Category Archives: Brexit

LONDON (AP) One month after Britain made a New Year split from the European Unions economic embrace, businesses that once traded freely are getting used to frustrating checks, delays and red tape.

British meat exporters say shipments have rotted in trucks awaiting European health checks. Scottish fishermen have protested at Parliament over the catch they can no longer sell to the continent because of complex new paperwork.

The manufacturers organization Make U.K. said Monday that 60% of manufacturing companies have experienced significant disruption since Jan. 1.

The British government says the troubles are teething problems, but companies say they are causing serious pain.

A teething problem is something that will go away eventually, said Alan Russell, who runs plant retailer Trees Online. New customs rules and health checks have prompted him to stop shipping to the EU and to Northern Ireland, which is part of the U.K. but remains in the blocs economic orbit because it shares a border with EU member Ireland.

Its 5 or 10% of my business I have just lost overnight, Russell said. Im used to a little bit of unpredictability. But this is without doubt the most severe and unpredictable event that I cant do anything about.

Britain left the EU politically a year ago, and quit the blocs single market and customs union at the end of 2020. A post-Brexit U.K.-EU trade deal means goods can still move without tariffs or quotas, but businesses face new costs, paperwork and barriers. While many firms prepared as best they could, details of the new arrangements were not nailed down until the trade deal was sealed on Dec. 24, just over a week before it took effect.

The British government is accentuating the positive. U.K. supermarkets have not run short of food, in part due to businesses stockpiling against uncertainty caused by Brexit and the coronavirus pandemic. Traffic jams have not piled up at English Channel ports, and the government says its reasonable worst-case scenario of 7,000-truck tailbacks is now unlikely.

Cross-Channel traffic is flowing relatively smoothly, with less than 5% of trucks being turned back because drivers lack the correct paperwork, the government says.

Business groups say thats because some companies are simply staying away. The flow of goods is only about three-quarters of its January 2020 level, and Make U.K. says many firms have put a hold on importing and exporting from the EU in a hope that things improve.

While many British businesses expected hurdles to trade with the EU, those that ship to Northern Ireland from other parts of the U.K. have found they also face new customs and veterinary checks as part of measures to maintain an open border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic to the south.

An open Irish border, free of checks on goods or people, has played a major role in building peace in the region. The sensitivity of the issue was underscored last week, when the EU threatened to ban shipments of coronavirus vaccines to Northern Ireland as part of moves to shore up the blocs supply. That would have drawn a hard border on the island of Ireland exactly the scenario the Brexit deal was crafted to avoid. British, Irish and Northern Ireland politicians all expressed alarm at the plan, and the EU dropped the idea.

U.K. business groups say firms need more support to overcome post-Brexit hurdles. Make U.K. urged the British government and the EU to simplify customs paperwork and to cut rules of origin red tape that has left businesses struggling to prove their goods are British and thus eligible for tariff-free trade.

The British government says it is spending millions to help companies adjust. But it also says some of the new trade friction is permanent.

Weve always been clear that trading as a third-party country would involve processes, the similar processes that you have for trading with the United States or Japan or any other countries, International Trade Secretary Liz Truss said Sunday.

Brexit supporters say any short-term pain will be offset by Britains new freedom to set its own economic agenda and strike trade deals around the world. On Monday Britain applied to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade bloc of 11 countries including Japan, Singapore, Australia, Canada and Mexico.

Critics note Britains 111 billion pounds ($152 billion) in annual trade with the Pacific bloc is a fraction of the 670 pounds ($920 billion) a year in trade between the U.K. and the EU.

Trade expert David Henig of the European Centre for International Political Economy said the British government was not levelling with people.

They are saying teething problems when it is actually a permanent economic shift, he said. Certain things are just going to become a lot harder.

Its a long-term economic adjustment that this is leading to.

___

Follow all AP stories about Brexit and British politics at httcrps://apnews.com/Brexit

Go here to read the rest:

A month on, post-Brexit 'teething problems' hit UK-EU trade - The Associated Press

I enjoyed Ben Fletchers vivid image of Dantes fifth circle of hell for the post-Brexit channel crossings (Report, 31 January).

