Tag: Brexit

Categories
World News

John Bercow, Central Determine in Brexit Drama as U.Okay. Speaker, Switches to Labour

John Bercow, Central Figure in Brexit Drama as U.K. Speaker, Switches to Labour

Mr. Bercow also was accused during his career of bullying members of his staff, claims that he denied. He stepped down in 2019.

Mr. Bercow is a strong critic of Mr. Johnson, a champion of Brexit whose rise has coincided with an exodus of pro-European Union politicians from the Conservative Party. Mr. Bercow told The Observer newspaper that the Conservatives under Mr. Johnson had become “reactionary, populist, nationalistic and sometimes even xenophobic.”

“The conclusion I have reached is that this government needs to be replaced,” he said. “The reality is that the Labour Party is the only vehicle that can achieve that objective.”

Justice Secretary Robert Buckland rejected the characterization of the party as xenophobic and said that Mr. Bercow’s decision to forgo political neutrality “actually has the effect of diminishing the force of his voice in politics.”

Categories
World News

Of Brexit and Boris: What’s Driving the Name for Scottish Independence

Of Brexit and Boris: What’s Driving the Call for Scottish Independence

The millions of votes counted across Scotland on Saturday could be some of the most momentous of recent times, and not because of their impact on things like health, education and fisheries. The biggest problem the country faced and was really at stake was nowhere on the ballot and that is the future of its 314 year old union with England.

While the final votes were still being counted in Saturday’s general election, it seemed almost certain that the Scottish Independent National Party would miss the majority it had hoped would provide an irresistible impetus for a new referendum to break off the elections would give United Kingdom. But it will keep power in Edinburgh, probably with the support of the Scottish Greens, to guarantee that the issue will continue to dominate Scottish politics, as it has for the past few years.

Much. A second referendum on independence after a referendum in 2014 could break the UK. If Scotland were to become independent, Britain would lose eight percent of its population, a third of its land mass and a considerable amount of international prestige.

Some say the loss of Scotland would be the greatest blow to a British Prime Minister since Lord North lost the colonies in America in the 18th century. Understandably, current Prime Minister Boris Johnson is not a fan of this idea.

In the 2014 referendum, the Scots rejected independence with a decisive lead of 55 to 45 percent. That should solve the problem for a generation, but two years later came the Brexit vote and that changed the landscape radically.

While England voted to leave the European Union, 62 percent of Scottish voters wanted to stay. With only about a tenth the population of England, Scotland outnumbered and its preference was simply ignored. Resentment about this has helped revive the urge for what is commonly known as “Indyref2”.

Then there is the person of Mr. Johnson. Already largely unpopular in Scotland, he did nothing to inspire himself, steadfastly advocating a hardline version of Brexit and finally “finishing it”, as he liked to say when 2021 arrived.

The resulting disruption to exporters, and particularly to the important Scottish fish and shellfish industry, which relied heavily on smooth trade with the European Union, has further angered Scots.

The main proponent is the Scottish National Party, led by Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister. Her party has led the Scottish Government for 14 years and she has earned praise for her steadfast handling of the coronavirus pandemic, especially when compared to Mr. Johnson’s early appearances.

There are smaller parties who also want another vote, such as the Greens, who are close to the SNP. Another party for independence, Alba, is led by Alex Salmond, who is not an ally of Ms. Sturgeon – at least not anymore. As a former first minister, Mr. Salmond was once Ms. Sturgeon’s mentor, but the two have recently been embroiled in a bitter feud and his campaign has stalled.

The Scottish Parliament, newly established in 1999, was supposed to satisfy the demand for Scottish independence, but it did not work out that way. The independent SNP has become the dominant force and in 2011 won a rare overall majority in a parliament in which the voting system is designed to avoid the rule of one party. Following that outcome, Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron reluctantly approved the 2014 independence referendum.

Ms. Sturgeon had hoped that an overwhelming victory for the independence parties in these elections would give her the moral authority to call for another referendum. They stayed behind, but Mrs Sturgeon will keep pressure on a referendum claiming that she has a mandate along with the vote for the Greens.

They show a divided Scotland that is split in the middle over independence. This is in line with the results of opinion polls, which showed last year that a majority are in favor of independence, only to fall behind marginally in recent months. The Scottish Conservatives, the opposition Labor Party and the Liberal Democrats are all against independence.

The issue is so dominant that some anti-independence voters appear to have switched loyalty from their normal parties to support the party most likely to defeat the SNP in their area. Ms. Sturgeon is on track to remain first minister, which is an impressive achievement, but with her path to an overall majority likely cut off, her moral case for a second referendum has been weakened.

For a second independence referendum to be legal would almost certainly require London’s approval, and Mr Johnson has repeatedly said no. This is a big problem for Mrs Sturgeon because she wants the result of a second referendum to be accepted internationally and for Scotland to be allowed to return to the European Union.

Far from it. Even if she has to rely on the Greens, Ms. Sturgeon will likely have enough votes to get indyref2 legislation through the Scottish Parliament and then ask Mr. Johnson or his allies to stop them in court.

That could cause a constitutional crisis. After all, Scotland’s union with England was voluntary in 1707, which made it difficult for London to say no to another referendum forever. And Mrs Sturgeon can calculate that support for independence will only increase when the Scots see popular will being blocked by a government in England.

Categories
World News

Brexit Commerce Deal Will get a Last OK From E.U. Parliament

Brexit Trade Deal Gets a Final OK From E.U. Parliament

BRUSSELS – In the results published on Wednesday morning, the European Parliament voted by a large margin for the European Union to finally approve a Brexit agreement, which is already fraught with difficulties, complaints and judicial contestation.

The vote was 660 votes in favor, five against and 32 abstentions.

While the outcome was never really in doubt, Parliament raised serious concerns about the trustworthiness of the current UK government in carrying out in good faith the two key Brexit documents: the withdrawal agreement and the trade and cooperation agreement that has just been approved.

The latter agreement, which regulates trade and customs issues and does not provide for tariffs or quotas, has been applied since the beginning of the year under certain conditions. It was completed on Christmas Eve and ratified by the UK Parliament on December 30th. However, a negative vote by the European Parliament would have killed it and produced the “No Deal Brexit”, which neither side supported.

