07.00 CET

On the fourth anniversary of Brexit last Wednesday, the business and trade secretary, Kemi Badenoch, trumpeted its successes. “The British people’s conviction that the UK would excel as masters of our own fate has paid dividends,” she said, launching a report detailing the benefits.

Among the top achievements listed were booming sales of honey to Saudi Arabia, surging pet food exports to India, a rush of UK pork, worth £18m over five years, heading into Mexico’s restaurants and homes, and UK beauty products sales leaping in China, thanks to barriers being smashed.

“My department is leveraging our post-Brexit freedoms to make the UK the best place in the world to start and grow a business,” added Badenoch, seen by many Tory MPs as one of several flexing their muscles for a tilt at the leadership quite soon.

But her triumphalist tone, and many of the assertions in the Department for Business and Trade’s (DBT) Brexit 4th Anniversary document, did not quite ring true with the industries cited.

“I don’t know any of our members who export any great amounts [to Saudi Arabia],” said Paul Barton of the Bee Farmers Association, which represents professional beekeepers in the UK.

“Speaking from the industry, we’ve not had any assistance from the government in exploiting [the Saudi Arabian] market, getting access into that market. So I don’t know where their increases come from.”

He added: “I do remember years ago a chap, I think he was Kuwaiti or Saudi, just knocked on the door and bought a couple of buckets full of honey. I imagine he put it in his hand luggage.”

People in the UK honey business seem focused on other issues. Of all the honey that is consumed in the UK, it is a worry that less than 10% is produced here, Barton said, with cheap Chinese imports making up the stiffest competition.

As far as Brexit is concerned, a big issue is not so much exporting the end product to Saudi or anywhere else but importing queen bees, and on that, Brexit is proving more of a problem than a help.

Queens are reared in southern European countries and brought to the UK so that farmers can begin their hives earlier in the season. But Brexit red tape means the bees are now subject to expensive and disruptive veterinary checks.

As for the government’s claim that “a barrier resolution worth £550m to UK businesses over five years” has helped British beauty companies export to China, the barrier in question had nothing to do with Brexit, according to industry experts. In 2021, China relaxed rules on animal testing, which had been a big red line for UK manufacturers, making it easier to sell into their market.

Millie Kendall, chair of the British Beauty Council, said the loss of trade with the EU outweighed the gains by a long way. “What we really want is to sell to Europe and the US. Economically, we’ve lost £853m in exports to the EU. Sixty-five per cent of our exports go to Europe – £550m sounds nice but it’s not even what we’ve lost.”

One of Kendall’s members sent some products to Spain in August and they have still not arrived. Another, larger company has had to build a £1m warehouse in the EU simply to be able to distribute products. Most smaller companies have just given up, she said.




https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -companies

[RTH10260]

UK admits ports could be overwhelmed under post-Brexit rules
Contingency plan comes after trade bodies warn new checks risk disrupting supply chains

Madeleine Speed and Peter Foster in London
FEBRUARY 7 2024

Animal products entering the UK from the EU will be waved through without checks if British ports are overwhelmed by new post-Brexit border controls, according to documents seen by the Financial Times.

An “automated clearance process” will clear goods for entry without paperwork checks if there are capacity issues at border control posts, the government contingency planning papers said.

Trade bodies have warned that paperwork and physical checks on plant and animal products from Europe, introduced last week but set to come into force in April, risk disrupting supply chains and causing supermarket shortages. 

“For a period after April 2024 there is . . . a possibility that some [border control posts] — despite good planning — may not be able to complete 100 per cent documentary checks before a consignment’s arrival in GB,” the documents said. 

The automated clearance process — known as the “timed out decision contingency feature” or Todcof — will apply to medium-risk animal products “on an interim basis”, while the government rolls out the new import controls.

Implementing the controls has been postponed five times since 2021, which has left EU exporters of animal and plant goods free to send their products to the UK without checks, as they had done before Brexit.

The previously unreported documents were shared with port health authorities in November and were posted on the website of Portsmouth city council.

Under the new post-Brexit border rules, EU businesses need to submit export health certificates to UK port and customs authorities 24 hours before goods arrive, so officials have time to check the documentation.

If the goods arrived before their documentation had been verified, they would be automatically routed for physical inspection. The government had intended this to occur for only 1 per cent of consignments.

But the contingency planning document warned that the system could be overwhelmed because border control posts by April might not be ready to complete the required checks in time.

In that event, the Todcof system would kick in to avoid routing goods for physical inspection and to indicate that “a documentary check had not been undertaken but the consignment was cleared for entry”.

Industry experts said the mechanism reflected the challenge of imposing border checks on plant and animal products that were designed for long-haul exports, not the high-intensity traffic of cross-Channel trade that developed during the UK membership’s of the EU single market.




https://www.ft.com/content/07d14214-b73 ... d60d3c5859

[RTH10260]

Dover Port health body fears gangs of meat smugglers looking to bypass new post-Brexit checks
Authority weighs up legal action against government over new checks on imported meat taking place 22 miles inland

Jack Simpson
Fri 9 Feb 2024 18.43 CET

The Port of Dover could become a target for criminals smuggling illegal and diseased meat into the country under new post-Brexit plans that will involve lorries from the continent being checked 22 miles inland, the port’s health authority has warned.

The Dover Port Health Authority (DPHA) is now considering legal action against the government over its decision to end physical checks of imported meat at a post within the port. Instead, lorries will be directed to a new checking facility half an hour’s drive up the M20 at Sevington, Ashford.

Lucy Manzano, the head of the authority, said that as a port with the only inland border control post in the country, Dover could become a hotspot for criminal gangs trying to bypass checks.

She said: “These goods will now come through Dover without interception at the port, with the anticipation and hope that drivers will self-present at a facility 22 miles away.

“It would be reasonable to assume that people involved in criminal activity – and there’s lots of money to be made within food crime – would start redirecting their stuff through Dover, because the controls won’t be in place.”

The warning from the body, which is run by Dover district council, comes before the new post-Brexit border rules being brought in at the end of April, which will require most meat and dairy products to be physically checked at government border control posts (BCPs). At present, only spot checks are carried out by the DPHA on loads that come through the port.



https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... xit-checks

[Volkonski]

How did the UK stop illegal and diseased meat from coming into the country before Brexit?

[RTH10260]

How did the UK stop illegal and diseased meat from coming into the country before Brexit?

Entering from the EU there were no controls cause it was trusted produce, originating under strict EU rules. Either by produced within the EU to the strict standards or entering the EU where the EU allowed thrid country imports under same strict food rules and protectve barriers. While in the EU the UK had to follow those rules when imports arrived in their harbours from overseas (including airfreight).

Now "sovereignity" rules and the UK have invented their own rules but did not build up the manpower to make the controls, not even those that are needed under WTO between independant nations not within a trade treaty.