Theres a big difference, though: in Dante the poor souls are suffering their torment as punishment for their own sins (intemperate anger), whereas at Dover the lorry drivers are enduring their misery because of the sins of others (and one hopes the drivers righteous anger would therefore not be considered sinful).

But I wonder in what circle of hell Dante would place those who are responsible for the chaos. Presumably somewhere in the eighth but is it among the fraudulent counsellors, or the falsifiers, or even the treacherous to country and cause?Martina Crowther-MennCambridge

To claim that the last thing Britain needs is to fall apart in a fit of absence of mind (Editorial, 28 January) is to ignore Englands uncompromising Brexit, forced through in an absence of mind. I have changed my mind on independence. It will be difficult but worth it worth it to be rid of Westminster. Let Scotland decide.Matt RitchieInverness

See more here:

To hell with Brexit and Westminster - The Guardian

There is little doubt what is currently the angriest programme on air: Radio 4s Farming Today. Every morning, enraged farmers and despairing fishers fume as their food rots in lorries and warehouses, unable to export to Europe or even Northern Ireland because of Brexit. Fishing boats lie idle. Meat cannot be moved. The talk is of animal product bans, faulty vet certificates, 50-page customs forms and impossible bureaucracy.

Engineering and manufacturing body Make UK says six out of 10 trading companies now suffer significant border disruption. Northern Irish eels suddenly cant be sold in London. More than 100,000 British pigs are stranded. Families and firms slide towards bankruptcy. Where now the promised frictionless Brexit?

Tut-tut says the occasional government minister, with talk of teething troubles or mere bumps in the road. Liz Truss, the trade secretary, says: We havent seen those predictions of Armageddon come true. Cue explosions of frustration and anger from the frontline of the food, retail and haulage industries. Why were we never warned?

The difference between an act of God and an act of government is a fine one. The government is now compensating individuals and firms extensively for its enforced lockdown of the economy due to coronavirus. The lockdown is rightly seen as an act of policy, even if occasioned by an act of God. The government should pay.

To the best of my knowledge, God was not involved in Brexit. In particular, implementing it by leaving the customs union was specifically a choice of Boris Johnson and his government. Politicians maintain that it was the public who, as Tory MP Neil Parish told the BBC, voted to come out of the single market and customs union. It did not. It voted to come out of the EU and was never asked if it wanted also to leave the customs union, let alone told what leaving might mean. It was told a lie that leaving the customs union would be frictionless. Other countries such as Norway are outside the EU but enjoy free trade within the customs union. The UK may have tariff-free trade but it is not frictionless.

How much of the current trauma is temporary remains to be seen, but that is not an issue. Leaving the customs union not to mention other features of the single market was an ideological whim. The victims of this whim manifestly deserve compensation every bit as much as those suffering from lockdown: both are bearing a crippling personal cost for a benefit, real or supposed, to the nation as a whole. In the case of Brexit, the damage is plainly the result of a political decision and its incompetent implementation. It is a massive regulatory failure. As ministers claim the decision to leave the customs union is greatly to the benefit of all, then all should pay its losers.

The same principle applies to the 700,000 hapless residents of dangerous flats, still stuck in buildings with flammable cladding almost four years after the Grenfell Tower fire. They too are the innocent victims of a state policy in favour of tower blocks, and a state failure to subsequently inspect and regulate their construction. If a car design is unsafe, its makers and inspectors are responsible, not its users. The same applies to a flat, even if the eventual cost is enormous. Any dispute should be between a towers owners, constructors and regulators, not its occupants.

As an urgent first response, the state should cover all residents insurance costs. This is not a case of negligent buyers but of bad government. Be it lockdown, the fallout from the Brexit trade deal or unsafe apartment blocks, the government should pay.

Read the original post:

The government must pay the farmers and fishers struggling with its bad Brexit deal - The Guardian

With disruptions at European borders and supply chains perturbed by new tariffs, the U.K. economy has begun to show the negative economic impact of leaving Europes single market and customs union at the beginning of the year, several indicators show.

