Brexit means Brexit…and more bicycles...maybe

Drinfinity wrote:

To Srchar’s question. All the lorries waiting to have their loads and documents checked will block the ports, since the laws that allowed them to move freely have been ripped up. It only takes extra delays measured in seconds per truck before the system will back up.

Imagine you are at a busy supermarket, and every customer has an item that won’t scan. That.

You might say - Why not just let them in without checking ? Well I would agree, that’s the whole point of freedom of movement for goods. 

We already import plenty of goods from outside the EU and process the customs paperwork so it's hardly an insurmountable challenge to overcome.

Just an increase in capacity really.

Rich_cb wrote:

Drinfinity wrote:

To Srchar’s question. All the lorries waiting to have their loads and documents checked will block the ports, since the laws that allowed them to move freely have been ripped up. It only takes extra delays measured in seconds per truck before the system will back up.

Imagine you are at a busy supermarket, and every customer has an item that won’t scan. That.

You might say - Why not just let them in without checking ? Well I would agree, that’s the whole point of freedom of movement for goods. 

We already import plenty of goods from outside the EU and process the customs paperwork so it's hardly an insurmountable challenge to overcome.

Just an increase in capacity really.

You don't think moving to WTO rules and opting out of EU wide tradeing processes with our non EU importers is going to cause any short term issues then?

Mungecrundle wrote:

You don't think moving to WTO rules and opting out of EU wide tradeing processes with our non EU importers is going to cause any short term issues then?

The only issue will be a capacity issue.

Non EU goods will still have to be checked and tariffs applied just as they are now.

Rich_cb wrote:

Mungecrundle wrote:

You don't think moving to WTO rules and opting out of EU wide tradeing processes with our non EU importers is going to cause any short term issues then?

The only issue will be a capacity issue. Non EU goods will still have to be checked and tariffs applied just as they are now.

How much lorry freight at UK ports is carrying non-EU goods? Aren't  wagons from Turkey , or containers from China via Antwerp or Rotterdam checked at the border with the EU, where the goods effectively become EU goods which roll through the channel ports without further checks.

Doesn't the same go for non EU goods arriving at Felixstowe or Immingham which may then travel onwards to Eire or France by truck? When checks are introduced for ALL goods crossing the channel ports (and Fishguard or Holyhead) , there will likely be gridlock on the M2 and A5 and beyond.

pockstone wrote:

How much lorry freight at UK ports is carrying non-EU goods. Aren't  wagons from Turkey , or containers from China via Antwerp or Rotterdam checked at the border with the EU, where the goods effectively become EU goods which roll through the channel ports without further checks.

Doesn't the same goes for non EU goods arriving at Felixstowe or Immingham which may then travel onwards to Eire or France by truck. When checks are introduced for ALL goods crossing the channel ports (and Fishguard or Holyhead) , there will likely be gridlock on the M2 and A5 and beyond.

You're correct that currently many imports destined for the EU arrive in the UK first and vice versa.

Once there are border checks between the UK and EU we'll see a change to shipping to a port in the target market nullifying the 'Rotterdam Effect'.

Rich_cb wrote:

You're correct that currently many imports destined for the EU arrive in the UK first and vice versa. Once there are border checks between the UK and EU we'll see a change to shipping to a port in the target market nullifying the 'Rotterdam Effect'.[/quote]

Cos there are loads of spare ports just sitting around in "target markets", waiting for business to come their way...

The whole point of having massive centralised ports like Rotterdam, Felixstowe and so on is to facilitate easy movement of goods, the economies of scale of having everything on one massive container ship rather than multiple smaller ships heading off to who knows where, the proximity of things like oil refineries to the port.

It means all the staff and resources are in one place rather than spread around a country. and one of the major concerns is that while there is spare capacity at some ports (to shift stuff away form Dover for example) there is a shortage of staff with the relevant skills and experience to operate that additional traffic.

Maybe the unicorns can carry everything ashore.

crazy-legs wrote:

Cos there are loads of spare ports just sitting around in "target markets", waiting for business to come their way...

The whole point of having massive centralised ports like Rotterdam, Felixstowe and so on is to facilitate easy movement of goods, the economies of scale of having everything on one massive container ship rather than multiple smaller ships heading off to who knows where, the proximity of things like oil refineries to the port.

It means all the staff and resources are in one place rather than spread around a country. and one of the major concerns is that while there is spare capacity at some ports (to shift stuff away form Dover for example) there is a shortage of staff with the relevant skills and experience to operate that additional traffic.

Maybe the unicorns can carry everything ashore.

There are obviously no new ports with huge amounts of capacity and the ability to almost double in size if needed.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Gateway

The UK is a huge market for imports, easily large enough for container ships to sail directly here.