The European Parliament had postponed its vote to protest the UK’s dealings with Northern Ireland and the protocol that governs trade on the divided island. The UK’s actions are the source of a legal complaint filed by the European Commission, the bloc’s executive branch, after the UK unilaterally extended the grace period for failing to carry out controls on goods moving between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

The two sides have not yet found a common basis for implementing the Northern Ireland Protocol, which aims to protect the internal market while avoiding a hard border with Ireland, a member of the European Union.

Suspicion ran through the debate. Christophe Hansen, a key Brexit legislator from Luxembourg, said a positive vote “should not be seen as a blank check to the UK government or a blind vote of confidence that it will implement the agreements between us in good faith, but it is over from our point of view more of an insurance policy. “

The trade and cooperation agreement, said Hansen, “will help us remind the UK of the commitments it has signed.”

Terry Reintke, a German Green lawmaker, said: “This deal is not a good one because Brexit is not a good one. The situation is also complicated because we cannot be sure how trustworthy the UK government really is. Still, this agreement can be a starting point to reconstruct what we lost with Brexit. “

Manfred Weber, a German who heads the largest party group, the center-right European People’s Party, has published it bluntly on Twitter. “We will vote for the TCA after Brexit,” he wrote, referring to the trade deal. “But we’re concerned about implementation because we don’t trust Boris Johnson’s administration.”

Many concerns have been expressed that the UK is abusing or undermining the complex rules governing fishing rights and the Northern Ireland Protocol.

David McAllister, a German lawmaker who is half Scottish, said some of the problems encountered so far were due to teething problems, but others were due to the type of Brexit Britain chose for itself, an increasing divergence from the European Union will mean internal market. This alone requires continuous discussion and the processing of areas that are excluded from the Brexit agreement, including financial services and foreign and security policy.

Brussels is determined to work on practical solutions between Northern Ireland, Ireland and mainland Britain. “But the protocol isn’t the problem, it’s the solution. The problem is called Brexit. “

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, urged Parliament to ratify the agreement and promised that Brussels would use the dispute and enforcement mechanisms of the agreement to ensure UK compliance. If not, she said, she would not hesitate to impose punitive tariffs.

“The deal is tied to real teeth – with a binding dispute settlement mechanism and the possibility of unilateral corrective action if necessary,” she said. “We don’t want to have to use these tools. But we won’t hesitate to use them if necessary. “

Dissatisfied with Great Britain, Parliament had postponed ratification twice. However, conditional transposition would have expired at the end of April and Parliament eventually cast its vote.

After nearly five hours of debate on Tuesday, lawmakers, many of whom were in virtual attendance, voted remotely, with final totals not being released until Wednesday morning.

Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator with Great Britain, thanked the legislators for their diligence. He praised the deal but warned: “Everyone must take responsibility and respect what they have signed.”

But he summed up the feelings of many when he said: “This is a divorce, a warning and a failure, a failure of the European Union and we must learn from it.”

Ratification would mark a new chapter in relations with Britain, good or bad, said Ms. von der Leyen. She hoped that this would constitute “the basis of a strong and close partnership based on our common interests and values”.

The UK voted to leave the European Union in a referendum in June 2016 almost five years ago. The complications of Brexit and the ongoing struggles over its implementation have not least contributed to the discussion in the rest of the European Union about a similar outcome.

Monika Pronczuk contributed to the reporting.

Categories
Entertainment

‘Peter Grimes’ Sails on Uneven Seas of Brexit and the Pandemic

‘Peter Grimes’ Sails on Choppy Seas of Brexit and the Pandemic

In Madrid, the British singers welcomed the opportunity to appear in a major “Peter Grimes” production with about 150 artists at a time when most opera houses in Europe and the United States were closed, but they also sounded concerned about what would come after that would come .

James Gilchrist, who sings the role of a priest in Britten’s opera, said 90 percent of his work was in the European Union rather than the UK, which worried him not only about his own future but also about the prospects for younger artists. “If you’re a promoter in Frankfurt or something, you’re not going to want to put a British artist on the top of your list because it’s such a hassle,” he said.

“For very established artists this is probably less of a problem as their name on the poster gets people in, but if you are more early in your career I think this will be very, very difficult. ”

Matabosch said the Teatro Real strives to have the best possible line-up regardless of nationality. He predicted that post-Brexit travel rules would be easier to navigate, but conceded that British artists risked losing substitution work, which is an important part of their income.

“I’m sure that in the end we will know exactly how to get a British singer across, just like people from Australia or Canada come here. The problem, however, is that if you need a last minute replacement and you have to fly over someone that same morning it is not really feasible from the UK at the moment, ”said Matabosch.

Another British member of the Peter Grimes cast, John Graham-Hall, thanked the Teatro Real for helping them overcome travel hurdles that left him with “a very bad feeling that the British government was not interested in the arts “. He also gave a brief summary of the twin hurdles posed by Brexit and the pandemic: “It’s a bloody nightmare.”

Alex Marshall contributed to coverage from London

Categories
Business

How Can the Metropolis of London Survive Brexit?

How Can the City of London Survive Brexit?

LONDON – Following this year’s Brexit, the UK government needed a new blueprint for the future of the country’s financial services as cities like Amsterdam and Paris vied to become Europe’s next investment and banking capital.

For some, the answer was Deliveroo, a London-based food company with 100,000 riders on scooters and bicycles. Despite losing more than £ 226 million (nearly $ 310 million) in the past year, Deliveroo offered the raw promise of many fast-growing tech startups – and it became a symbol of Britain’s new ambitions by choosing to Go public and list your stocks not in New York, but on the London Stock Exchange.

Deliveroo is a “true UK tech success story,” said Rishi Sunak, the UK’s chief financial officer, last month.

It was a false start. Deliveroo has since been dubbed “the worst IPO in London history”. On the first day of trading, March 31, the shares fell 26 percent below the market price. (It’s gotten worse.)

The flop has damaged the image of the City of London – the geographic and metaphorical name for the UK’s financial center – as it attempts to recover from the country’s exit from the European Union. Some of the effects of Brexit were immediately felt: on the first working day of 2021, trading in European stocks shifted from the venues in London to the major cities of the bloc. Then London’s share of trading in euro-denominated derivatives fell sharply. There is fear about what might go next.