Read: High-tech British firms eye U.S. listings in blow to post-Brexit London stock market

The outlook: Prime Minister Boris Johnson recently qualified as teething problems the many incidents and trade disruptions triggered by the start of Brexit. But from British fishermen to City of London finance professionals, many rather expect the government to act to try soften the blow.

The massive economic hit triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic may help hide the detrimental Brexit impact to the general population in the first half of the year. But it is hard to see how the government will be able to mitigate the consequences of being an outsider to the single market without taking steps back toward the EU and opening further discussions.

Read: Why Europe Needs More Fiscal Stimulus

More here:

How Brexit is already taking its toll on the U.K. economy - MarketWatch

HOLYHEAD, Wales Beneath swirling gray clouds, Bryan Anderson leaned from the cab window of his truck to vent his frustration at the new paperwork that had already delayed his journey through Britains second-largest ferry port by half a day.

Its a nightmare, Mr. Anderson said, explaining how he spent hours waiting at a depot 250 miles away for export documents required because of Brexit. The delay meant he reached Holyhead, in Wales, too late for the ferry he planned to take to Dublin, and for the next one, too.

I am roughly 12 hours behind schedule, he said as he prepared, finally, to drive aboard the Stena Adventurer to Dublin to drop off a consignment of parcels for Irelands mail service.

Fear of hassles and red tape stemming from the introduction of the new rules governing Britains trade with the European Union that came into effect on Jan. 1 led to dire predictions of overwhelming gridlock at British ports.

But, so far, the opposite has happened. Apart from hardy souls like Mr. Anderson, truckers are increasingly shunning ports like Holyhead. They are fearful of the mountains of paperwork now required for journeys that last month involved little more than driving on to a ferry in one country and off it in another.

On Thursday, just a couple of dozen other trucks stood waiting for the same ferry as Mr. Anderson in a vast but almost empty port-side parking lot. Holyhead is operating at half its normal capacity and staff have been placed on furlough.

Its too much hassle to go through, Mr. Anderson said.

After months of uncertainty and tense negotiations, Prime Minister Boris Johnson finally struck a trade deal with the European Union on Christmas Eve. So when Britain left Europes single market and customs union on Jan. 1, it avoided the chaos seen during a dress-rehearsal border closure by French officials in December.

Yet the old system that allowed frictionless travel to and from European nations is over. Despite claims by its supporters that Brexit would reduce bureaucracy, companies need to produce millions of customs declarations as well as new documentation like health certifications for food and proof of origin for a wide variety of goods. Shipments of mixed goods like the parcels Mr. Anderson was carrying can mean a plethora of paperwork for drivers to cover everything being carried.

Across Britain, the impact of the rules has caught traders by surprise, setting off a chain reaction that has threatened some jobs and livelihoods.

Outraged over costly delays, Scottish shellfish exporters blockaded the Parliament in London in protest. A truck load of chips destined for a supermarket in Northern Ireland was held up for two days as the truck company sought to prove the origin of the potatoes they were made with, according to a British lawmaker. And more than 600 truck drivers have been fined for breaking a rule designed to prevent congestion that requires them to have a permit to approach Britains busiest port, Dover in Kent.

Under the new rules, truckers must log their consignments with the authorities before reaching ports. Relatively few arrive without the paperwork just 7 percent at Holyhead, according to the port.

But that is because many are stuck elsewhere awaiting papers.

The new system has also raised questions about the future of one of Europes busiest trade routes, between Ireland, which remains part of the European Union, and continental Europe.

The quickest route for trucks is generally via a ferry from Dublin to Holyhead, then east to Dover on Englands coast, and from there a short ferry trip to Calais in France.

Before the Brexit changes, that journey via the land bridge was cheap and reliable, required almost no paperwork and allowed trucks to drop off loads along the way.

But that route has been obstructed by a thicket of bureaucracy, and many companies are opting for direct services between Ireland and France to stay within the European Union.