Rich_cb wrote:

Drinfinity wrote:

To Srchar’s question. All the lorries waiting to have their loads and documents checked will block the ports, since the laws that allowed them to move freely have been ripped up. It only takes extra delays measured in seconds per truck before the system will back up.

Imagine you are at a busy supermarket, and every customer has an item that won’t scan. That.

You might say - Why not just let them in without checking ? Well I would agree, that’s the whole point of freedom of movement for goods. 

We already import plenty of goods from outside the EU and process the customs paperwork so it's hardly an insurmountable challenge to overcome. Just an increase in capacity really.

A little over half is from within the EU, so you are talking more than a doubling of capacity.  Which implies it's not insurmountable but also far from trivial.

(That's measured by value - come to think of it I wonder whether one has to consider the mass or volume involved - bulkier goods would imply more lorries parked up.)

In any case it's still a cost.  I am just not convinced all these multiple costs are really worth it.  I have never loved the EU, but I'm just unconvinced that getting out offers benefits equal to all this pain and inconvenience.

Rich_cb wrote:

Drinfinity wrote:

To Srchar’s question. All the lorries waiting to have their loads and documents checked will block the ports, since the laws that allowed them to move freely have been ripped up. It only takes extra delays measured in seconds per truck before the system will back up.

Imagine you are at a busy supermarket, and every customer has an item that won’t scan. That.

You might say - Why not just let them in without checking ? Well I would agree, that’s the whole point of freedom of movement for goods. 

We already import plenty of goods from outside the EU and process the customs paperwork so it's hardly an insurmountable challenge to overcome. Just an increase in capacity really.

That's the point; there IS no spare capacity.  You are talking about an exponential increase in customs processing that does not exist now.  IT systems, staff, vets and technicians are inadequate to cope with this huge increase.  In practical terms, we will have no choice but to simply wave the trucks through with no inspection.  Funny way to 'take back control'.  

Eton Rifle wrote:

That's the point; there IS no spare capacity.  You are talking about an exponential increase in customs processing that does not exist now.  IT systems, staff, vets and technicians are inadequate to cope with this huge increase.  In practical terms, we will have no choice but to simply wave the trucks through with no inspection.  Funny way to 'take back control'.  

All of our ports are working at 100% capacity 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year?

Rich_cb wrote:

All of our ports are working at 100% capacity 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year?

At Felixstowe port, there is a maximum number of movements which can be carrried out per hour, so unless you are suggesting that the port suddenly invest in more RTGs and cranes along a waterfront of fixed width, why do you think it can be accommodated ? There is also the need to increase staff, IT and buildings as a result.

On the other side, european ports were built expecting ships and freight to be delivered under a set of physical constraints and admin constraints, so that is a further complication.

hirsute wrote:

Rich_cb wrote:

All of our ports are working at 100% capacity 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year?

At Felixstowe port, there is a maximum number of movements which can be carrried out per hour, so unless you are suggesting that the port suddenly invest in more RTGs and cranes along a waterfront of fixed width, why do you think it can be accommodated ? There is also the need to increase staff, IT and buildings as a result.

 

On the other side, european ports were built expecting ships and freight to be delivered under a set of physical constraints and admin constraints, so that is a further complication.

Let's try again.

Drinfinity wrote:

To Srchar’s question. All the lorries waiting to have their loads and documents checked will block the ports, since the laws that allowed them to move freely have been ripped up.

That's not an answer. If processing delays look likely to cause a backlog that will stop food reaching supermarket shelves, who in government will take the decision to carry on doing paperwork, rather than simply let the trucks roll through?

srchar wrote:

Drinfinity wrote:

To Srchar’s question. All the lorries waiting to have their loads and documents checked will block the ports, since the laws that allowed them to move freely have been ripped up.

That's not an answer. If processing delays look likely to cause a backlog that will stop food reaching supermarket shelves, who in government will take the decision to carry on doing paperwork, rather than simply let the trucks roll through?

So the argument is that if the attempt to 'take back control of our borders' causes problems we'll just completely abandon control of our borders?  Why not stay where we are then?

I just resent all this economic cost and risk being forced on us because a couple of percent more people who voted wanted to leave, several years ago.

Also, the point for me is not whether people knew what they were voting for, but that they didn't tell the rest of us what they were voting for at the time.  Maybe those who voted leave were all willing to embrace 'no deal', but they didn't actually say that at the time.  It's a bit late for some to now retrospectively claim that's what they meant.  They should have said so _then_.

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

So the argument is that if the attempt to 'take back control of our borders' causes problems we'll just completely abandon control of our borders?