Financial services are an integral part of the UK economy, accounting for 7 percent of gross domestic product – £ 132 billion in 2019, or around $ 170 billion. Exporting financial services and other professional services is something that sets the UK apart. Membership of the European Union allowed London to serve as the financial base for the rest of the continent and the city’s business grew. Four tenths of exports of financial services go to the European Union.

The government has embarked on a series of reviews and consultations on a variety of subjects, including IPOs and trading regulations, to seek ideas to bolster London’s reputation as a global financial center.

For many, the changes cannot come soon enough.

“The UK is not going to sit still and watch its financial services move to other European cities,” said Alasdair Haynes, founder of Aquis, a London trading venue and stock exchange. This will be exciting for the next three or four years, he said.

However, this optimism is not universal. The prospects for a warm and close relationship between the UK and the European Union have deteriorated significantly. The two sides recently finalized negotiations on a Memorandum of Understanding to set up a forum to discuss financial regulation. However, the forum is voluntary and the document has yet to be signed.

The European Union has made no secret of its plans to build its own capital markets, which could flourish if London is denied access. The “mood music in the EU,” said Andrew Pilgrim, who heads the UK government and financial services team at EY, focuses on having autonomy over one’s own financial services rather than relying on the UK.

It is becoming increasingly attractive for Great Britain to write its own financial rules. The trick is to attract more business without lowering regulatory standards in London, which many consider a strong win. A recent Duff & Phelps survey of senior financial managers found that fewer see London as the world’s leading financial center, but that it tops the rankings for the regulatory environment.

Here are some of the plans.

“I want to make the UK the best place in the world for high-growth, innovative companies,” Sunak told Parliament on March 3rd. On the same day, a government-commissioned review recommended changes to encourage technology companies to go public in London. Common New York ideas were suggested that would allow the founders to maintain more control of their company after they began selling shares.

Example: Companies with two share classes and different voting rights (like Facebook) can be listed in the premium section of the London Stock Exchange, which could pave the way for inclusion in reference indices. Or: to allow a company to go public while selling a smaller proportion of its shares than the current rules require.

In business today

Updated

April 16, 2021, 10:48 p.m. ET

The timing of Deliveroo’s IPO was no coincidence. It was listed on double-class shares, which gave its co-founder William Shu more than half the voting rights for three years – a structure that should closely align with the review’s recommendations, the company said.

But the idea might be a no-starter among some institutional investors in London. Deliveroo flopped in part because they opposed the offer of shares with minimum voting rights.

Others, however, are enthusiastic about the ideas of the review carried out by Jonathan Hill, a former European Commissioner for Financial Services. Among them is Mr Haynes, whose company Aquis acquired a stock exchange last year to compete with the London Stock Exchange.

“I am very supportive of what Lord Hill did,” said Haynes, who wants his exchange to become “Europe’s Nasdaq” one day. It seeks to lure companies into some of the larger companies that get involved with perks such as a no-sell policy (a practice where investors bet against the price of a stock). The Nasdaq has a coveted reputation for listing technology giants like Microsoft, Apple, and Facebook.

London doesn’t have “that alternative for fast-growing companies,” said Haynes.

Mr. Hill’s report also urges London to become a more welcoming home for special-purpose acquisitions or blank check businesses, the recent craze in the financial markets that has caught on with investors and celebrities alike. SPACs are public shell companies that are listed on a stock exchange and then look for private companies to buy.

London was left in the SPAC passion. Last year, according to Dealogic, 248 SPACs were listed in New York and only four in London. In March, Cazoo, a British used car dealer, announced that it would go public through a SPAC in New York.

There are already signs that Amsterdam could take the lead in this booming business for Europe. This year there were two SPACs each in London and Amsterdam, but the value of the listings in Amsterdam is five times that of London.

The UK’s financial regulator announced that it would soon open consultations on SPACs and introduce new rules by the summer.

London already has a reputation for producing soaring financial technology companies like Revolut and Monzo, both of which expanded into the US, and Wise (formerly Transferwise), which was valued at $ 5 billion last year. All three are so-called challenger banks that offer financial services via apps without the need for stationary branches.

The government clearly wants to build on this dynamic. It released an independent review of the fintech industry in February and is already acting on some of its recommendations, including setting up an express visa procedure for people interested in coming to the UK to work for fintech companies. The review also recommended a program that will bring regulatory blessings to small businesses experimenting with new fintech offerings and services.

As the UK prepares to host the United Nations Climate Change Conference in November, the government aims to transform London into a global hub for investors looking to spend their money on green and sustainable initiatives.

Mr Sunak has previously said that the Treasury Department will require large corporations and financial firms to disclose all climate change risks to their businesses by 2025 and is working on a taxonomy to define what really counts as “green”. Next, millions of pounds will be invested in new research centers to provide climate and environmental data to financial companies.

The government is also seeking to reclaim the lost ground in Germany, France and other European countries by issuing green bonds to fund projects to combat climate change.

London’s financial industry is in no danger of collapsing, but with Brexit, one of the cornerstones of the UK economy is no longer looking as impressive as it used to be. And as London tries to keep up with New York, it looks over its shoulder at the financial technology coming out of Asia.

The government has continuously billed Brexit as an opportunity to do more business with countries outside the European Union. This will be vital when international companies wonder whether they want to set up their European business in London or elsewhere.

When it comes to the future of the UK, it is “almost a look back at the future of London as an international center as opposed to an international and European center,” said Miles Celic, the executive director of CityUK representing the industry. “It doubles on international business.”

Categories
Business

How Brexit Ruined Easter for Britain’s Chocolate Makers

How Brexit Ruined Easter for Britain’s Chocolate Makers

“We were told the product would arrive in France, so we set Calais as the entry point. It went to Rotterdam, where it stood for six weeks, ”he said. “Chocolate. Sitting in a warehouse. For six weeks.”

Through a freight forwarder, he managed to drop the import duty. He’s learned a lesson about filling out forms, but that expertise isn’t going to help him much.

“It is impossible to find shippers delivering to Europe,” he said, “because there is an inventory in the pipeline.”

At Coco Caravan, a chocolate maker in the Cotswolds, stasis has seen Europe jump from 15 percent of the company’s sales to zero. This has resulted in Jacques Cop, the owner, disappointing old customers and discouraging new customers. In the past few months, potential buyers in the Netherlands, France and Germany have expressed interest.

