Category Archives: Brexit

A Unionist leader is warning of violence returning to Northern Ireland, claiming Brexit is being used to force through huge political change without consent.

Peter Robinson, a former first minister at Stormont, said leaders must recognise the odour of betrayal in the air, saying: We all know where that leads.

The Northern Ireland Protocol which has created a trade border in the Irish Sea to protect the EU single market would lead to laws in the province being made in a Dublin-influenced EU, Unionists feared.

There are forces using the exigencies of Brexit to advance a programme of constitutional change through stealth and propaganda, Mr Robinson said, in a newspaper article.

My advice to those who are driving this agenda forward is as short as it is restrained. Take care.

Read more:

Some opposition would be vented more robustly than protest voting and be met with greater tolerance than it deserves, the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) until 2015 said.

We are perilously close to a line which, when crossed, will lock us all into a pattern all too familiar to my generation, he added.

Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday

Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday

The article comes amid stalemate over attempts to solve the crisis affecting imports from the UK because of vast red tape created by Boris Johnsons EU withdrawal deal.

The EU has started legal action after the UK unilaterally delayed further checks and the two sides have not held direct talks involving ministers for one month.

Supply problems that emptied supermarket shelves have eased, but the UK government admitted they would return if grace periods were ended, as agreed under the 2019 Protocol.

Last month, food inspections at Northern Ireland ports were suspended following an upsurge in sinister and menacing behaviour and graffiti appeared to describe port staff as targets.

The DUP has demanded the Protocol be scrapped altogether, but the UK government has rejected that while experts warn there is no alternative to the rules it imposes.

Mr Robinson wrote: It is too easy to either be dismissed as a scaremonger or attacked for sabre-rattling.

Unionists believed their rights are being violated, he said, adding: They reflect on the commitments they were given, and which have been appallingly broken leaving the odour of betrayal in the air.

Those with wisdom who have their finger on the pulse should recognise the signals when a people become disenchanted with the system.

Mr Robinson said: It would be wrong to assume that in time Unionists will calm down and eventually acquiesce. That is not my assessment.

See the rest here:

Unionist leader warns of violence returning to Northern Ireland because of Brexit betrayal - The Independent

The EU has confirmed biscuits and chocolates will be exempt from the new layers of post-Brexit red tape that threaten to cost manufacturers millions of pounds in extra costs, a Defra official said Thursday.

The move will be of great relief to businesses like Cadbury and McVities, who faced costly export health certificates (EHCs) for every shipment to the EU from April. The FDF warned the additional bureaucracy could make it unviable for many businesses to keep supplying Northern Ireland.

The new EU legislation comes into force on 21 April and will significantly expand the range of products needing an EHC when arriving from third countries such as the UK. These are currently only required on goods that consist predominantly of meat or dairy.

The Chilled Food Association has estimated the change will increase the number of EHCs required by around a third.

One of the biggest concerns was whether foods containing pasteurised milk such as chocolate digestives or curry sauces would require an EHC, but the EU confirmed this week these foods could be shipped with a much simpler private attestation completed by the manufacturer, said David Kennedy, Defras director general for food, farming, animal and plant health.

Thats really important. If they had needed export health certificates it could have been disruptive, he told the environment, food and rural affairs committee on Thursday.

It is understood the commission had concerns over pasteurisation as an acceptable heat treatment for dairy elements in shelf-stable composite products, but these have been addressed.

Other shelf-stable products such as tinned rice pudding will also be exempt, however perishable foods containing low levels of dairy, a Victoria sponge cake for example, will need an EHC signed off by an official veterinarian.

Kennedy told the committee the EU is revamping its entire range of EHCs with 50 new certificates set to come into effect. While foods that dont require an EHC already will need to do so from April, products such as meat and cheese that have needed them since January will have until August to make the switch.

Defra secretary George Eustice said it was inconvenient that weve got these changes just as people get used to some of the previous ones although he recognised it was not due to the EU being more difficult. These changes have been in train for some time he said.

See the rest here:

EU saves biscuits and chocolate from fresh hit of Brexit red tape - The Grocer

A UK honey exporter is within weeks of closure as hauliers refuse to transport its small loads to the EU due to post-Brexit red tape.

The issues are largely driven by groupage the consolidation of small loads into a single lorry in which paperwork errors on one load can end up delaying an entire trucks worth of goods.

Family Foods has asked more than 25 haulage companies to ship two pallets to Europe in recent weeks yet every one has rejected its requests.

The company will be shut within four to eight weeks if it continues as the EU makes up around 70% of its sales, said director Andrew Thain. He bemoaned a lack of government support in easing the barriers facing small companies in particular.

Its really emotional seeing your business crumble around you and the government doing nothing to help, he said. We just need a solution. We dont care what it looks like but at the moment we cant ship anything to Europe which is unacceptable.

While much has been made of the new post-Brexit bureaucracy a BMPA report out this week showed it is now a 23-step process to send a pork chop to Paris Thain said the paperwork is doable the issue is finding anyone to take it.