We're talking about inbound goods here, not people. Trucks will roll through just as they do today; customs declarations can be submitted later.

This notion that EU based exporters will suddenly stop selling to us, that there will be huge queues of trucks awaiting documentation checks because the government prefers paperwork over produce and that the supermarket shelves will be empty is fantasy.

Outbound, granted, is a different story and depends entirely on what the EU decides to do. They can be as accommodating or as obstinate as they wish. You would hope it's the former, given that there will be EU-based businesses reliant upon UK-based suppliers, and EU-owned businesses based in the UK that export to the EU.

srchar wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

So the argument is that if the attempt to 'take back control of our borders' causes problems we'll just completely abandon control of our borders?

We're talking about inbound goods here, not people. Trucks will roll through just as they do today; customs declarations can be submitted later.

This notion that EU based exporters will suddenly stop selling to us, that there will be huge queues of trucks awaiting documentation checks because the government prefers paperwork over produce and that the supermarket shelves will be empty is fantasy.

Outbound, granted, is a different story and depends entirely on what the EU decides to do. They can be as accommodating or as obstinate as they wish. You would hope it's the former, given that there will be EU-based businesses reliant upon UK-based suppliers, and EU-owned businesses based in the UK that export to the EU.

Its not about preference, it’s about legal requirements. 

Incoming there are are two simple choices:

1) Check everything as we do need with none EU goods right now.

2) Check nothing as we do for EU goods right now.

The fantasy is your idea that the UK can just do what it wants and will decide to just carry on as if nothing has changed. WTO rules don’t allow that. Goods must be treated the same. We could choose not to check anything, but do you think that’s a good idea?

Outgoing, the EU have the same options, plus their own legal requirements for goods from outside the EU being checked within 15km of the boaEder. It’s not about what the EU chose to do, but about their own internal laws and international law.

We are back again to the same issues as we had pre vote. Lots of pro brexit people, either through ignorance or malice, misrepresenting the situation, and when told the reality paint it as the EU being unreasonable. It’s not, it is international law. 

Please do explain how how you think we could get round the existing EU and WTO laws within existing frameworks, without having new technology that doesn’t yet exist, expecting someone to brake the law or having an agreement with the EU (otherwise known as a deal...)

As it stands there is no realistic option but checks at the boarders. Checks that will lead to queues that will lead to shortages.

John Smith wrote:

srchar wrote:

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

So the argument is that if the attempt to 'take back control of our borders' causes problems we'll just completely abandon control of our borders?

We're talking about inbound goods here, not people. Trucks will roll through just as they do today; customs declarations can be submitted later.

This notion that EU based exporters will suddenly stop selling to us, that there will be huge queues of trucks awaiting documentation checks because the government prefers paperwork over produce and that the supermarket shelves will be empty is fantasy.

Outbound, granted, is a different story and depends entirely on what the EU decides to do. They can be as accommodating or as obstinate as they wish. You would hope it's the former, given that there will be EU-based businesses reliant upon UK-based suppliers, and EU-owned businesses based in the UK that export to the EU.

 

Its not about preference, it’s about legal requirements. 

 

Incoming there are are two simple choices:

1) Check everything as we do need with none EU goods right now.

2) Check nothing as we do for EU goods right now.

 

The fantasy is your idea that the UK can just do what it wants and will decide to just carry on as if nothing has changed. WTO rules don’t allow that. Goods must be treated the same. We could choose not to check anything, but do you think that’s a good idea?

 

Outgoing, the EU have the same options, plus their own legal requirements for goods from outside the EU being checked within 15km of the boaEder. It’s not about what the EU chose to do, but about their own internal laws and international law.

 

We are back again to the same issues as we had pre vote. Lots of pro brexit people, either through ignorance or malice, misrepresenting the situation, and when told the reality paint it as the EU being unreasonable. It’s not, it is international law. 

 

Please do explain how how you think we could get round the existing EU and WTO laws within existing frameworks, without having new technology that doesn’t yet exist, expecting someone to brake the law or having an agreement with the EU (otherwise known as a deal...)

 

As it stands there is no realistic option but checks at the boarders. Checks that will lead to queues that will lead to shortages.

This! Known as the "most favoured nation" rule. Applies to Boris' myth that he can choose when and where to apply tariffs. He can't. And it gets worse! As most of the trade agreements "we" currently have with non eu nations are actually eu trade agreements which won't cover us after a no deal, then all our trade takes place under the lowest common denominator. ie we must treat all countries the same as we treat for example Venezuela, with whom we have no trade agreement.

John Smith wrote:

As it stands there is no realistic option but checks at the boarders. Checks that will lead to queues that will lead to shortages.

The head of the French channel ports begs to differ.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/08/11/no-deal-lorry-mayhem-dov...