“They say,” We found you online and we love everything you do to be ethical and vegan. But how are you going to fight the import-export problem that we will have with the European Union? “Cop said.” We can’t give you a straight answer except, ‘Yes, there is an additional charge.’ “

Mr. Cop also faces a challenge that small UK chocolate makers have in common: importing raw materials from Europe. He stored cocoa from his preferred source in Amsterdam in 2020. Now that it is time to buy more, obstacles have emerged. Transportation costs have doubled, which is bad enough. But Mr Cop says his shipper is refusing to take new orders because he is concerned that a shipment between Amsterdam and the UK will be blocked.

“It’s to the point where I think about renting a Renault van and just driving to the Netherlands myself,” said Cop. “It’s a 10 hour drive at a time. But I’m not sure I have any other choice. “

Categories
Business

May Brexit Destroy British Style?

Could Brexit Destroy British Fashion?

Not long before the latest fully digital London Fashion Week kicked off on February 19 – with a scaled-down schedule reflecting the ongoing impact of the pandemic on the sector – there were more than 450 industry leaders, including designers such as Paul Smith, Katherine Hamnett and Roksanda Ilincic sent an angry letter to 10 Downing Street.

In it, the signatories claimed that the new Brexit trade terms negotiated between the European Union and the UK could jeopardize the survival of hundreds of fashion companies that were “disregarded” by the last-minute deal. The local industry, so the letter, may be confronted with a “decimation” due to the redrawn geography of Europe.

Fashion “contributes more to Britain’s GDP than the fishing, music, film, pharmaceutical and automotive industries combined,” says the letter addressed to Prime Minister Boris Johnson and organized by the Think Tank Fashion Roundtable.

“The agreement with the EU has a loophole in which the promised free movement of goods and services for all creative people, including the fashion and textile sectors, should exist.”

Even Samantha Cameron, the wife of former Prime Minister David Cameron – who chaired the 2016 referendum that led to the UK’s decision to leave the European Union at all – said in a BBC radio interview that her contemporary fashion label, Cefinn, was going through “teething problems.” “after Brexit.

“If you bring goods into the country from outside the UK and then try to sell them back to Europe,” said Ms. Cameron, “it is very challenging and difficult right now.”

It is no surprise that the majority of the British fashion industry continues to rail against Brexit. For the past five years, domestic start-up brands, international luxury houses, leading London design schools and rural textile manufacturers had raised concerns about whether Britain would maintain its reputation as a creative and commercial hub for fashion after Brexit.

More recently, in the last year, as the time drew nearer December 31st, fears about the possibility of no agreement grew, bringing new ones at a time when the UK economy was already under pressure Taxes on merchandise and stalled ports with them in the pandemic.

This scenario was avoided in the eleventh hour. But as the UK adapts to its new position outside of the bloc, a chorus of voices from across the fashion industry are expressing increasing concern about what to do next.

Take John Horner, CEO of Models 1, a London-based modeling agency that represents Naomi Campbell and Lara Stone. For decades he has been booking models for runway shows or magazine shoots abroad with less than a day’s notice, with at least a quarter of all income generated from European jobs. However, free movement between the UK and the EU ended on January 1, which resulted in new visa requirements. Mr. Horner believes the extra layer of paperwork and costs will have a dramatic impact on the business.

“Models now need one of 27 visas to work in European countries – it’s going to be an ongoing administrative nightmare,” Horner said, noting that the UK creative industries are banding together to put pressure on the government to negotiate visa-free work arrangements for artists and professionals. “I think we will also see a number of international players avoid London as a filming location and choose European cities instead.”

According to the industry association Walpole, 42 percent of all British luxury goods are exported to the EU. Now British fashion brands are grappling with piles of new customs procedures and taxes where a wrongly ticked box or stroke of a pen can mean time-consuming delays or fines.

Jamie Gill, CEO of Roksanda, said the fact that the deal was closed in the final moments of 2020 meant no one had time to adjust to the unfamiliar bureaucratic hurdles and penalties, from brand employees based in the UK to to their small artisan suppliers and manufacturers in Europe.

“There is so much to learn about new rules for us as well as for large logistics partners like FedEx and DHL,” said Gill. “Right now there are delays in every way, everyone is doing something wrong and it costs both time and money. The industry breathed a sigh of relief when no business was avoided and we ran out of tariffs. But the pandemic means it’s pretty tough out there and every brand wants to get goods to the shop and online as soon as possible. “

Last week, the British Fashion Council, the industry’s lobbying body, said it was “live and ongoing discussions” with government officials about travel restrictions and working with designers and brands to help them familiarize themselves with paperwork and the customs of understanding rules on rules of origin for products.

Not to mention import issues. Many EU consumers who buy goods from UK fashion retailers’ websites receive customs and tax bills for 20 percent or more of the cost of the goods, and UK customers who shop in the EU are also charged additional bills.

Adam Mansell, head of the UK Fashion & Textile Association, warned that it is currently “cheaper for retailers to write off the cost of goods than to take care of everything, either abandoning them or possibly burning them. A lot of large companies don’t have this under control, let alone smaller ones. “

Another blow to many fashion brands and retailers is the UK government’s decision to end its retail export program on January 1st. The program, which allowed international visitors to reclaim 20 percent of VAT on their purchases, had long allowed wealthy foreign tourists to make expensive purchases tax-free in the UK. Now luxury power players like Burberry, Harrods and the Oxfordshire Bicester Village shopping center believe the new laws will reduce the UK’s attractiveness as a luxury shopping destination at a time when such bait is most needed.

In December, 17 luxury and retail companies estimated that planned £ 1 billion investments in infrastructures such as branch expansions and distribution centers would be lost due to lower demand as buyers went elsewhere, something not just felt by ordinary British marquee luxury names.

“It is wrong to see this as a problem that only affects the West End. Over £ 500 million of tax-free shopping is happening locally, including Manchester, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool, ”said James Lambert, vice chairman of Value Retail, which owns Bicester Village. The outlet center, which is supposed to look like a small town home to Burberry, Gucci and Dior, among others, has become one of the UK’s most popular tourist attractions.

“The impact will have an impact on the entire retail and hospitality supply chain across the UK,” said Lambert.