Small food producers have been shut out of sending produce to the EU since Brexit, according to trade analysis by the FDF this week. It showed food exports collapsed in January with salmon and beef exports almost stopping completely down by 98% and 92% respectively.

Anton Guntar, MD at freight forwarders Global Freight, said it was an absolute disgrace that willing exporters were unable ship their goods, and blamed the laziness of large international hauliers for not pursuing potential solutions.

These big, large hauliers have the resources to be able to sort this out, he said. I think its time they got their head out from the backsides and help the smaller guys. Theyre only interested in the big contracts and the easy freight.

Guntar is working with other exporters facing the same issue, but even when they offered to pay more to cover the potential disruption, many hauliers still rejected their loads.

A Lords committee said this week it was dismayed at the high trade frictions now facing agri-food exports, and Rod McKenzie, MD of policy & public affairs at the Road Haulage Association, suggested such barriers are pushing hauliers to favour the simpler jobs.

This work isnt being taken on because hauliers and freight forwarders think its too much faff, he said. They can do other jobs which are much less stressful and less bureaucratic elsewhere. Not travelling to Europe, for example.

Many in the industry are pushing for the UK to reach a veterinary agreement with the EU that could dramatically reduce the number of SPS checks on food heading to the EU and Northern Ireland. George Eustice publicly backed the plans last month, however it is understood that has been little further progress.

John Davidson, strategy and external relations director at Scotland Food & Drink, called on both sides to show some urgency in addressing the problems. They need to get going and inject some pace into these talks.

A Defra spokesman said the government is providing a range of support to help businesses adjust to the new trading arrangements and it is pleased to see the majority of businesses adapting well to the new requirements.

We are liaising with the European Commission, EU member states and GB hauliers to look at what further guidance can be developed to aid exporters of single pallets. We have developed a new groupage model across the agri-food sector that will help to alleviate some of the difficulties smaller businesses have faced with transitioning to these export arrangements.

Read more from the original source:

UK exporter faces closure within weeks due to Brexit - The Grocer

Philip Woode, principal at Efficio Consulting, explains how a post-Brexit supply chain can be better focused on speed and agility

Procurement, finance and marketing teams must collaborate to achieve a more efficient supply chain post-Brexit.

Since Britains departure from the EU, the nation has been bombarded with news updates of port delays and cross-border friction, as businesses face the immediate shocks of Brexit. In fact, these Brexit teething problems could be symptomatic of widespread disruption that will force many organisations to restructure, or in some cases, will put them out of business altogether. It has become clear, however, that rather than take place as a single event, Brexit will continue as a series of smaller obstacles that businesses are yet to face. As supply chain managers continue to battle with the relentless post-Brexit changes over the months ahead, speed and agility will be essential to keep pace. In order to navigate the unknown landscape ahead, businesses will also need to implement quality procurement solutions as quickly as possible.

But, does a business truly understand how each of these moving parts is functioning and how effective they are being? And is there the ability to re-establish strategies and react quickly? This build-up of uncertainty has become a minefield following Brexit, and it has meant that supply chains have most definitely been stress-tested. In doing so, however, many revealed procurement weaknesses and inefficiencies that already existed. Continual change needs a more joined up business, and the ability to adapt quickly to create value. The following question must be asked: when confronted with an unavoidable incentive for change, such as Brexit, does that change signify more of a challenge or an opportunity for the chief procurement officer (CPO)?

Garry Jones, CEO of Perfect Channel, discusses the hidden procurement hurdles that must be cleared for UK vaccination to be truly successful, and how digital technologies can help. Read here

The answer, as ever, is probably a balance of the two. For many companies, early Brexit assessments indicated that only half of the risks discovered through stress testing the supply chain were exclusively Brexit related.

This largely reflects the evolution of procurement over the past decade, moving away from the idea of or even obsession with control. The right type of contract with suppliers and partners is therefore key. Its important to have a handful of key commitments from your suppliers and customers during any disruption, and businesses need to update contractual frameworks for such events. A joint approach with your key suppliers will help you to establish a more reliable supply chain and improve your strategic partnerships.

The reality is that nobody can predict exactly what will happen in the next 12 months. Brexit is just part of the puzzle that will impact supply risk management. There are other factors to consider, including the new President in the US, and the trade deal between the UK and US needing to be renegotiated, plus Covid-19 and how the vaccine, and the impact of new Covid variants will affect lockdowns. Each brings its own set of challenges, making it essential to be prepared, and this is where the processes put in place for Brexit will be an advantage to mitigate other change.

When challenges are being fired from all angles, its clear that the narrative, the approach, and general attitudes to the supply chain all need to change in order to survive a changing landscape. This requires both an external mindset change in how businesses compile and manage their supply chain networks and procurement channels and also an internal overhaul beyond procurement being a siloed operation.

Addressing the former, the CPO needs to completely rethink how the industry is evolving despite the unknowns. When youre struggling for complete clarity or precision in your forecasts, then there at least needs to be heightened agility and resilience to whatever trends you may face in the future.