Whether this reflects teething troubles or a fundamental shift is unclear, and the changes have been welcomed in some quarters.

Some environmental campaigners hope the drop in trade will be permanent and reduce the number of trucks crisscrossing Britain.

Port operators had expected a drop-off in trade as companies emptied stockpiles they had built in December in case there was no trade deal. The pandemic has also hit commerce and tourism, just as companies are adjusting to Brexit-era form filling.

But there are fears that the hit to ports like Holyhead may have lasting implications.

Very loud alarm bells are ringing, said Rhun ap Iorwerth, a member of the Welsh Senedd, or Parliament, for Plaid Cymru, a party that advocates independence for Wales.

It is clear that trade is down massively through the port, he said. I hope this is a temporary phenomenon but I fear that new patterns of trading are being established here and I worry for jobs. The smaller the traffic through the port, the fewer people you need to work at the port.

Virginia Crosbie, a lawmaker with Mr. Johnsons Conservative Party, said she expected that the fluctuations in transport patterns we are seeing at the moment will be short term, citing the benefits of the land-bridge route through England.

Others are more doubtful, noting that eight weekend ferry services from Holyhead to Dublin have already been canceled, while those between Ireland and France have been ramped up.

Given the choice, I think a lot of that traffic has switched to the direct routes, said William Calderbank, port operations manager at Holyhead, which is operated by Stena Line , adding that, while he expects much business to return, some of it will not.

To add to Holyheads problems, it is also losing business to ports in Scotland and northern England that offer routes to Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, that generally require less bureaucracy.

It now makes little sense to send goods destined for Northern Ireland through Holyhead and then by truck north through Ireland a popular route previously.

And while companies should get better at completing paperwork, they face additional changes in the future. The British government is phasing in its own post-Brexit rules, waving most imports through.

But, from July, it will apply full controls as the Irish and French do now.

We are only in phase one of Brexit, we have another one coming in July, said Mr. Calderbank.

That will add to the burden for companies who already face complex regulations.

Andrew Kinsella, managing director of Gwynedd Shipping, a transportation company headquartered in Holyhead, described how one consignment was held in Ireland for seven hours while officials questioned whether it should be certified as a dairy product because of milk contained in cookies chocolate chips.

Holyhead is a ghost town, he said. You dont see the normal steady stream of vehicles every day; you are lucky to see a handful of trucks when the ferries arrive.

At Road King, a Holyhead truck stop, another driver, Rob Lucas, was still parked midafternoon at the spot where he arrived at 6 a.m. to await clearance to take a load into the port.

He had no idea when the text message authorizing him to move would come but did know that the delay had already wrecked his next days schedule.

The only way I can explain it is to say that everything used to run freely, there was no waiting for paperwork; but last Friday I was held up five hours in Kent, he said.

We are all stuck in limbo one of our lads was here for four days early in January, Mr. Lucas said. Its terrible, absolutely terrible, he added, and I can only see it getting worse before it gets better.

Read the original here:

Truckers Shun U.K. Ports to Avoid Brexit Red Tape - The New York Times

A beekeeper trying to bring 15 million bees into the UK says he has been told they may be seized and burned because of post-Brexit laws.

Patrick Murfet wants to import the baby Italian bees for his Kent business and to help farmers pollinate valuable crops. But new laws that came into effect after the UK left the single market mean bringing bees into the country is banned.

Since the end of the transition period, only queen bees can be imported into Great Britain, rather than colonies and packages of bees. However, confusion over whether bees can be brought in via Northern Ireland has caused a legal headache.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said it was aware of the issue and is working with the devolved administrations to find a solution.

I am a passionate beekeeper, Ive been doing it for nearly 20 years, Murfet said.

He is managing director of Bee Equipment, based near Canterbury, and every year he imports large numbers of bees from breeders in Italy, where the climate is warmer.

For decades, bees have been imported to replenish stocks, strengthen breeding lines and as early awakening pollinators for fruit and honey farms in the UK.

But the ban could put this in jeopardy, Murfet said: Its a monumentally stupid situation for a country supposed to be standing on its own two feet and exporting round the world.

In an effort to avoid the import ban and abide by the new laws, Murfet arranged for his usual importation of 15 million bees to arrive via Northern Ireland in April, but said he had been told they may be destroyed if he tries.

I dont care what they think it should say. At present the rules are clear that bees from Northern Ireland can enter the UK legally. If the law intended something else, they have not written it into legislation, Murfet said.

He says his inquiries into the reasoning behind the ban have been met with a wall of silence, except an email reading: Illegal imports will be sent back or destroyed, and enforcement action (criminal charges) will be brought against the importer.

Murfet said he had already paid a deposit of about 20,000 for the bees and stood to lose nearly 100,000 in costs alone if he cannot bring them into the country.

He added: So far the department has overseen a policy whereby the UK is only one of three countries in Europe to see a decline in bee colonies.Fewer honeybees means less pollination, less top fruits and more imports.

Defra said bee health was a devolved matter and it was working to find a solution. A department spokesperson said it would provide guidance to bee importers and beekeepers as soon as possible.

It is the responsibility of the importer to ensure goods dispatched from Northern Ireland meet the definition of NI qualifying goods or meet import requirements, they added.

Visit link:

Brexit rules mean 15m baby bees may be seized and burned, says beekeeper - The Guardian

LONDON (Reuters) - Early signs of disruption caused by Britains shift to its new, less open trading relationship with the European Union are emerging in economic data.

FILE PHOTO: Lorries queue in at the border control of the Port of Dover, Britain, January 15, 2021. REUTERS/John Sibley

Although the biggest problem for many companies remains the COVID-19 pandemic, details of recent surveys show that Brexit is adding to the strain on the economy.

Manufacturers and services firms have been hit hard by supply chain and export disruption, according to data company IHS Markit.

British factories reported the steepest increase in supplier delivery times among the six flash preliminary Purchasing Managers Index (PMI) surveys published by IHS Markit last week for France, Germany, Japan, Australia and the United States as well as the United Kingdom.

This was almost exclusively linked to both Brexit disruption and a severe lack of international shipping availability, IHS Markit said.

For a graphic on:

Under a deal struck last month, trade between Britain and the European Union remains free of tariffs and quotas but a new full customs border means goods must be checked and paperwork filled in.

Using a phrase that has angered many business owners, Prime Minister Boris Johnson described the disruption as teething problems which have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trade experts think some of the extra cost and bureaucracy will be permanent. Proponents of Brexit say Britain will benefit in the long run by striking its own trade deals and forming its own regulations outside the EU.

Brexit disruption in the first quarter of 2021 was likely to reduce British economic output by around 1%, International Monetary Fund Chief Economist Gita Gopinath said on Wednesday.

Services companies - which account for the bulk of the British economy and generate a surplus in trade with the bloc - were hit this month, the IHS Markit survey showed.

Services exports deteriorated faster in Britain than in any other of the six flash PMIs published this month, bucking a trend of improvement seen in most other countries.

For a graphic on:

The service economy was hard-hit by restrictions on trade and reduced consumer spending at the start of the year, IHS Markit said.

Following the initial disruption, a truer picture of the costs and benefits of Brexit is likely to emerge over time, although many businesses are not hopeful.

A Confederation of British Industry survey published last week showed British manufacturers confidence in their ability to compete in the EU market has fallen to its lowest level since records began 20 years ago.

For a graphic on:

Reporting by Andy Bruce; Editing by William Schomberg and Catherine Evans

Original post:

First flashes of Brexit trade trouble appear in UK data - Reuters

EU data transfer mechanisms are in a state of flux, and the additional complications of Brexit can leave organizations wondering how best to navigate this current area of uncertainty. Several decisions need to be made: are new data transfer mechanisms needed following Brexit? If so, which one(s) should be implemented? What is the relevant timeframe? How can data flows be prioritized sensibly for remediation? These decisions will be influenced by other factors such as a need to replace Privacy Shield as a transfer mechanism, to supplement existing Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) following the Schrems II case, and to implement the European Commissions new SCCs once they are available. Added to this is the likelihood that data transfers will remain a focus for privacy rights activists and therefore regulators, and that data transfer restrictions (or data localization) are becoming a significant geopolitical issue. Given this complexity, organizations need to ensure they understand the issues, and adopt a defensible strategy for reviewing and updating their data transfer mechanisms.

Brexit has further complicated the data transfer issue, not least due to confusion about the date by which EU UK data flows must be addressed. Technically, the UK left the EU on January 31, 2020, but a transition period preserved the status quo, including in relation to data transfers, until December 31, 2020. Accordingly, during 2020 EU entities could continue to export personal data to the UK as if it was still an EU Member State. On December 24, 2020, as the end of the transition period approached, the EU and UK announced the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. To general surprise, this Agreement provides yet a further transition period for data flows, easing the immediate pressure to implement alternative arrangements. This new transition period of up to six months is to allow the European Commission time to conclude its assessment of whether the UKs data protection laws meet the EU standard of adequacy under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

An adequacy determination from the European Commission would ease data transfer restrictions between the EU and the UK, removing the need for EU organizations to implement a transfer mechanism such as SCCs or Binding Corporate Rules to send data to the UK. This would be a welcome outcome for business, but it comes with the price of tying the UKs data protection regime to that of the EU. In other words, adequacy is not a one time assessment, but is an ongoing process. The UK is thought to have a good chance of being considered adequate, given that the UKs data protection laws incorporate and remain closely aligned with the GDPR. Indeed, if the UK is not successful, it is hard to see how other countries, particularly those whose data protection laws are not based on the GDPR, could succeed with an adequacy assessment. However, the assessment process also considers surveillance and government access to personal data. These areas are not within the competence of EU law but will be subject to scrutiny now that the UK has left the EU. It is possible that the UKs surveillance laws may be criticized, either during the adequacy assessment itself, or perhaps as part of a legal challenge at some later date. Typically an adequacy assessment requires approximately two years to conclude, but the UKs application is proceeding more quickly, and recent comments suggest the UK is confident that a decision will be made soon.

If the UK does not receive an adequacy decision, transfers of personal data from the EU to the UK will require a data transfer mechanism. Many organizations took steps in 2020 to prepare for this possibility by implementing SCCs, naming the UK as a non-EU importer for EU-UK transfers, to take effect at the expiry of the Brexit transition period. While the current SCCs are a dated tool, and are in the process of being replaced, for now they are likely to be the most pragmatic solution.

Transfers from the UK to the EU do not require a transfer mechanism. The UK government has already recognized EU Member States as adequate, and adopted the EUs existing adequacy determinations. Accordingly, transfers from the UK to countries such as Israel, Canada and Japan (among others) do not require a transfer mechanism following Brexit.

Transfers from the UK to the US and to other non-adequate countries will continue to require a data transfer mechanism, just as they did when the UK was an EU Member State. It should be noted, however, that EU laws (like the GDPR) have become part of UK law, and decisions of the CJEU handed down before 31 December 2020 remain authoritative and binding in the UK as part of retained EU law. Accordingly, Schrems II remains part of UK law and the Privacy Shield continues to be invalid in the UK. Finding a replacement for the Privacy Shield appears to be a priority for President Bidens new administration, and it seems likely that the UK would seek to adopt any new arrangement that is negotiated between the EU and the US. Similarly, when the European Commission adopts its new SCCs, the UK is likely to adopt a broadly similar approach in adopting its own SCCs.

Organizations utilizing SCCs should note that following Schrems II they must undertake (and document) a data transfer risk assessment, and add supplemental contractual provisions as necessary to mitigate the risk of government access to EU personal data, and to ensure individuals rights in relation to their personal data are respected. Further, EU regulators have signaled that significantly greater detail will be expected when implementing data transfer mechanisms, and that the days of generic, broadly drafted, catch-all SCCs are unlikely to withstand scrutiny. A more granular approach can be seen in the European Commissions proposed replacement SCCs.

The UKs departure from the EU has other consequences for data protection, in addition to data transfer issues. With effect from 1 January 2021, the UK is a third country for the purposes of the GDPR, and the one stop shop mechanism no longer applies. Organizations therefore face the possibility of enforcement by the Information Commissioners Office as well as enforcement by European supervisory authorities for infringement of the GDPR, for example, in the event of a data breach.

In addition, organizations in the UK will remain subject to the EU GDPR by virtue of Article 3(2) where they process personal data in the context of offering goods or services to data subjects in the EU, or monitoring their behavior. UK organizations that continue to do business in the EU may well find that they must continue to comply with the EU GDPR, as well as the UK GDPR. For now, the laws are essentially the same, but that position may change, whether intentionally or inadvertently. UK organizations that continue to process EU personal data from the UK will also need to assess whether they must appoint an EU representative, under Article 27 of the GDPR. Similarly, EU organizations continuing to process UK personal data will need to consider whether they are subject to the UK GDPR by virtue of Article 3(2) of the UK legislation, and whether to appoint a UK representative.

Given the complexity and legal uncertainty in relation to data transfers, organizations must ensure they understand the detail of their data transfers, including transfers to and from other group entities, customers and vendors. With those facts to hand, transfers from the EU to the UK should be identified and prioritised for remediation. Alongside EU-UK transfers, UK-US transfers that previously relied on the Privacy Shield should also be prioritised. Transfers that rely on SCCs must also include a Schrems II transfer risk assessment and additional contractual safeguards. All of these steps should be undertaken on the understanding that they will be an interim step, given the likelihood that the Privacy Shield will be replaced, and that new SCCs will need to be implemented.

Data transfers that rely on SCCs must also include a Schrems II transfer risk assessment and additional contractual safeguards. #GDPR #respectdataClick to Tweet

Brexit aside, data transfers have long been a complex and challenging issue. Now that data protection regulators, prompted by privacy activists such as Mr. Schrems, are actively enforcing compliance with data transfer restrictions, this is an area that requires ongoing attention.

Go here to see the original:

Navigating the Impact of Brexit on EU-UK Data Transfers - CPO Magazine

As UK grocery stores already suffer supply shortages following the UKs exit from the European Union, analysis from global consultancy OC&C Strategy Consultant suggests that food prices will see a hike in the coming years. The researchers expect that at least some of an 8% spike in the cost of imported meals will be passed onto the consumer.

Days after the UK finally completed its mammoth withdrawal from the European Union, Ocado became the first large grocer to warn of stock shortages as it was hit by staff absences linked to Covid-19, while hauliers grappled with extra customs controls after Brexit. The online grocer, which became a lifeline for shoppers wishing to avoid the health risks of walking shopping in public during a pandemic, warned regular customers that changes to the UK supply chain have affected some of our suppliers and may result in an increase in missing items and substitutions over the next few weeks.

Soon after, Lord Rose, Chairman of the supermarket delivery company went on to warn that the cost of added paperwork traders must go through following Brexit will be passed on to the consumer. The senior retail chief told the UK press that delays and difficulties in international shipping caused by added red tape resulting from Brexit will mean customers will end up paying more.

Similarly, Lorenzo Zaccheo, Managing Director of haulage firm Alcaline UK, also took to BBC Radio 4s Today Programme to warn that the customs changes would lead to a bloodbath for the sector, as delivery delays have begun eating into already-tight profit margins.

New analysis fromOC&C Strategy Consultants has similarly suggested the consumers could soon face a pricing hike as a result of Britains exit from the remaining bloc of 27 EU nations. Referencing what it called a raft of pink tape, plus new checks on the border, OC&C experts determined that three billion kilos ($4.1 billion) in prices for meals importers could be added to industry bills, in accordance with the UKs Meals and Drink Federation.

According to OC&Cs Will Hayllar, higher costs for importing ingredients or finished products, or changes to tariffs, could likely result in price inflation. Suppliers margins were already paper-thin, suggesting they will struggle to absorb the price rises, leaving the answer of whos going to bear the brunt of the changes unclear. It is either passed on or major efficiencies have to be found elsewhere, he said.

Estimates from the industry-funded Agriculture & Horticulture Growth Board present bills growing 5%-8% for livestock merchandise and 5% for crops commerce. There could possibly be a tempestuous set of discussions to come back between suppliers and supermarkets, whore ever-aware of the have to be price-competitive, added Hayllar.

Should this conclude in costs being passed onto the consumer, it could put even more pressure on the thinly-spread household income of the UK which had already pushed 1.9 million people to use foodbanks in 2019 alone. The double whammy of the pandemics financial fallout and the additional Brexit prices is already worsening the UKs meals insecurity to that end.

According to Mark Curtin, head of London-based meals waste redistribution charity The Felix Challenge, the group offered roughly 21 million meals last year, and that is anticipated to leap to 38 million in 2021. Were already going through big demand, Curtin elaborated. This can solely be additional exacerbated due to the necessity to assist people who find themselves discovering it troublesome to afford high quality meals.

Excerpt from:

Brexit expected to lead to higher food prices for consumers - Consultancy.uk

More direct ferry services between Ireland and mainland Europe are being launched to meet the increased demand from businesses looking to avoid Brexit checks with Britain.

Brittany Ferries has unveiled three new weekly sailings between the Irish ports of Rosslare and Cork, and Roscoff and Saint-Malo in northern France as traders seek more capacity on direct routes.

The new freight-only sailings will see three new departures a week out of Ireland with a ferry leaving Cork for Roscoff on a Tuesday, returning to Rosslare on a Thursday before departing that night for St Malo and returning to Cork before departing for Roscoff again on a Saturday.

The sailings are being announced as post-Brexit trade rules introduced on January 1st deter Irish and continental European hauliers from using the British landbridge due to increased customs checks and paperwork. More than 150,000 lorries used this landbridge route every year.

The duration of the new direct services is about 18 hours. That is longer than the timing on the landbridge route but has no border checks as the freight remains within the European Union.

The companys Cork-Roscoff service was expected to come on stream at the end of March but that has been brought forward due to the increased post-Brexit demand from businesses.

The new sailings will operate until the end of March when the scheduled freight and passenger services will resume between Cork and Roscoff, with two weekly sailings in each direction a doubling of the frequency of the service for this year.

Its clear that Brexit has distorted flows of trade between France and Ireland. Theres now clear and compelling demand both in Brittany and beyond to boost freight capacity direct from the region to Ireland, said Hugh Bruton, general manager of Brittany Ferries Ireland.

And Irish traders too are seeking direct links to western France. Were always listening to our haulier customers in order to best meet their needs and we look forward to restarting Brittany-Ireland services two months earlier than planned.

The companys new sailings come in addition to the extra weekly Rosslare-Cherbourg round-trip service that was introduced in mid-January. The company also already operates two weekly round-trip sailings between Rosslare and Bilbao in northern Spain.

The new routes bring the companys weekly sailings to eight in each direction between Ireland and France, and a total of 12 sailings a week linking Ireland with France and Spain.

Conor Mowlds, chief commercial officer at the Port of Cork, said the two new freight-only services from Cork to St Malo and Roscoff would offer transport options to importers and exporters giving more flexibility to Irish customers, ensuring supply chains are maintained.

The new services bring to 32 the number of direct sailings to and from Rosslare and mainland Europe as the south-eastern port benefits from record freight levels as companies seek to guarantee supply lines and avoid post-Brexit border controls and checks at borders with Britain.

Glenn Carr, general manager of the Iarnrd Eireann-owned Rosslare Europort, said the new sailings would give further choice and capacity alongside Brittany Ferriess existing services out of Rosslare to Bilbao and Cherbourg.

The launch of the route to and from St Malo is responding in particular to demands from traders looking to ship agrifood and fisheries produce between Ireland and northern France.

Continued here:

Brittany Ferries unveil new post-Brexit direct ferries to mainland EU - The Irish Times