Still, not all companies are so pessimistic. While some UK silk and thread suppliers said the feedback from their European customers was that they would buy from European suppliers instead of accepting additional costs and hassle, Brian Wilson of cloth maker Harris Tweed Hebrides felt the short-term hurdles were nothing what could not be overcome.

“We are not in the same position as grocers or those with perishable stocks who are clearly having a terrible time,” he said.

Harris Tweed is a durable, all-weather textile handwoven in their homes by islanders in the Hebrides. While 14 percent of the fabric is exported to fashion makers in Europe, Wilson said the American, Korean and Japanese markets have remained resilient and that trade with these countries has remained stable in order to minimize the Brexit disruption.

The cabinet office, which had not officially responded to the Fashion Roundtable letter by February 19, said it had offered helplines, webinars and support for companies in the fashion industry. However, this may not be enough for companies already decoupling from ongoing lockdowns and a year of pandemic.

Katherine Hamnett, the veteran fashion designer long known for her simple speech, summed up the situation for her colleagues.

“Unless there is a radical overhaul,” she said, “British brands are going to die.”

Categories
Business

Brexit Nightmares: 53 Tons of Rotting Pork and Extra

Brexit Nightmares: 53 Tons of Rotting Pork and More

LONDON – Als das neue Jahr den Brexit Wirklichkeit werden ließ, stieß Tony Hale auf die Fallstricke der neu gezeichneten Geographie Europas. Insbesondere sah er sich mit der Notwendigkeit konfrontiert, 53 Tonnen verrottende Schweinefleischprodukte aus dem administrativen Fegefeuer in einem Hafen in den Niederlanden zu befreien.

Seit mehr als zwei Jahrzehnten hatte die Firma von Herrn Hale Schweinefleisch ohne Zollkontrolle in die Europäische Union verschifft, als ob das Vereinigte Königreich und der Kontinent über dem Wasser ein riesiges Land wären. Da Großbritannien nun legal außerhalb des Blocks war, mussten die Exporteure plötzlich Inspektionen, Sicherheitsbestimmungen und einen verwirrenden Papierkram durchlaufen.

Für Mr. Hale bedeuteten falsch vorbereitete Dokumente, fünf Behälter mit Schweinefleisch an einen ungeplanten Endort zu schicken – die Verbrennungsanlage.

“Es ist ein neues Spiel, und wir müssen die Regeln lernen”, sagte Hale. “Wir müssen jedes Dokument doppelt und dreifach überprüfen.”

In den frühen Tagen der Ära nach dem Brexit kämpft Großbritannien darum, sich an seine neue Position in der Weltwirtschaft anzupassen – sein Vermögen ist immer noch an die Europäische Union gebunden; seine Unternehmen auf der Außenseite. Das Handelsabkommen, das Großbritannien Ende letzten Jahres mit der Europäischen Union geschlossen hatte, verhinderte, dass Zölle auf Waren erhoben wurden, die über den Ärmelkanal ausgetauscht wurden, verhinderte jedoch nicht die Wiederbelebung von Zollverfahren, Gesundheits- und Sicherheitskontrollen, Mehrwertsteuern auf Importe und andere Zeiten -konsumierende, den Handel einschränkende Hindernisse.

Unternehmen in ganz Großbritannien kämpfen jetzt mit lähmender Verwirrung und ungewohnten bürokratischen Hürden. Papierkram, Zollschrecken und andere teure Störungen verschärfen die Belastung einer Wirtschaft, die bereits von der Pandemie heimgesucht wurde.

Am Freitag gab das Amt für nationale Statistik bekannt, dass die britische Wirtschaft im vergangenen Jahr um fast 10 Prozent geschrumpft ist, der schlimmste Einbruch seit Jahrhunderten. Wirtschaftswissenschaftler haben eine robuste Expansion im Laufe dieses Jahres erwartet, da die britische Impfkampagne – unter den führenden Politikern der Welt – zu einer Rückkehr zur Normalität führt, aber Pannen im Zusammenhang mit dem Brexit dürften den Aufwärtstrend begrenzen.

Premierminister Boris Johnson, ein Brexit-Champion, hat die Unabhängigkeit Großbritanniens von Europa als eine Stärke dargestellt, die es der Regierung ermöglicht, ihre Impfkampagne schnell voranzutreiben. Verwaltungsbeamte haben die Probleme beim Brexit minimiert und sie als „Kinderkrankheiten“ bezeichnet, die abklingen werden, sobald die Unternehmen die Feinheiten der neuen Verfahren beherrschen.

Aber viele Unternehmen – insbesondere kleine und mittlere Unternehmen – beklagen, was sich wie eine neue Normalität anfühlt.

Die Europäische Union hat traditionell fast die Hälfte der britischen Exporte gekauft. Das Exportvolumen, das im Januar den Kanal überquerte, ging im Vergleich zum Vorjahr um mehr als zwei Drittel zurück. Einige Produzenten von Fisch, Schalentieren, Fleisch und Milchprodukten wurden von den Märkten in Europa abgeschnitten und mussten einen katastrophalen Umsatzrückgang hinnehmen.

Transportunternehmen sind sich der Komplexität des Warenversands von Großbritannien nach Europa so bewusst, dass viele das Geschäft meiden. Etwa die Hälfte aller Lastwagen, die Waren vom französischen Hafen von Calais zum englischen Hafen von Dover bringen, kehren jetzt leer zurück und transportieren nur dünne Luft.

In der lukrativen britischen Finanzindustrie hat sich der Handel mit Aktien europäischer Unternehmen abrupt auf den Kontinent verlagert, da Amsterdam London als Hauptmarkt für solche Aktien verdrängt hat. Wachsende Mengen der als Derivate bekannten exotischen Instrumente – insbesondere der auf Euro lautenden – verlassen London für New York.

Die Hersteller haben mit schwerwiegenden Störungen bei der Lieferung von Fertigprodukten, Komponenten und Grundmaterialien zu kämpfen.

Und die durch den Brexit auferlegten Änderungen stehen erst am Anfang, da London und Brüssel die Regeln für künftige Handelsgeschäfte im gesamten Kanal weiterhin neu verhandeln.

