UK ports grappling with ‘shambolic’ Brexit black hole of information

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,310
WITH six months to go until Britain imposes post-Brexit border checks on European Union goods, UK ports lack sufficient clarity to start building the required infrastructure, have no clear guidance on the required detail of border processes and now have to contend with a government IT system that the head of the government’s own expert customs panel has described as “shambolic and amateurish”.

Following several months of near radio silence from government departments sidetracked by the coronavirus pandemic, the UK ports sector is currently being bombarded with communications daily as plans for the UK to leave the EU rapidly ramp up.

Two weeks ago news quietly started to emerge that a government-led IT system, the Goods Vehicle Movement Service, was about to be introduced to help goods flow across Britain’s borders and cut queues. That was swiftly followed by an 89-page consultation document circulated by the government to trade groups setting out draft policy on the EU border processes.

Since then, port officials report a daily barrage of Brexit activity and communications as government departments race to avoid blockages at the border with the European Union, its biggest trading partner.

The draft consultation document, seen by Lloyd’s List, sets out the basic processes that everyone moving goods between Britain and the EU will need to follow from January 1, 2021, a second phase of processes introduced from April 1, 2021 for food and other organic imports and finally the full introduction of controls from July 1, 2021.

The document details how operators would have to follow a “prelodgement” model — where trucks carrying goods must file their paperwork electronically before arrival in the UK — or follow the same “Temporary Storage” arrangements as cargo arrivals from the rest of the world.

However, the document contains several blank pages where detail on the import processes are yet to be finalised and contains no information on how government plans to enforce the new pre-clearance processes that are being rolled out on an untested IT system still under development.

And therein lies the problem — UK ports know that post-Brexit border control infrastructure needs to be built, but they lack the basic details that would allow them to start construction and planning.


The last uk briefing on this matter was very informative :


 


Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
34,428
Twitter
No
The border with Northern Ireland will have to be redrawn from Stranraer to Swansea. It would make things easier all 'round and there's already a handy line drawn there by both nature and cartographers so no extra work required :)
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
34,428
Twitter
No
Mind you, you'd want to be careful about putting a hard border in around Stranraer given Scotland's increasingly frequent glances at her wristwatch at Christmas Union parties.

And Welsh nationalism has undergone something of a revival under Boris 'Merlin' Johnson, wizard of the unexpected. Might be better to settle the Northern Irish border closer to Chester and only north as far as Carlisle.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
34,428
Twitter
No
Actually we should try something like that for a laugh with the EU negotiators. Suggest innocently a way out of the impasse on the Northern Ireland political border might be to set up nominal and single purpose Free Trade Zones at Carlisle, Stranraer and Swansea to enable the smooth transition of goods out to the EU (Ireland in this case) and imports from the Western EU (Ireland).

If you obscured it a bit you could probably slide the item onto the agenda on the EU side as an innocent sounding possible resolution of the technical customs issues. The UK Foreign Office would go off like a rocket :)

There's no rule, regulation or law that prevents wind-ups at an international political level.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
34,428
Twitter
No
I propose a novel private sector solution to the issue of movement of goods between the UK and EU. A special purpose vehicle with the golden share divided between the Irish Government and UK government with goods transitioning not through official EU/UK customs posts but through a privately held FTZ operated via 49% shares in the golden share being held by the Irish Government, 49% of the golden share owned by the UK government and the 2% left over held by a panel of mixed representatives with the power to vote their 2% one way or another, with that panel including representatives of the EU. For ease, cost and logistic reasons these FTZ should be held convenient for importers and exporters and logistics companies at existing ports capable of handling volume.

This way the issue gets shifted away from the political and into an instrument which supports the legal position of all parties and provides a resolution and logistics handling system in one go.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
34,428
Twitter
No
On a serious note amid the leg-pulling there is the germ of a technically feasible idea in the wind-up above. If you think of bonded warehouses which have excellent anti-fraud barcoding and other logistics built in to manage goods which have yet to attract duty then you could construct a system of a vehicle in which all stakeholders are represented on the governance board and in the administration of a virtual bonded warehouse system. This is one area where there might be a private or semi-private solution where the ingredients already exist to move the debate away from lines drawn on maps to 'virtual desktop' systems as a solution.

You don't actually need bricks and barbed wire on a border. You could just have a virtual border and solve the problem at that level with the use of existing bonded warehouse practices, logistics and security coding.