Initially, this requires more of a conjoined outlook alongside the marketing director to attain a stronger picture of the supply and demand equation. A business cannot prepare for what it may need to procure in the future if it doesnt know what is likely to be in demand. It sounds simple, but at present this notion is often negated by a siloed approach.

Covid-19 has shone an additional spotlight on this above necessity, proving that demand volume, trends, prices and goods isnt a constant in any environment, and cant be based around historic data and individual decisions. By establishing stronger insights into market demands, organisations can then focus on preparing a more flexible and diversified network that will meet these needs, while also offsetting unforeseen challenges that could derail supply channels.

Traditionally, the CPO has tried to limit the number of suppliers across the network. Now, when faced with the prospect of increased tariffs, customs checks, lengthened supply times, data regulation clashes and a host of additional unknowns, the physical network and the terms being agreed have to become more diverse and malleable off the back of this more conjoined outlook.

Recent developments in EU data protection have created great uncertainty for businesses in relation to cross-border data transfers, according to Tim Hickman, partner at White & Case LLP. Read here

As alluded to already via a stronger connection between CPO and marketing director, the second phase of change needs to happen internally. The breaking down of department silos will be key in navigating supply chain challenges as it will present the most holistic and informed picture possible, even if that picture still isnt complete.

This needs to occur across procurement, marketing, and finance primarily, with stronger communication channels established. For example, marketing and procurement need to agree a better demand profile; procurement must then look at the incoming supply chain options and scenarios, including risk management; and finally, marketing, procurement, and finance must all agree a response to the changes in the supply chain. The result will be a better understanding that comes from solid procurement work, and means all areas of the business are in agreement on how to manage impacts. By proxy, improved communication with that inbound supply chain will ensure an additional layer of foresight and collaboration at a time where independent guesswork simply isnt viable.

Working together, from manufacturing to sale, again seems like an obvious strategy. But it has traditionally been avoided due to a sense of mistrust between each silo. Self-preservation and a desire to protect their own departments or interests, has created a hierarchal strain where the CPO often takes the brunt.

Times of crisis are a great time to forego these conflicts, however. And, by creating a more linear and collaborative dynamic between internal disciplines, and then the supplier portfolio, organisations can form a more united and robust defence in the face of unprecedented challenges.

Adrian Overall, CEO of CloudStratex, discusses his campaign for change within public sector IT projects and procurement. Read here

Many have learned that a business focus must be applied to the procurement function when reacting to a changing world. In essence, it is time to shake up the procurement department and prepare for the future. Upskilling procurement teams will be vital for this process, so that they are prepared to deal with the wide-ranging issues and variables heading their way to ensure they have the right knowledge and tools to navigate a post-Brexit supply chain.

The more open and aligned conversations that take place in the coming months, the more prepared businesses will be to manage procurement challenges triggered by both Brexit and Covid-19. And beyond that, it will be more likely that theyll be to set their procurement function on a better trajectory than has been in place over the past 10-15 years. So, not only are business working to overcome the challenges being presented today, but they are automatically putting plans in place to capitalise on tomorrows opportunities.

Those businesses that were previously failing to inject resilience and visibility into their supply chains have been given a free pass to start again. As the impact of Brexit becomes clearer, businesses that fail to adapt risk face a minefield of challenges. This could hinder your organisations progress even further once we come out the other side. Instead, reacting to the changes as a series of smaller obstacles with speed and agility will be instrumental in building an effective supply chain post-Brexit.

Read more from the original source:

A post-Brexit supply chain relies on speed and agility - Information Age

The Remainers who delivered Brexit: decisions by Tory PMs Theresa May and David Cameron led to the UKs EU exit. Credit: Andrew Parsons/Flickr

The roots of Brexit go deep. Within a few years of the UK joining the then-European Economic Community in 1973, Oliver Letwin a veteran Tory policy guru, MP and minister, known for providing astute advice in private and faux pas in public was among the Conservatives growing group of Eurosceptics.

For decades, says Letwin, he argued that the common market, the Single Market, was a good idea and beneficial to our trade and standing in the world. But the apparatus of central control from Brussels that was leading towards an emerging European state, while maybe very suitable for some other European countries, wasnt ever going to be acceptable here.

Letwin believed that the UK should retain its Single Market membership, while avoiding other forms of convergence. But his colleagues were adopting much more radical positions: by the time his party leader David Cameron won the 2015 general election, he says, many of them had got to the: We must get completely out of all of this forever and have nothing further to do with it position.

Nonetheless, Brexit let alone the hard Brexit ultimately secured by PM Boris Johnson was far from inevitable. Some of the missteps and omissions that shaped the UKs Brexit journey, and the challenges facing civil servants working for a divided party, have already been revealed in interviews with many of the key players published by research group UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE). And now weve returned for a third excavation of UKICEs archive.

In interviews with Letwin and four key Tory advisers, we unearth six key inflection points: particular decisions or behaviours which brought the UK to its current position. Here we cover three of these inflection points, and next week well pick out three more covering decision-making processes, 2016-19 prime minister Theresa Mays self-imposed red lines, and the Democratic Unionist Partys ill-judged hubris.