Rich_cb wrote:

John Smith wrote:

As it stands there is no realistic option but checks at the boarders. Checks that will lead to queues that will lead to shortages.

The head of the French channel ports begs to differ.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/08/11/no-deal-lorry-mayhem-dov...

Yeah, well he's wrong.

"Michael Lux, a former head of customs legislation and procedures at the European commission, said the UK would have to impose customs checks and tariffs on the northern side of the border, despite claims to the contrary by Brexiters.

Under WTO rules, the UK could opt for zero tariffs, but it would be obliged to offer this free-trade deal to every other country. This would mean cheap food and dairy products, which currently attract high tariffs, from countries such as Brazil or New Zealand, and might also lead to chlorinated chicken from the US ending up on British supermarket shelves."

Or you could go to the wto site and read the source docs, instead of just quoting the Daily Brexitgraph.

Griff500 wrote:

Yeah, well he's wrong.

Michael Lux, a former head of customs legislation and procedures at the European commission, said the UK would have to impose customs checks and tariffs on the northern side of the border, despite claims to the contrary by Brexiters.

Under WTO rules, the UK could opt for zero tariffs, but it would be obliged to offer this free-trade deal to every other country. This would mean cheap food and dairy products, which currently attract high tariffs, from countries such as Brazil or New Zealand, and might also lead to chlorinated chicken from the US ending up on British supermarket shelves.

Had enough of experts have we?

You don't seem to understand how the WTO rules work.

You apply a tariff per product. So you could put a zero percent tariff on lemons and the maximum permissible tariff on lamb.

The draft tariffs have already been leaked so you could look at those if you were interested in how things are likely to pan out.

Rich_cb wrote:

Griff500 wrote:

Yeah, well he's wrong.

Michael Lux, a former head of customs legislation and procedures at the European commission, said the UK would have to impose customs checks and tariffs on the northern side of the border, despite claims to the contrary by Brexiters.

Under WTO rules, the UK could opt for zero tariffs, but it would be obliged to offer this free-trade deal to every other country. This would mean cheap food and dairy products, which currently attract high tariffs, from countries such as Brazil or New Zealand, and might also lead to chlorinated chicken from the US ending up on British supermarket shelves.

Had enough of experts have we?

You don't seem to understand how the WTO rules work.

You apply a tariff per product. So you could put a zero percent tariff on lemons and the maximum permissible tariff on lamb.

The draft tariffs have already been leaked so you could look at those if you were interested in how things are likely to pan out.

Er, that's a quote from the former head of eu customs legislation, an expert I believe, not from me, and not from a port manager, so maybe you should be telling him he doesn't know how wto tariffs work. Read the wto rules ffs instead of Brexit press. All trade partners without a trade agreement need to be treated equally. Simple. As for leaking tariffs on lemons? Nothing to leak there. All countries without a trade agreement are treated equally as per wto rules. The tariffs are in the public domain as we already trade with some countries (including buying lemons) under wto rules. Nothing to leak! And therefore no tariffs to decide, by either the eu or UK, as with most products, we already have non trade agreement (no deal) tariffs set!

Griff500 wrote:

Er, that's a quote from the former head of eu customs legislation, an expert I believe, not from me, and not from a port manager, so maybe you should be telling him he doesn't know how wto tariffs work. Read the wto rules ffs instead of Brexit press. All trade partners without a trade agreement need to be treated equally. Simple. As for leaking tariffs on lemons? Nothing to leak there. All countries without a trade agreement are treated equally as per wto rules. The tariffs are in the public domain as we already trade with some countries (including buying lemons) under wto rules. Nothing to leak! And therefore no tariffs to decide, by either the eu or UK, as with most products, we already have non trade agreement (no deal) tariffs set!

If you want to know if there will be queues at the ports I would suggest that the manager of said ports might be the person to ask.

I really don't think you understand WTO tariffs at all.

The WTO set the maximum permissible tariff. Each country is free to apply any rate of tariff up to that maximum. The maximum rate of permissible tariff is different for every product.

The UK can therefore choose any rate of tariff it likes (up to the maximum) for every product we import. We do have to treat every country equally but there are loopholes to avoid that too.

The leaked tariff rates are therefore worth a look.

John Smith wrote:

Its not about preference, it’s about legal requirements. 

Incoming there are are two simple choices:

1) Check everything as we do need with none EU goods right now.

2) Check nothing as we do for EU goods right now.

Who in government is going to choose option 1 if it looks at all likely to cause lengthy delays at the border? Nobody.

HMRC has already confirmed that customs declarations can be made and import duty paid after goods have crossed the border. IIRC this is currently guaranteed for at least the first year.