I'd envisage a golden share in the operating company held between Ireland, UK and with the EU having a gatekeeper brief with a positive duty toward dispute resolution and the duty to show effort to have done so before triggering access to the World Trade Organisation dispute process in intractable cases.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
8,556
WITH six months to go until Britain imposes post-Brexit border checks on European Union goods, UK ports lack sufficient clarity to start building the required infrastructure, have no clear guidance on the required detail of border processes and now have to contend with a government IT system that the head of the government’s own expert customs panel has described as “shambolic and amateurish”.

//
So they will have to wave trucks thru, and then they are the losers.

All customs duties started off as protection money, and the sooner we eliminate them the better.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,310
So they will have to wave trucks thru, and then they are the losers.

All customs duties started off as protection money, and the sooner we eliminate them the better.

unfortunately lorries go both ways.
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,585
So they will have to wave trucks thru, and then they are the losers.

All customs duties started off as protection money, and the sooner we eliminate them the better.
Is that not the way it was before the Brexiteers voted to impose customs?
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
8,556
Is that not the way it was before the Brexiteers voted to impose customs?
Yes - but they want a free trade zone with the EU, iirc. It's the EU that wants border posts set up back from the border.

Obvs we don't want any trade barriers with GB or the EU.

It has to be said, the first customs posts were set up by us in 1923, hoping to net a few shillings from the local traders.
 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,585
Yes - but they want a free trade zone with the EU, iirc. It's the EU that wants border posts set up back from the border.

Obvs we don't want any trade barriers with GB or the EU.

It has to be said, the first customs posts were set up by us in 1923, hoping to net a few shillings from the local traders.
They had a free trade zone with the nearly thirty countries of the EU but Brexiteers tore it up by voting for Brexit.

Now they blame everyone else for the consequences and especially Paddy whom the anti-EU propaganda machine that is the gutter London media tell to know his place and 'shut his gob'.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
8,556
They had a free trade zone with the nearly thirty countries of the EU but Brexiteers tore it up by voting for Brexit.

Now they blame everyone else for the consequences and especially Paddy whom the anti-EU propaganda machine that is the gutter London media tell to know his place and 'shut his gob'.

I agree totally, but "we are where we are". Our history is also littered with examples where we were too proud to bend, and paid a huge price for that pride.

Reality is that they are one of our biggest trading partners, and if the EU beggars them, it will be beggaring us as well.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
59,681
1 story and another related story on this today so far.

The NI Agriculture minister, Edwin Poots of the DUP, says he wont apply for BCPs (Border Control Posts) until the UK govt clarifies how they will be used. He wants supermarkets to be exempt from checks as "trusted traders" and for checks on non trusted traders to be limited to 1%.

The deadline for the plans to be submitted to the EU was supposed to be June 23rd.

...In his letter to DEFRA Secretary George Eustice, Mr Poots acknowledged there is a legal responsibility to create the BCPs.

However, he added: "I am currently unable to present a full application due to the lack of certainty around a number of key areas including the level of checks required."....
Mr Poots then posed a series of questions such as whether major supermarkets could be exempt from checks as "trusted traders" and whether a check of 1% of non-trusted trader goods would be acceptable.

Mr Poots suggested he will only be able to submit the applications when his questions have been answered by the joint committee - the EU-UK body overseeing the implementation of the Brexit deal.

He added that in the meantime his officials would continue to "scope a range of options" and submit further details "once clarity has been received".

The move by Mr Poots will place even greater time pressure on the creation of BCPs.

Last month, the chief vet in the NI Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs said the European Commission was expecting details of the BCP plans by the end of June .

Robert Huey said: "That work has to be done, in effect, by 23 or 24 June in order for it to go through a Whitehall process."...
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,310
I agree totally, but "we are where we are". Our history is also littered with examples where we were too proud to bend, and paid a huge price for that pride.

Reality is that they are one of our biggest trading partners, and if the EU beggars them, it will be beggaring us as well.
The EU is doing everything it can to keep the UK from damaging itself.


EU negotiator Michel Barnier said the bloc's position needed to be "better understood and respected" by the UK if an agreement is to be found.

Boris Johnson said a "good deal" was possible but it must recognise UK sovereignty in areas such as fishing.

The UK has ruled out extending the December deadline to reach a deal.

The prime minister told LBC Radio he was "more optimistic" than Mr Barnier about the chances of a deal but, if it did not happen, the UK would happily trade with its neighbour on more limited terms similar to Australia.

"I am not remotely disrespectful of Michel or the EU system that I understand deeply," he said.

"But I just don't think that it's right for us to proceed on the basis of the European Court of Justice continuing to arbitrate in the UK or us having to continue to obey EU laws when we are out of the EU."