“Wir werden für den Rest unseres Lebens mit dem Brexit zusammenleben”, sagte Jeremy Thomson-Cook, Chefökonom in London bei Equals Money, einem internationalen Geldmanager. „Das Coronavirus ist eine akute Erkrankung. Der Brexit ist chronisch. “

Während der Brexit-Referendumskampagne 2016 versprachen diejenigen, die Europa verlassen wollten, den Unternehmen die Befreiung von den erstickenden Vorschriften und der zeitraubenden Bürokratie, die angeblich über den gesamten Kanal herrschten.

James Wilson war zweifelhaft. Er erntet Muscheln vom Meeresboden der Menai-Straße in Nordwales. Traditionell werden solche Mollusken von Briten nicht geliebt, was ihn für 98 Prozent seines Umsatzes von Europa abhängig macht.

Mr. Wilson erwartete zusätzlichen Papierkram. Er war nicht auf den Schock vorbereitet, den er letzten Monat bei einem Videoanruf mit der Shellfish Association of Great Britain erhalten hatte: Nach europäischen Vorschriften war die Einfuhr lebender Muscheln von außerhalb des Blocks nur zulässig, wenn sie in Gewässern von höchster Qualität geerntet wurden. Die Menai-Straße war nicht ausreichend – und zwar nicht wegen europäischer Perfidie, sondern nach britischem Klassifizierungssystem.

Er wurde von seinem einzigen Markt ausgeschlossen.

“Es war, als hätte dich jemand unerwartet in die Leiste gekniet”, sagte Mr. Wilson.

Ein paar hundert Tonnen Muscheln, die zuvor etwa 160.000 Euro geholt hätten, liegen jetzt im Dreck und sind es nicht wert, geerntet zu werden. Herr Wilson hat drei seiner sechs Arbeiter beurlaubt.

Sogar diejenigen, die die europäischen Märkte erreichen können, haben entdeckt, dass das versprochene Lagerfeuer der Vorschriften tatsächlich eine brennende Hölle von Papierkram ist.

Im Südwesten Englands, nur wenige Kilometer von dem Dorf entfernt, das dem Cheddar-Käse seinen Namen gegeben hat, rechnet ein Käsehersteller, Lye Cross, mit zusätzlichen 125.000 GBP (173.000 USD) pro Jahr, um die administrativen Anforderungen zu erfüllen, die mit dem Brexit einhergingen. Eine Transaktion, die im vergangenen Jahr sieben Schritte umfasste, einschließlich Bezahlung und Rechnungsstellung, läuft jetzt auf 39, sagte Ben Hutchins, Vertriebs- und Marketingdirektor des Unternehmens.

In der ersten Januarwoche schickte Hartington Creamery etwa 40 kleine Päckchen seines Stilton-Käses nach Europa. Insgesamt waren sie etwa 1.000 Pfund (1.383 Dollar) wert. Der Kurier brachte nach dem Brexit einen Zuschlag von jeweils etwa 5 Pfund oder etwa 200 Pfund an. Die Zollbehörden in Europa lehnten die Sendungen ab, vor allem, weil ihnen die erforderlichen Gesundheitsbescheinigungen fehlten. Um solche Dokumente vorzubereiten, musste ein Tierarzt für etwa 180 GBP pro Sendung eingestellt werden.

Hartington erstattete seinen Kunden und bezahlte den Kurier erneut, um den Käse nach England zurückzugeben.

“Sie fühlen sich ziemlich krank”, sagte Robert Gosling, der Mehrheitsaktionär des Unternehmens. “Wenn du es zurück hast, musst du alles wegwerfen, weil es fünf oder sechs Tage gedauert hat, um dorthin zu gelangen und zurück zu kommen.”

Vor dem Brexit konnte ein mit 25.000 Litern Sahne beladener Lastwagen aus einer Molkerei in Nordwales über Nacht fahren und bis zum Morgen Frankreich erreichen. Jetzt kann dieselbe Reise fünf Tage dauern, beklagte sich Philip Langslow, Direktor von County Milk Products.

Die Molkerei muss die Ausfuhrbehörden mindestens 24 Stunden vor Abflug über den Export informieren und ein Gewicht liefern – etwas, das sie erst sicher wissen kann, wenn der Tankwagen beladen ist. Wenn das Gewicht von den Angaben auf den Unterlagen abweicht, kann die Sendung bei der Ankunft abgelehnt werden. Das Unternehmen von Herrn Langslow hat seine Exporte halbiert.

“Antigua ist einfacher als Amsterdam”, sagte er über einige Exportaufträge.

Vor dem Brexit konnte Fashion Enter, ein E-Commerce-Unternehmen mit zwei Fabriken in Großbritannien, eine Bestellung für in Deutschland hergestellte hochwertige Fäden aufgeben und diese in vielleicht fünf Tagen erhalten.

Eine kürzlich erfolgte Bestellung dauerte mehr als drei Wochen. Für die Vorbereitung der Zollpapiere wurde eine Bearbeitungsgebühr von £ 44 Pfund (mehr als $ 60) erhoben.

Ohne den Faden musste das Unternehmen die Arbeit an einem entscheidenden Auftrag verschieben – 10.000 Schutzkittel für medizinische Mitarbeiter an vorderster Front beim Nationalen Gesundheitsdienst.

Der Fadenlieferant schreibt jetzt Bestellungen aus Großbritannien ein Minimum von £ 135 ($ 185) vor, da er sich bewusst ist, dass für einen niedrigeren Betrag eine Registrierung erforderlich ist, um die britischen Mehrwertsteuern zu zahlen, sagte Jenny Holloway, Chief Executive Officer von Fashion Enter.

Wie viele Modeunternehmen ist auch ihr Unternehmen bestrebt, seine Lagerbestände schlank zu halten, damit es sich an veränderte Kundenanforderungen anpassen kann. Aber die neue Mindestbestellmenge hat das Unternehmen gezwungen, sich mehr einzudecken, damit ihm nicht etwas ausgeht, das es nicht schnell wieder auffüllen kann.

“Es wird unser Geld binden”, sagte Frau Holloway. “Dies ist das neue Geschäft, in dem wir uns befinden.”

Die Autoindustrie ist besonders anfällig, da Teile den Kanal häufig mehrmals überqueren und für eine spezielle Verarbeitung erneut überqueren, bevor sie in fertigen Fahrzeugen landen. Die Fabriken müssen jetzt die Unterlagen ausfüllen, in denen die Herkunft der von ihnen gesendeten Daten angegeben ist.

Fast zwei Drittel der kleinen und mittleren Fertigungsunternehmen in England haben seit Inkrafttreten des Brexit höhere Kosten für importierte Komponenten erlitten. Dies geht aus einer Umfrage hervor, die am Montag vom South West Manufacturing Advisory Service veröffentlicht werden soll.

In den industriellen Vororten von Birmingham drückt eine Firma namens Brandauer Bleche zu Präzisionsteilen für Autos und Haushaltsgeräte. Das Unternehmen hat kürzlich einen Prototyp für einen britischen Autohersteller entwickelt, der ein Elektrofahrzeug entwickelt. Sie beauftragte eine Fabrik in der Schweiz, die kein EU-Mitglied ist, mit der Abwicklung eines wichtigen Teils der Arbeit.

Vor dem Brexit hätte Brandauer das Teil in ein oder zwei Tagen aus der Schweiz zurückerhalten. Dieses Mal dauerte es mehr als drei Wochen, als das EU-Territorium in beide Richtungen durchquert wurde.

“Die Route von der Schweiz nach Großbritannien ist voll von diesen Problemen”, sagte Rowan Crozier, Brandauers Vorstandsvorsitzender.

Obwohl das zwischen Großbritannien und Europa geschlossene Handelsabkommen die Zölle auf Waren abwendete, ließ es den Großteil der britischen Wirtschaft – den Dienstleistungssektor und insbesondere die Finanzen – offen.

In den letzten Jahrzehnten haben sich multinationale Banken und Vermögensverwalter in London zusammengeschlossen und die Stadt zu einem globalen Finanzzentrum gemacht, das mit New York konkurriert. Der Brexit hat diesen Status ins Spiel gebracht. Beim Austritt aus dem europäischen Markt verloren Unternehmen in Großbritannien das Recht, Transaktionen für Kunden in Europa abzuwickeln. Viele Unternehmen haben bereits Mitarbeiter und Investitionen in europäische Hauptstädte wie Frankfurt, Dublin und Paris verlagert, um sicherzustellen, dass sie dort weiterhin Geschäfte abwickeln können.

“Sie haben gesehen, wie dieser Autounfall in Zeitlupe auf sie zukam”, sagte William Wright, Gründer von New Financial, einer Forschungseinrichtung in London. “Die meisten großen Unternehmen und alle nationalen Regulierungsbehörden und EU-Regulierungsbehörden haben in den letzten viereinhalb Jahren intensiv daran gearbeitet.”

Der erste Handelstag im Jahr 2021 zeigte eine wesentliche Änderung: Als Reaktion auf die europäischen Anforderungen, dass Anleger innerhalb des Blocks Aktien von börsennotierten Unternehmen an europäischen Börsen handeln, wurden Aktien im Wert von 6 Milliarden Euro von London auf Märkte auf dem Kontinent verlagert.

Die europäischen Regulierungsbehörden werden ab dem nächsten Jahr verlangen, dass Derivate in Euro innerhalb des Blocks abgewickelt werden – ein Geschäft, das jetzt von London dominiert wird.

Für ein in London ansässiges Maklerunternehmen haben TP ICAP, Brexit und die Pandemie zusammen einen Teil ihrer Geschäftstätigkeit behindert.

Vor drei Jahren gründete das Unternehmen eine Tochtergesellschaft in Paris, um sicherzustellen, dass es nach dem Brexit weiterhin auf dem Kontinent Geschäfte tätigen kann. Zu Beginn des Jahres gab es 230 Makler in der Europäischen Union, aber 100 weitere mussten noch umziehen.

Im vergangenen Monat gab das Unternehmen bekannt, dass sich seine Umzugspläne durch die Pandemie verzögert hatten. Die Firma bat die französischen Aufsichtsbehörden um zusätzliche Zeit. Die Franzosen sagten nein und zwangen TP ICAP, einige Transaktionen für europäische Kunden vorübergehend einzustellen, während es sich bemühte, seine Mitarbeiter in Position zu bringen.

Inmitten der Pandemie hat der Brexit das Unternehmen gezwungen, zahlreiche Mitarbeiter und ihre Familien über einen Kanal zu bewegen, der plötzlich breiter erscheint.

Categories
Business

For Some Scottish Seafood Exporters, Brexit Might Be a Loss of life Knell

For Some Scottish Seafood Exporters, Brexit Could Be a Death Knell

LONDON – The trucks loaded with tons of live crabs, lobsters and prawns headed south from the Scottish town of Oban had to reach their destination in Spain within 72 hours to make sure the cargo would survive the trip.

With the UK complying with new trade rules following Brexit, a trip that used to be routine is now a gamble for exporter Paul Knight, managing director of PDK Shellfish.

“It’s like roulette,” said Mr. Knight as he waved off two huge trucks, adding that despite spending tens of thousands of pounds on Brexit preparations, he continued to fear that raids in French ports would be causing a large part of his broadcast could perish.

“We are as ready for Brexit as possible and we are still facing failure,” he said.

“I’m exhausted, the pressure is so strong – it’s like being on a knife edge,” he added.

Since the UK completed the final phase of Brexit on January 1st and left the European Union’s internal market and customs union, the world has changed and not in a good way for UK exporters to the continent.

Despite a trade deal signed by the UK and the European Union on Christmas Eve, promises by Brexit activists that leaving the bloc would free companies of unnecessary red tape now sound like a macabre joke. Shipments that previously moved with minimal effort now require extensive documentation, including customs declarations and, for food products, health certificates.

Various problems have hit UK companies, some of which have ceased sales to continental Europe and even Northern Ireland which is part of the UK. Due to its land border with Ireland, a member state of the European Union, it now has a special customs status.

The complications pose a particular threat to Scottish seafood exporters, many of whom rely on the European market because there is no similar demand at home.

Before shipping a truckload of live crabs, Colin Anderson and three colleagues devoted a full day to completing the new records. Even that led him to secure one final document required to bring more than three tons of crabs to the Netherlands.

“We thought we were on top, but we still don’t have all the records,” said Anderson, executive director of the Crab Company, Scotland, based in Peterhead, as he pondered which route to take for his broadcast.

Jimmy Buchan, executive director of the Scottish Seafood Association, a trade organization, said the new system “went insane”. He added that “so many certificates are required and if they are not all 100 percent aligned, the system will reject them, even if it is a typo.”

For companies already hit by the coronavirus and falling demand from the hospitality industry, the introduction of new trade rules was a sucker.

In a video posted on Twitter, Lochfyne Langoustines and Lochfyne Seafarms said their inventory was stuck in ports, that exports to mainland Europe had become impossible and that the company could be put out of business.

“Welcome to the modern world of Brexit and the disorder associated with it,” it said. “It’s unbelievable that we’re in this position.”

According to Victoria Leigh-Pearson, sales director for John Ross Jr., an Aberdeen-based smoked salmon manufacturer, French customs apparently reject entire truck loads without explanation.

“It feels like our own government has thrown us into the cold Atlantic waters without a life jacket,” she wrote in a letter to the government.

To make matters worse, IT outages in France and the UK exacerbated the problems, said Donna Fordyce, managing director of Seafood Scotland, another trading group.

The changes have created layer-by-shift administrative problems that have resulted in delays, border denials and confusion, she said in a statement.

“These companies don’t transport toilet rolls or widgets. They export the highest quality perishable seafood that has a limited window of time to get to market in tip-top condition, ”said Ms. Fordyce.

Customers turned down some shipments, and even products that made it through sometimes lost value due to the extra travel time.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if this were the death knell for some companies,” said Mr. Buchan. “Some lose tens of thousands of pounds, and in some cases run into the hundreds of thousands.”

Instead of minimal bureaucracy, exporting fish to France is now a 25-step process. In addition to customs declarations, every consignment of fish and seafood must receive a health certificate after the inspection.

Traffic still moves freely across the canal in the ports, but this is partly due to the fact that the raids are elsewhere.

DFDS, a Danish logistics company that also offers ferry services, plays a key role in moving Scottish fish to markets in France. It has set up inspections at Larkhall, near Glasgow, where seafood is shipped before it is driven into ports and then onto the continent.

However, the integration with government tax and customs systems did not go smoothly, forcing the company to implement slower manual workarounds. In Larkhall, there have been delays in signing health certificates and other raids by exporters who did not send the correct documentation.

“Our employees who are supposed to enter the information have been overwhelmed by delays.” said Torben Carlsen, managing director of DFDS.

As a result, the company is currently not taking new orders from smaller companies whose goods need to be grouped in a truck with many different papers.

Since every shipment needs the correct certification, a problem with one shipment can stop the entire truckload.

“We were very strict,” said Mr. Carlsen. “I think everyone else has to make sure that you cannot enter the ports if you don’t have your records. Because if you do this and can’t move, you risk much bigger operational and supply chain problems. “

In terms of additional costs, the Scottish Government estimates that new delays at the border, including new customs formalities, will amount to £ 7 billion, approximately $ 9.5 billion, annually for UK business.

Many Scottish exporters are saddened that France implemented the new rules from day one, while the British decided to wave through many European trucks for several months while the kinks are worked out of the system.

They want the government to negotiate concessions with the French authorities and with opinion polls showing a majority support for Scottish independence, the problems of the fishing industry are likely to fuel resentment against London. A majority of Scots who voted in the 2016 Brexit referendum wanted to stay in the European Union, but they were numerically among the English and Welsh voters.

Although the system could become more efficient in the coming months as the teething troubles are resolved, it is unlikely that it will become significantly less bureaucratic after the UK leaves the customs union and the European Union’s internal market.

Inevitably, this means billions of more forms will be required from exporters, and the government, which has urged exporters to broaden their horizons and look for non-European markets, has warned them for months to prepare for post-Brexit trading conditions.

But for Mr. Knight of Oban, no preparation can assure the possibility that his perishable product will be waiting in line for hours behind other vehicles waiting for inspection upon arrival at a French port.

French officials are doing their best, he says, and two of his trucks have made it successfully. But they were traveling during the holiday season when traffic was unusually light, a situation that is inevitably about to change.

With little market for its premium shellfish in the UK, Mr Knight said the only way to keep his business going is to keep playing with the cross-channel export trade, even if the odds are against him.

“At some point we will tap the wrong key on the computer or the wrong date will appear on a document,” he said. “It’s not about if they catch me, but when.”

Categories
Business

A Week Into Brexit, the Ache for U.Okay. Companies Has Arrived

A Week Into Brexit, the Pain for U.K. Businesses Has Arrived

“The things that turn out to be problematic are the things that we expected to be problematic,” Ms. Jones said. “Merchandise is all about the speed and accuracy with which people prepare the right documents.”

Many UK companies – at least 150,000 according to the UK Tax Service – have never traded outside the European Union and therefore have no experience of dealing with customs systems.

The situation in Northern Ireland is an additional wrinkle. Northern Ireland will remain partially in the European Union’s internal market, an exception that avoids a border with the Republic of Ireland but creates a border in the Irish Sea. Logistics experts say Trader Support Service, a free government service that helps businesses fill out customs forms to ship goods from England, Wales and Scotland to Northern Ireland, is overwhelmed.

Some companies anticipated cross-border problems with Europe and stocked up on stocks – such as auto parts and pharmaceuticals – before the end of the Brexit transition period. This has kept cross-border shipments at a fraction of their normal levels. In the next few weeks, when these stocks run out, business will pick up and delays exacerbated.

Another new problem facing large retailers with international locations is “rules of origin” which determine whether a product leaving the UK is “British enough” to qualify for duty free trade with the European Union. International retailers using UK locations as distribution centers are now finding that they cannot automatically re-export their products to their stores in the European Union without paying tariffs – even if the product is off the block.

For example, a company could not import jeans from Bangladesh or cheese from France into a hub in England and then forward it to a store in Ireland without export duties. The UK retail consortium said at least 50 of its members have faced such tariffs. Debenhams, a large but now bankrupt department store chain, has closed its Irish website due to confusion over trading rules.

As companies strive to catch up on the rule changes, what is Britain doing with the sovereignty and freedom it secured before leaving the European Union? The government has to decide how much it wants to deviate from the European rules, where it might want to deregulate and whether it wants to pay the price.