Saturday 20 April 2024

New border checks coming sometime never

On Thursday we discovered that the government intends to U-turn on its pledge to introduce the next phase of the Border Target Operating Model. This imposes checks and extra costs on plants and foodstuffs imported into the UK from the EU and was supposed to begin in a couple of weeks on 30 April.  We didn’t find out through any official announcement but by a leaked internal presentation from DEFRA seen by the FT which says the checks could create ‘significant disruption’ and therefore the implementation date will remain the same but the number of checks will be “set to zero for all commodity groups,” meaning products will simply continue to be waived through as they are now.

This is hardly a surprise given the dire warnings coming from trade groups and importers,  If it ever came to a choice between carrying out checks and seeing food shortages this was an obvious move and despite Julian Jessop saying firms will always find workarounds, it's clear the government thought there was a good chance we would have empty supermarket shelves.

Last night I noticed a report in The Belfast Telegraph with a non-denial from a UK government spokesman who was quoted saying:

“Checks are commencing from 30 April and, as we have always said, the medium- and high-risk goods posing the greatest biosecurity risk are being prioritised as we build up to full check rates and high levels of compliance.

“Taking a pragmatic approach to introducing our new border checks minimises disruption, protects our biosecurity and benefits everyone – especially traders.”

But this appears to confirm the central claim in the FT story, that the BCPs will “build up to full check rates” presumably starting from zero as the leak suggested. There was no timeline set to reach full compliance and David Gauke suggested they may never come fully into operation if Labour wins power later this year. If Starmer wants to ‘improve’ the TCA he could start by eliminating all the costly bureaucracy with an SPS agreement.

But until then we’re going to pretend that everything is hunky dory and imports of rancid meat for example will no longer be permitted to enter the UK without being checked, while not actually carrying any checks out. You can almost hear Sir Humphrey Appleby explaining it to a bemused Jim Hacker. And the amazing bit is that importers will still be charged!

Business is calling for more clarity. Phil Pluck, the chief executive of the Cold Chain Federation (CCF), is quoted in The Guardian: “The ongoing confusion about how and when new checks will be introduced makes these preparations incredibly challenging.

“A phased approach is the right one but businesses urgently need clear information about what exactly these phases will include, and a definitive timeline.”

Last week the CCF called for the checks to be delayed until October. Now, no one knows which commodity groups will be checked or when the checks will start. It is a recipe for chaos.

You can imagine the news being greeted by those involved in the food supply chain with relief and fury. They have been clamouring for a delay fearing that our new border control posts are nowhere near ready for the onslaught while at the same time trying their best to prepare for all the chaos and delays expected.

Some horticulture businesses have been stockpiling and some EU suppliers have held back shipping goods in case they were ruined by being held in BCPs overrun with trucks being checked. The Cold Chain Federation experienced the other way when UK exporters were suddenly faced with trade barriers when the EU imposed checks on day one of Brexit in January 2021. Many firms simply stopped shipping and some quit the export business altogether rather than be bothered with all the extra paperwork.

Brexit is apparently so good the full effects have to keep being postponed.

Badenoch

While all this was going on Kemi Badenoch was giving a speech to The City International Conference 2024: How smart regulation creates growth.  The speech is on her very own website, www.kemibadenoch.org.uk.  Later she tweeted about the 'hysterical' reaction of The Guardian although I should say that I can’t find the reaction so I’m not sure what it is that she’s complaining about:

Her tweet and the title of her presentation to City bigwigs suggests her speech explains or gives examples of ‘smarter regulation’ and how it has spurred on economic growth. But when I read the speech I find nothing of the sort. Most of it is given to a denial that Britain's imperial wealth was built on slavery and a claim that we don't need any new regulations at all:

"Every day in Parliament, someone has a great idea for a new regulation. As MPs when confronted with a problem, the easiest thing is to say is “lets make some more rules”. But a lot of the time more rules aren’t what we need.  Sometimes it’s more enforcement, other times, it’s more innovation."

The only reference to 'smarter regulation' comes near the end when she said this:

"I’m not here to list all of Labour’s proposals like stopping employers from contacting staff about work outside of working hours. And one thing I particularly hate, reporting burdens. I’ve been stopping them recently like new ones which will come in like mandatory ethnicity pay reporting which I have spoken against in Parliament on dozens of occasions. People want us to bring these things in. I say no.

"Instead, I will ask that you look at our record, how we have delivered for your sector and the new exciting things we have planned, like our Smarter Regulation programme which I will be expanding on in the next month but it looks at how we can reform our regulatory regime to drive economic growth and it spends a lot of time looking at what regulators have been doing."

And that's it. No explanation, no examples, no underlying philosophy or ideology to support smarter regulation or tell us what it means apart from regulation.  There was no 'how' smarter regulation creates growth.

And if we don't regulate in tandem with the EU it simply creates more headaches for exporters and greater divergence with the huge single market on our doorstep and reduces growth. The Americans can afford to be different and less concerned about product safety because they have an enormous and wealthy domestic market. We don't. 

Gibraltar

Chris Grey's regular Friday post highlights the ongoing talks between the UK, Spain, and the EU over Gibraltar. I follow this topic closely because I'm convinced this is the next 'betrayal' coming down the track for Brexiteers to rage about.

We are getting close to a deal and there are fears by Brexit supporters of some sort of sell-out with Gibraltar becoming part of the Schengen area and Spanish authorities exercising control over visitors entering Gibraltar via the airport.  I suspect their fears will be justified.

Grey sums it up well:

"Crucially, as with the Northern Ireland situation, and in a different way with the import controls situation, the Brexiters have no answer to the fundamental conundrum, which is of their own making: they have created the need for a border but don't want to create a border."

Ain't that the problem?

Mobility

The EU is reported to have offered the UK government a youth mobility arrangement that is limited to 18-30 year olds. Rishi Sunak has rejected it immediately and Kier Starmer has done the same. I find it amazing but perhaps a key to understanding why is in the comment on the BBC news website:

Apparently, No 10 has said they won’t accept the offer because: "free movement within the EU was ended". But we already run schemes with some non-EU countries to allow people to come to the UK for up to two years and the government says “it is open to extending that to individual EU member countries, rather than throughout the EU.”

It is simply hatred of the whole idea of the EU. Whilst this explains the insane Tory position why is Starmer turning it down?

Posted by at