If tyou want to see how good the British are watch

 

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,585
I agree totally, but "we are where we are". Our history is also littered with examples where we were too proud to bend, and paid a huge price for that pride.

Reality is that they are one of our biggest trading partners, and if the EU beggars them, it will be beggaring us as well.
When we signed the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement we drew a line of conciliation under eight centuries of colonial exploitation all the way from the Normans stealing Irish land in the 1100s through subsequent generations of English colonisers stealing Irish land, through penal laws, plantations, famine, imposition of the border not to mention the black and tans.

But Brexiteers want to tear up that international agreement, declare economic war and regard Paddy with contempt.

What do we do? Grovel?

We grovelled long enough.

The EU is not beggaring anyone.

It is the Brexiteers that has declared economic war and wants to dismantle and beggar the EU.

Then they would have Paddy on his own to be re-exploited.

Brexit is English racism.

We have had to put up with that for eight centuries.

But this time we have EU backing.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
8,556
When we signed the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement we drew a line of conciliation under eight centuries of colonial exploitation all the way from the Normans stealing Irish land in the 1100s through subsequent generations of English colonisers stealing Irish land, through penal laws, plantations, famine, imposition of the border
//

No, I don't think the EU looks that far back! Conciliation of france and germany in the 1950s, so why not britain and here. Borders were as signed up for, unless any locals want to change them. 1925 was long gone by 1972.

Brexit is bad, but the EU had a clause saying states could vote to leave, and we signed up for it. I don't recall any pol here or in the uk saying it was a leaving a hostage to fortune.

Looking for free trade is not grovelling, it's getting back to where we were before the Normans.
 
Last edited:

shiel

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
19,585
No, I don't think the EU looks that far back! Conciliation of france and germany in the 1950s, so why not britain and here. Borders were as signed up for, unless any locals want to change them. 1925 was long gone by 1972.

Brexit is bad, but the EU had a clause saying states could vote to leave, and we signed up for it. I don't recall any pol here or in the uk saying it was a leaving a hostage to fortune.

Looking for free trade is not grovelling, it's getting back to where we were before the Normans.
The Belfast/Good Friday Agreement is an international act of conciliation.

Brexiteers want to tear it up and re-impose a border.

The UK and this republic had free trade with a Europe of 500 million people before the English racist Brexiteers tore up the treaty and declared economic war.

Do you think we should join them?
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,310
I agree totally, but "we are where we are". Our history is also littered with examples where we were too proud to bend, and paid a huge price for that pride.

Reality is that they are one of our biggest trading partners, and if the EU beggars them, it will be beggaring us as well.
The EU is doing its best to strike a reasonable deal with the UK. They already think that Brexit will end badly without any help from them.
 

McSlaggart

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
19,310
Firms in Northern Ireland could get direct subsidies from the taxpayer to prevent them from collapsing under a deluge of Brexit customs red tape, The Telegraph has learned.
HMRC is expected to announce this week that it is considering “a service to run for at least two years to support businesses with new administrative processes under the Northern Ireland Protocol and will be free at the point of use”.
It comes in addition to the £50m fund for companies across the UK to help train staff in customs skills and to upgrade their IT systems to be compatible with the Goods Vehicle Movement Service (GVMS), HMRC’s own new platform, ahead of the end of the transition period at the end of the year.
The Northern Ireland Retail...



The problem with the possibility of firms needing subsidies is that it is evidence that they are less competitive after brexit. Subsidies is not a solution just a way of delaying the inevitable loss of firms and jobs.
 

Mickeymac

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
42,346
Firms in Northern Ireland could get direct subsidies from the taxpayer to prevent them from collapsing under a deluge of Brexit customs red tape, The Telegraph has learned.
HMRC is expected to announce this week that it is considering “a service to run for at least two years to support businesses with new administrative processes under the Northern Ireland Protocol and will be free at the point of use”.
It comes in addition to the £50m fund for companies across the UK to help train staff in customs skills and to upgrade their IT systems to be compatible with the Goods Vehicle Movement Service (GVMS), HMRC’s own new platform, ahead of the end of the transition period at the end of the year.
The Northern Ireland Retail...



The problem with the possibility of firms needing subsidies is that it is evidence that they are less competitive after brexit. Subsidies is not a solution just a way of delaying the inevitable loss of firms and jobs.

The glaring disgrace in all of this is the fact the good folk of the six counties did not vote to impoverish themselves or their children through An English Brexit.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom