Britain outside the EU

[1andrew1]

It just looks like Frosty's highly political approach may have been holding things up.

So if Truss doesn't fall down that particular rabbit hole, progress can be made. From the FT's interview with Sefovic on Friday:

It has also offered an “express lane” for goods heading to Northern Ireland that were unlikely to leak across the border into Ireland and the wider single market.

It claims that the changes would cut customs checks in half and health checks by 80 per cent, although the UK has questioned those figures, with the result that talks have hardly progressed.

Sefcovic said he could guarantee those reductions but “everything depends on the quality of the safeguards” from the UK, such as giving the EU real-time access to customs data.

“Can the trusted trade scheme really be trusted? What will happen in the case where we have some kind of public health alert, some spoilt shrimp or some kind of damaged goods that need to be pulled off the shelves?

“Why are you telling us that putting a sticker on a food product ‘only for the UK’ is a huge problem when you have a sticker on everything on the shelves that you can take two for the price of three or there is a discount? What is so cosmically difficult about that?”

He called for an end to “political dramas”. “Ninety per cent of the problems coming to us . . . could be solved at a technical level.

https://www.ft.com/content/a5cf97bb-...8-eb29233a5fe8

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Could be worse…. Could of been IDS….

(Depending On your viewpoint of course)

Don't tempt me, Mr M!

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It just looks like Frosty's highly political approach may have been holding things up.

So if Truss doesn't fall down that particular rabbit hole, progress can be made. From the FT's interview with Sefovic on Friday:


https://www.ft.com/content/a5cf97bb-...8-eb29233a5fe8

It’s quite a revealing interview that demonstrates the philosophical gulf between the EU and the UK. For the EU, regulation is basically a good thing. Stuff should be regulated unless there’s a reason not to. For the UK the assumption is the opposite. We regulate only where necessary. I’ve done just enough consultancy work in the past to be treated to the spectacle of civil servants tying themselves in knots trying to avoid “extraneous business regulation”, even accidentally, in sloppily-worded guidance (as my task at the time was to write guidance this was of primary concern for me).

So no, it is not cosmically difficult to put stickers on things but Sefcovic seems not to understand the fundamental difference between a supermarket choosing to discount items as one of its basic freedoms, and a food manufacturer being compelled by regulation to separate out quantities of its product so that the right pallets get stickers on them, or not, as the case may be. Compelling business to act in certain ways by making regulations is not the first instinct of the British civil service (although its fair to say when they do accept the case for regulation, or rather are instructed by politicians to do it, they tend to be guilty of gold-plating).

This issue is not a political drama, and that the EU thinks it is, simply illustrates the deep-seated incompatibility of the processes of government that pertain in the UK and in the founding members of the EU (and principally, France), upon which the Commission (the EU’s civil service) is modelled.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Chris

It’s quite a revealing interview that demonstrates the philosophical gulf between the EU and the UK. For the EU, regulation is basically a good thing. Stuff should be regulated unless there’s a reason not to. For the UK the assumption is the opposite. We regulate only where necessary. I’ve done just enough consultancy work in the past to be treated to the spectacle of civil servants tying themselves in knots trying to avoid “extraneous business regulation”, even accidentally, in sloppily-worded guidance (as my task at the time was to write guidance this was of primary concern for me).

So no, it is not cosmically difficult to put stickers on things but Sefcovic seems not to understand the fundamental difference between a supermarket choosing to discount items as one of its basic freedoms, and a food manufacturer being compelled by regulation to separate out quantities of its product so that the right pallets get stickers on them, or not, as the case may be. Compelling business to act in certain ways by making regulations is not the first instinct of the British civil service (although its fair to say when they do accept the case for regulation, or rather are instructed by politicians to do it, they tend to be guilty of gold-plating).

This issue is not a political drama, and that the EU thinks it is, simply illustrates the deep-seated incompatibility of the processes of government that pertain in the UK and in the founding members of the EU (and principally, France), upon which the Commission (the EU’s civil service) is modelled.

Oh yes.

[1andrew1]

Understandable - why would businesses want to increase costs and red tape just to keep the ERG happy?

UK businesses ‘not persuaded’ by new safety and quality mark

Survey by British Chambers of Commerce shows clear majority prefer retaining EU system

Businesses are “not persuaded” by the UK government’s plans to introduce a new post-Brexit “UKCA” safety and quality mark, a survey by the British Chambers of Commerce has shown.

A new “UKCA” safety certificate is due to replace the EU’s “CE” mark on all products in the UK from January 2023. It was intended as a statement of the UK’s new regulatory independence after Brexit.

However, the survey indicated that the UKCA scheme, which has already been delayed by a year under pressure from manufacturers and traders, remains hugely unpopular.

Some 59 per cent of BCC members that rely on the quality assurance marks to place products on the market told the survey of 1,000 businesses that they favoured a return to recognising the CE mark.

William Bain, head of trade policy at the BCC, said the findings reflected the “clear views” of business that “they are not persuaded by the case for ditching CE marking in Great Britain.”

On the contrary, Bain added, business saw “strong benefits” in having a single system for certifying industrial and electrical goods that was recognised in both the EU and the UK and avoided the cost of duplicate testing caused by having two different regimes.

“We urge UK ministers to go the extra mile and craft solutions on goods markings which reflect the reality of supply and manufacturing chains, and do not add extra costs at a time of continuing supply chain stress for many businesses,” he said.

The intervention is the latest in a chorus of complaints from business about the UK “Conformity Assessed” mark, which industry has persistently warned will not be ready by 2023 because of a shortage of testing capacity in the UK.

The UK’s Construction Leadership Council wrote to business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng last month to warn that the UKCA marking would cause shortages of building products and materials and damage the government’s “levelling up” agenda....

Responding to the survey, one medium-sized electronics manufacturer in Ayrshire, western Scotland, said it had faced a “monumental task” changing all the labelling on its inventory of nearly 100 products to enable them to serve EU and UK markets.

It added that the cost and bureaucracy had deterred EU customers. “Brexit has therefore lost us business, increased our costs dramatically and killed our sales expansion in the EU,” the company said.

https://www.ft.com/content/e6ea46bf-...d-3b29be88f152

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Understandable - why would businesses want to increase costs and red tape just to keep the ERG happy?

https://www.ft.com/content/e6ea46bf-...d-3b29be88f152

As I’ve said innumerable times before, as long as you go on deliberately caricaturing Brexit, you’re doomed never to understand it.

Sure it’s cheaper to import another country’s rules wholesale. It is also utterly undemocratic. We are well able to understand the regulatory requirements of the British market and to set rules as necessary, and we are now able to do so.

If the price of our democracy is to be found only in health and safety checklists, so be it. I bet, in time, regulations made in the UK will be rather less onerous than those cooked up in Brussels.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

As I’ve said innumerable times before, as long as you go on deliberately caricaturing Brexit, you’re doomed never to understand it.

Sure it’s cheaper to import another country’s rules wholesale. It is also utterly undemocratic. We are well able to understand the regulatory requirements of the British market and to set rules as necessary, and we are now able to do so.

If the price of our democracy is to be found only in health and safety checklists, so be it. I bet, in time, regulations made in the UK will be rather less onerous than those cooked up in Brussels.

The CE mark is now becoming global with Australia being the latest country to sign up. By all means have an optional low-regulation alternative for products sold in the UK if that's the direction the government decides to go. But putting British manufacturers through another process just puts them at a cost disadvantage to their competitors.

---------- Post added at 22:23 ---------- Previous post was at 22:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

It’s quite a revealing interview that demonstrates the philosophical gulf between the EU and the UK. For the EU, regulation is basically a good thing. Stuff should be regulated unless there’s a reason not to. For the UK the assumption is the opposite. We regulate only where necessary. I’ve done just enough consultancy work in the past to be treated to the spectacle of civil servants tying themselves in knots trying to avoid “extraneous business regulation”, even accidentally, in sloppily-worded guidance (as my task at the time was to write guidance this was of primary concern for me).

So no, it is not cosmically difficult to put stickers on things but Sefcovic seems not to understand the fundamental difference between a supermarket choosing to discount items as one of its basic freedoms, and a food manufacturer being compelled by regulation to separate out quantities of its product so that the right pallets get stickers on them, or not, as the case may be. Compelling business to act in certain ways by making regulations is not the first instinct of the British civil service (although its fair to say when they do accept the case for regulation, or rather are instructed by politicians to do it, they tend to be guilty of gold-plating).

This issue is not a political drama, and that the EU thinks it is, simply illustrates the deep-seated incompatibility of the processes of government that pertain in the UK and in the founding members of the EU (and principally, France), upon which the Commission (the EU’s civil service) is modelled.

I can't see how "regulation is basically a good thing" can be deduced from the article. That's a generic comment that's miles off what the article is discussing.

To me, it says that these things can be ironed out with trust. I guess now that's with Truss.

I've argued before for Frost to go to break the deadlock and I'm encouraged that this has happened. Let's hope Truss can deliver so we can move forward.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The CE mark is now becoming global with Australia being the latest country to sign up. By all means have an optional low-regulation alternative for products sold in the UK if that's the direction the government decides to go. But putting British manufacturers through another process just puts them at a cost disadvantage to their competitors

Saw this on the web

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Saw this on the web

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

As far I know we moved to the new scale at the same time so there shouldn't be two scales even if one chart has a British flag.

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2021/03...and-your-home/

The energy label changes above are part of a change in EU regulation going ahead on 1 March 2021. The UK has decided to stick to the changes for now, but also has the freedom to go further in future

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Saw this on the web

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

That's a bit strange. I've recently bought some electrical items and the EU and UK ratings were identical and followed the A-G ratings on the left. I think the UK one in that picture is from old stock whilst new stock would have the one on the left with EU branding and an identical one with UK branding.

From this site, we introduced the A-G labels in March this year.
https://energylabel.org.uk/for-consu...om-march-2021/

Yeah …. I smell Photoshop …

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Chris

Yeah …. I smell Photoshop …

Being charitable, it could be a misreading of the regulations. Apparently there was a changeover period where the old scale and new scale would be shown

https://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/effici...ommercial.html

New products that launched between June 2020 and March 2021 will have the current energy ratings on them, but you’ll find labels for both rating systems in the box. This will only happen during this period of transition while the old ratings are being phased out.

From March 2021, products online and in-store will have labels with the new A to G ranking system for energy efficiency.

But that applied to the whole scheme, and wouldn't be different between the UK and the EU rating labels.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

Yeah …. I smell Photoshop …

Over a screen that’s impressive

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

B
But that applied to the whole scheme, and wouldn't be different between the UK and the EU rating labels.

Not to say the manufacturer made a mistake or couldn't put their hands on the up-to-date UK version so used the old one as it was still valid.

Originally Posted by jfman

Over a screen that’s impressive