David Camerons 2013 decision to promise an in-out EU referendum was conceived as a way to secure Britains place in the EU once and for all. At the time, the PM felt he had little choice: Denzil Davidson then an adviser to the foreign secretary, and later Mays special adviser on Europe believes that the fight against the referendum had been lost in the Conservative Party, and it was perfectly clear that whoever succeeded David Cameron would be in favour of a referendum. Better, the PM thought, to keep the process in the hands of those whod back Remain.

Whats more, explains Letwin, Cameron feared that Nigel Farages UK Independence Party could deny his party a majority at the 2015 election; promising a referendum would rob them of electoral support. And some of Camerons allies were quietly hoping that theyd end up back in Coalition talks with the Liberal Democrats, being required to trade away their referendum pledge: I had prepared documents ready to sign on that basis, recalls Letwin.

Chris Wilkins, a veteran Tory speechwriter and Mays director of strategy during her first year in office, says the referendum had been injected for party management purposes and for political purposes. If wed come out of the election with the Coalition government that we were all expecting, it might well have been put on the back burner. For many people, he adds, winning the 2015 election was a surprise. And suddenly you were landed with this problem: this sort of unexploded bomb, which you werent expecting to have to deal with.

Camerons plan for defusing this bomb involved renegotiating the UKs terms of membership with the EU, securing guarantees that would calm peoples fears of an ever-expanding EU superstate. But his 2009 decision to pull the Tories out of the European Peoples Party the centre-right group of European parties had weakened his relationships with key national leaders, says Davidson: they didnt realise what David Cameron was up against, domestically, and did not appreciate his political needs. While the PM won some useful concessions, none were eye-catching enough to shift the debate.

At the time, Letwin thought the agreement would put a brake on further integration and shift the relationship subtly, but very importantly, between us and the European Court of Justice which I regarded as the main issue. But such constitutional nuances did not survive contact with a referendum campaign fought on the binary battleground of Leave or Remain. In Wilkins view, the referendum was never going to be about what he came back with in terms of the renegotiation. The outcome wasnt a bad package, he explains, but it was slightly irrelevant to the main question. Voters werent going to be going through it line by line: the debate was much more visceral and emotional than that and that was the game you had to engage in.

Brexiteers certainly understood that, and focused on immigration and the UKs history as a global trader and Empire-builder. A Remain campaign led by long-standing Eurosceptics people whod spent years downplaying the benefits of EU membership could never show the same passion. During the 2010-15 Coalition, recalls Davidson, the Brexiteers often successfully intimidated Number 10 into not broaching the positive arguments for the EU, for fear of the stink, the discord, that it would cause in the party when they had their eyes on winning the next election. The renegotiation achieved many of its tactical goals, but proved a strategic failure.

On losing the referendum Cameron resigned, called a leadership contest, and handed the task of preparing the ground for Brexit to Letwin who began talking to the opposition parties. Strong Remainers in Parliament, he felt, would seek to frustrate any exit talks, while hard Brexiteers simply wanted to be out full stop, with no compromise of any kind about the future relationship.

In his view, the only way to keep those two groupings under control was to have a solid phalanx of 400-plus members of Parliament who were joined in a single pursuit. By building a cross-party consensus around a relatively soft Brexit, he believed, one could wend ones way towards something that would be a unified, smooth transition to a different relationship.

Letwin was exploring the potential for continued alignment to the Single Market or a close trade deal. But when May came to power in July, she promptly sacked him. Im no doubt it was all of that thinking in part that led Theresa to think it was an urgent necessity to be rid of me, he comments. She took the view that it was necessary, if at all possible, to avoid the very thing that I thought it was necessary to promote: namely, cross-party governance of this issue.

Given the parliamentary strength of the European Reform Group (ERG) of backbench Conservative Brexiteers, Mays approach was risky even with the slender Commons majority she inherited from Cameron. And when she lost that majority in a disastrous 2017 general election, she doubled down: to avert a leadership challenge, she hardened her Brexit position securing a tiny majority through an alliance with Northern Irelands Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).

Wilkins would have liked to have seen May adopt a more consensual, more cross-party approach in the weeks after the election. I dont know how you could look at that election result and say the message the country is sending us is that they really want a really hard Brexit, he comments. But at that point, senior Brexiteers were terrified that their long-held goal might slip through their fingers. They got around the PM and my belief is, I think they said to her: You can stay as long as you drop everything else and just make our version of Brexit happen, says Wilkins. It stemmed from a fear that the whole thing was about to come crashing down.

It sounds obvious that she shouldve taken a slightly different approach and tried to build coalitions, comments Raoul Ruparel, then adviser to Brexit secretary David Davis. But had she done so, she probably would have been removed immediately. This is the fundamental tension with all of this. That persisted for a long time, and its why it took so long to get any kind of clarity on the approach. There was a bit of a paralysis of fear that, whichever way you move, youre going to get taken down.

For Letwin, Mays new Parliamentary weakness only deepened the need to find votes across the aisle. Perhaps it was already too late to build a consensus, he adds: Anyway, she didnt try. My level of anxiety about the lack of bipartisan governance of the matter increased from considerable to extreme at that point. Two years later, May did finally approve talks with Labour but by then, says Letwin, the dynamic within each political party, and in particular the dynamic of the two leaders, ultimately made it impossible.

That personal dynamic was certainly important. In Davidsons words, the centre right viewed Corbyn as a Kremlin-hugging terrorist cheerleader who has been against his country in every dispute: the mutual hostility between Conservative MPs and the Labour leader from the start, I think, shaped the evolution of Brexit. Had Labour still been led by Corbyns predecessor Ed Miliband, he believes, you could have had a smidgeon of a conversation where you might talk about the national interest.

By the end of 2018, recalls Letwin, I could only see around me positions hardening to the point where we were going to be faced with the cataclysmic choice between two evils: not leaving, or leaving without a deal. May was in big trouble: Almost everything that was happening to her was happening in a way that she didnt want and wasnt planning. I didnt think she was in control any more; I thought there were forces that were way beyond her capacity to control.

If May couldnt get an exit deal through Parliament by March 2019, the UK faced crashing out of the EU without arrangements for citizens rights, the Irish border and other crucial issues. I thought it was entirely possible that she would end up leaving without a deal because she couldnt find a way of not leaving without a deal except not leaving, which she couldnt do either, says Letwin, who rebelled for the first time in his 20-year Commons career to join fellow moderates trying to prevent a disorderly exit.

I hadnt ever even abstained: I could be counted on to vote for things that I very much disliked, because they were the things the party was doing and I recognised that a party is a coalition of interests and views, he comments. But at this particular moment, I thought the nation was faced with a particularly severe risk. The party and the country had got themselves into a position where they werent going to be able to deliver a reasonable solution.

After months of rancorous debate and two extensions to the exit date, May stepped down in 2019. Her successor, Boris Johnson, agreed a new exit deal addressing the Irish border issue by leaving Northern Ireland largely within the EUs regulatory ambit then won a large majority in a December election, and negotiated a thin trade deal with the EU.

His policy leaves exporters facing swathes of new non-tariff barriers, from the need for work permits to hefty new administrative costs, and offers little to the services businesses that dominate the UKs economy. Further restrictions and rules are on their way, as this weeks Institute for Government report makes clear. Does this represent Letwins reasonable solution?

Well, the hard Brexiteers are content but Remainers, moderates on both sides, the devolved administrations, and the DUP are very much not. And the public havent got what they were promised during the referendum campaign by Leavers, who maintained that British businesses wouldnt face new barriers to trade with the Continent.

Faced with this highly complex and divisive issue, the UKs political system has delivered a zero-sum, winner-takes-all result more extreme than anything proposed by the most hardened Brexiteers back in 2016. To the extent that democracy involves finding solutions to divisive issues that command the broadest possible public support, that system has clearly failed.

There are some strengths in the binary way our system works, but it is set up to foster division, says Davidson. The problems of a failure to look for consensus have been demonstrated over the past few years. And Letwin worries that these days, the UKs public debate is too rarely a discussion between grown-ups who accept that people can honestly and rationally hold differing views.

There is real merit in competitive democracy Theres real merit in debate, in bringing out the arguments on either side, he says. These things are built into our legal system, theyre built into our Parliamentary system and long may they remain.

But if that productive dialectic just turns into catcalling and a refusal to accept that the other side is motivated by anything other than low motives, the system will not work properly, Letwin concludes. We face many problems as a country at the moment, but I think thats the biggest underlying problem were likely to face over the next 20 or 30 years. If that lack of mutual respect in politics goes on being the case, we wont be able to tackle the very serious problems we all face because were just going to be having a continuous argy-bargy between people who arent recognising the force of each others arguments.

Read the rest here:

Secret story: inside the delivery suite with the reluctant midwives of Brexit - Global Government Forum

ITS not actually called the Festival of Brexit of course. The working title for next years extravaganza is, in fact, Festival UK* 2022. But when the first news of what might be on offer under its auspices emerged earlier this week every newspaper used the label Festival of Brexit somewhere in their reports. Usually in the headline.

Thats the baggage this particular festival will have to carry one of suspicion and division until it finally emerges blinking into the light.

The original idea for a festival was first announced by Theresa May when she was Prime Minister and was then backed by Boris Johnson. In the circumstances you can understand why any suspicion might be baked in.

May wanted the event to strengthen our precious union, something, you might argue, she had done her best to undermine thanks to her pursuit of Brexit. As a result, there are many who are not naturally inclined to embrace the festival.

The danger is Festival UK* 2022 will always be seen as too Brexity by angry Remainers and not Brexity enough by those who quite like the idea of a festival thats all flags, The Fizz (Bucks Fizz, as was) and Jim Davidson.

There are reasons to be hopeful for it, though. The chief creative officer is Martin Green who is widely seen to have done a fine job as head of Hulls City of Culture Year in 2017. He was also Head of Ceremonies for the London Olympics in 2012. All the devolved governments have bought into the project and plenty of notable arts organisations including the National Theatre of Scotland, Celtic Connections and Edinburgh International Festival have got involved.

Read More: My distaste for this Prime Minister is visceral

And given everything that has happened over the last 12 months any money for culture is to be welcomed. The arts have been decimated over the last year because of the pandemic, so 120 million is not to be sniffed at, wherever its coming from.

Plus, frankly, the UK government owes the creative industries. After all, it has done its best to undermine them via its inept Brexit deal one that has thrown up serious challenges for musicians and the fashion industry in particular.

As an aside, you do wish they offered help with a little more grace, right enough. Instead, this is a government that too often sees culture as something to be weaponised. When the Culture Recovery Fund was announced last year, reports emerged that organisations who benefited from it had to announce their gratitude to the government via social media.

Whether what emerges next year will enthral us remains to be seen. I find it difficult to get too excited at previews that flag up a celebration of the British weather or Glasgow-based Aproxima Arts promising the largest grow-your-own food project of modern time. But it may be wonderful. Time will tell.

That said, its difficult to see how it can ever quite be the unifying celebration thats desired. As a country we are divided more than ever. The idea that a festival will offer an effective sticking plaster to cover the gaping wound seems more than a bit hopeful.

So, in the end, you do have to ask whats it actually for? In a year that will not be short of festivals there will also be the Commonwealth Games in Birmingham and a Platinum Jubilee to be getting on with too how can it stand out?

The people behind it would no doubt say by producing good work. Heres hoping.

Link:

Teddy Jamieson: Do we really need a 'Festival of Brexit'? - HeraldScotland

Brexit is a massive opportunity for criminals, a webinar on serious and organised crime in the UK and Ireland was told on Wednesday.

Professor Gloria Laycock, of University College London, made the remark when saying she believed the UK leaving the EU was among the issues that those concerned with fighting organised crime in Ireland and the UK had to contend with.

The Professor of Crime Science said that the nature of crime was changing dramatically and that policing also needed to change.

One of the ways to reduce crime was to increase the risks for criminals, and reduce the rewards, she said.

If I was in charge, Id double the amount of money being given to the Criminal Assets Bureau. Go for the money. Its a really great idea.

Prof Laycock said there would be no point in CAB seizing criminals assets but not telling people about it. Offenders needed to be made feel less comfortable, she said.

Anarine McAllister, a solicitor with Michael Staines & Co, said the fact that the UK was no longer part of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) system would have potentially serious consequences for the prosecution of serious and organised crime in the future.

Irelands largest trading partner in terms of the EAW system has been the UK. The two jurisdictions need to retain a fluid extradition system if we are to harbour any hope of combating organised crime in the future, she said.

The EAW system has been described as being three times faster, and four times less expensive, than the alternatives.

Because the UK is no longer subject to the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it may over time develop its own law in relation to extradition, she told the webinar.

The webinar, which was organised by Sar Consultancy,with support from the British embassy in Dublin, was also addressed by the Chief Bureau Officer of CAB, Det Chief Supt Michael Gubbins, who spoke about the bureaus role in seizing the proceeds of crime.

Det Chief Supt Gubbins said CAB had trained 471 people outside the bureau, most of whom were members of An Garda Sochna but some were with the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social Protection, to act as asset profilers.

They are trained to be the eyes and ears of CAB around the State and to look out for potential targets for CABs attention.

Man caves, houses with excessive spending on renovations, bulletproof glass, expensive cars, repeat exotic holidays and the ownership of high-value goods, such as bags, jewellery, watches and store cards, are among the clues that local profilers are trained to look out for, he said.

The bureau targets small and medium-sized crime groups, as well as larger organisations, as this helps to prevent criminals progressing to more serious crime, and sends out an example to others.

He encourages the bureau to take part in events such as the webinar as he thinks it is important to let citizens know what law enforcement is doing.

See more here:

Brexit is a massive opportunity for criminals, conference hears - The Irish Times

A celebration of the British weather and the largest grow-your-own food project of modern times will be among the events being staged for a nationwide festival of creativity aimed at bringing the UK together in 2022.

Organisers of the 120m festival, commissioned by Theresa Mays government and supported by Boris Johnson, announced 10 teams who had successfully pitched ideas.

The festival remains a divisive one. In some eyes it is a politically motivated festival of Brexit, but its supporters say that is the last thing it will be. Its chief creative officer, Martin Green, said it was about bringing people together and celebrating creativity in events that are open, original and optimistic.

Others balk at the cost, while supporters point to the work it brings to creative freelancers ravaged by the pandemic. Dont write it off, argued a Guardian editorial in September.

It has a working title of Festival UK 2022, but that will be replaced with a better name before the year is out.

On Tuesday 10 teams were named, chosen from 30 that had taken part in a three-month paid research and development process. The idea is that the successful teams give a flavour of what their project is about, but the public will have to wait for full details.

A team led by the Glasgow-based Aproxima Arts will offer a unique approach to community growing celebrating music, future food technology and sustainable festivals. Part of that will be the largest grow-your-own project of modern times.

Angus Farquhar, the creative director, said the plan was to empower as many people as possible to grow their own food and would involve spaces being reclaimed to allow that. But he added: Im conscious of giving too much away.

That wait and see element is true for all the teams, including one led by the Leeds-based events studio Newsubstance, which is promising a physical manifestation and celebration of the British weather and UK coastline involving a large-scale installation that addresses global questions, encourages playfulness, elicits joy and presents an experiment in change.

All the teams are strikingly mixed in terms of specialisms and may include poets, film-makers or mathematicians. Other groups in the Newsubstance team include Dose of Society, a video platform for unheard voices; the British Antarctic Survey; and the kinetic sculptor Ivan Black.

The Turner prize-winning architecture collective Assemble are leading a team promising an immersive experience exploring the wonder of the human mind through architecture, neuroscience, technology, light and sound.

The Salford-based Walk the Plank, known for outdoor spectaculars, head a team exploring the outdoor beauty of the UK and asking questions about access, taking part, landscape and the future of public spectacle.

The festival has been cursed by the festival of Brexit label since the start, which may well have prevented some people and organisations taking part.

Claire Doherty, an associate creative director of National Theatre Wales, another team leader, said the process had been incredibly open and transparent We trust Martin [Green]. Our team said how can we use this investment to help recovery after the pandemic, how can we make sure this project really looks at who is under-represented and overlooked and listen to those voices.

Green, whose CV includes the Olympic ceremonies and Hull city of culture, said the festival was one of a number of big events due to take place in the UK in 2022, including the Queens platinum jubilee and the Commonwealth Games in Birmingham.

The festival is funded by the UK government but Green said the devolved governments were fully onboard.

Scotlands culture secretary, Fiona Hyslop, said it had been inspiring to see creative and Stem (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) sectors working together to share their talents. This is an important opportunity to support freelancers and organisations in these sectors as we begin our recovery from the pandemic, she said.

Read more here:

Festival of Brexit': first events for divisive 120m project announced - The Guardian

SCOTLANDseconomyhas benefited from a range of advantages that few other countries of similar size can match. Our natural wealth is a key foundation stone for a prosperous future as an independent country and it is simply unreasonable to believe that a country as naturally wealthy as Scotland would not thrive if it were to gain the power to manage these resources for Scotlands benefit.

There is plenty of evidence to back up that claim, not least the fact that we have already utilised our natural resources and combined them with ingenuity to develop the specialist products that are in demand all over the world. So much so that Scotland has become an exporting powerhouse.

We have become very used to being told Scotland is too small to stand on its own feet and needs the support of the larger UK to thrive. We have shown in earlier articles in this series that the opposite is true. In reality, being part of the UK holds our country back from reaching its true economic potential.

Such claims are simply not true, as can be proved by focusing on the huge contributions Scotland makes to the wider UK economy.

Whisky, for instance, was the UKs largest food and drink export in 2019, worth 4.9 billion, 21% of the UK total value of exports. Scottish seafood exports were worth a massive 1.02m in 2019. And Scotlands non-EU exports of goods and services have increased by 95% since 2002. Our goods and products are much in demand from Europe and elsewhere in the world but this is yet another example of how being part of the UK is working against our best interests.

Brexit has been imposed on Scotland despite the fact Scots voted against leaving the UK. In less than three months it has proved hugely damaging to Scottish exports to Europe, which have suffered disproportionately.

READ MORE:Would Scotland have to go to the back of the queue to join the EU?

The figures show a grim picture. Scottish exports of food and live animals to the EU were the hardest hit by Brexit, collapsing by 63.6% in January compared to the same month last year. That was much worse than the UK drop of 40.7%.

Office for National Statistics figures reports that Scotlands largest food export category, fish and shellfish, was down a staggering 83% over the same period. Meat and dairy also suffered with exports plunging 59% and 50% respectively.

Another report, this time by the Scottish Food and Drink Federation was even worse. It showed salmon exports were down by 98%, beef exports dropped by 91.5%, pork by 86.9% and cheese by 84.9% in January compared to the same month in 2020. These terrible results were down to Brexit. If our democratically expressed wish to stay in Europe had been heeded our economy would not have been damaged by these dramatic drops.

Scotland has been more badly affected than other areas of the UK for the simple reason that we export more. If we look back at the pre-Brexit figures for the international exports of goods for all the UK nations produced by HM Revenue and Customs, we see that Scotland is the only UK nation to have exported more goods internationally than it has imported every year since records began. That is literally the opposite of a deficit.

The value of Scotlands goods exports per head is more than double those achieved by the rest of the UK. The rest of the UKs, and especially Englands international trade deficit in goods is massive and with the chaotic aftermath of Brexit, and increased economic instability, it is likely that the UK trade deficit will worsen significantly.

In the past few years Northern Ireland has generated a surplus in goods, but persistently operated a deficit in the past. England and Wales always run persistent deficits in international trade in goods.

Scotlands international exports in goods and services have risen by 64% since 2002. Scotlands non-EU exports of goods and services increased by 95% at the same time.

A surplus in international trade in goods is a key strength of Scotlands economy. Its strong not just in UK terms but also compared to similar northern European nations. Denmark sets the gold standard in exports, so is clearly a nation that Scotland needs to aspire to match in the medium-to-longer term. However, Denmark does not even come close to having our natural wealth, or as broad-based an economy as Scotland enjoys.

Achieving a greater exporting ratio per head than nations such as Finland and Sweden and being close to Norway is a significant result for Scotland. Becoming independent is the only way to make sure that our exporting success story continues and that the disastrous downturns in our exports to Europe are reversed.

By contrast, Brexit is posing serious threats to even some of the most successful parts of the UK economy. London, for instance, was the largest financial trading centre in Europe until Brexit-related changes to finance rules came into force. Now Amsterdam has overtaken it.

Following new Brexit rules, EU-based banks wanting to buy European shares currently cannot trade via London, meaning a loss of fees for City firms.

A new poll by YouGov this week found that 52% of UK businesses had been disrupted by Brexit. Three quarter of those expected the problems to last a long time. Of those companies which do a moderate or large amount of trading with Europe, 60% expect the situation to get worse rather than better.

Boris Johnson and his Cabinets obsession with Brexit will never allow them to reconsider the decision to leave Europe so the UK is looking at a future in which the current problems will only increase. And remember Scotland is disproportionately badly hit by Brexit. That means the problems are even worse in a country that voted AGAINST Brexit.

An opinion poll just this week showed that a desire to rejoin Europe was the issue that could drive a majority independence vote in a future independence referendum.

But as long as we are governed by Westminster, rejoining Europe will never be on the table. Luckily Scotland has an alternative, all we need to do is grasp it. Now that the Leave vote in the rest of the UK has removed Scotland from the EU we have to rejoin and that will take time. We may have to wait as long as four years to become full members but we can in the shorter term join the European Economic Area (the EU Single Market) without being full EU members. That would take less time as Scotland already meets all the criteria having been EU members for so long. In other words, a Norway style deal that also gives us flexibility in our trading relationship with the rest of the UK after independence.

When we do so Scotlands many vital advantages and significant untapped potential will allow us to develop our already successful exporting record without being held back by the UK. Escaping the dead hand of Westminster policies and the pressing new dangers of Brexit will be a huge boon to Scottish exports and the Scottish economy. They will thrive with the bespoke policies and attention they can only receive in an independent Scotland.

Thisis the 13th in a series of 24 articles for undecided voters which we are running over 12 weeks. To participate in the Yes Challenge, give your unique code to somebody you want us to talk to about indy and direct them to http://www.thenational.scot/subscribe/openminds. If you have any problems with the unique codes, or want additional codes, please email us at campaign@thenational.scot and to find out more about this campaign visit http://www.yeschallenge.scot!

See the article here:

Open Minds #13: Only independence can fix damage of Brexit - The National

BusinessA Morayshire craft brewer that had built up a loyal following for its distinctive beers has fallen into administration amid hospitality and Brexit headwinds.

Friday, 26th March 2021, 11:37 am

Wooha Brewing Company, which is based in Kinloss, was founded in 2015 by Heather McDonald. It had built a substantial export business for its range of craft beers and regular seasonal releases.

Eye-catching brand names such as Roch N Rol, Hop Stampede and Jenny from the Bock helped the business secure trade partnerships across a growing number of markets including China, Russia, Italy, Finland, Israel and the US.

The administration is said to have been caused by unsustainable cash flow problems arising from the rapid contraction of the global hospitality and licensed trade industry and costs for exporters arising from Brexit.

Since 2017, Wooha Brewing has been operating from a purpose-built 16,000-square-foot facility in Kinloss with the capacity to support fast-growing demand.

Since its inception, the business has raised 2.3 million from private investors which included a high-profile crowd-funding campaign. The investment helped create the infrastructure required to support an expanding export business and finance a major rebranding.

Iain Fraser and Tom MacLennan, partners with FRP, have been appointed joint administrators.

Fraser said: Wooha Brewing Company is a high-profile craft brewing business with a substantial and growing trade and consumer client base. The business had grown rapidly in recent years, was well financed, and had a clear strategy and positioning in a crowded market.

The business has unfortunately been severely affected by a combination of Covid, the contraction of its main markets and the bureaucracy of Brexit. Despite every effort by the directors to keep the business trading and ensure the company would be able to capitalise on the recovery when it comes, the severe financial problems meant that administration was the only option.

Unfortunately, 12 members of staff have been made redundant with immediate effect, with two staff being retained to assist with the administration process.

We will be working closely with the Redundancy Payments Service and other agencies to minimise the impact on the staff. We will also be looking to sell the business and assets, either in whole or in part as quickly as possible.

A message from the Editor:

Read this article:

Scottish craft brewer goes bust as lockdown and Brexit take their toll - The Scotsman