IT has been an unmitigated disaster. Brexit should never have been bullied through and certainly not at the worst possible time.
Now, every single statistical study shows the detrimental impact on the UK economy which is heading for the slowest growth and the highest inflation among the G7.
As we come out of the pandemic, headwinds are generated by wider global factors including the Russian war on Ukraine, but the damage done by Brexit is emerging as a long-term threat to tackling the cost of living crisis.
The London School of Economics this week revealed the “unprecedented unravelling” of relationships between UK producers and EU destinations in the first year of Brexit.
“We estimate that the introduction of the TCA (UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement in January 2021) reduced the count of product-destination export relationships with EU countries per quarter by around 30% in 2021,” the LSE centre for economic performance study found.
Sir Keir Starmer, Leader of the Opposition, says that next year “our growth is set to be slower than every G20 country except one – Russia”, adding: “Our inflation is going to be double the rest of the G7.”
It comes as the UK dropped plans to introduce border checks on food imports, due in July, for 18 months. It brings with it obvious risk and makes a mockery of what voters were promised.
“Cheaper, easier imports vs the risk of food fraud, African swine fever and unfair competition for British exporters,” says the British Meat Processors Association. “We’ve taken back control of our borders only to impose no controls at those borders.”
The British Veterinary Association has “repeatedly warned that delaying checks, which have already been pushed back three times, could have serious implications for animal health and British agriculture”.
James Russell, BVA senior vice president, said: “This move flies in the face not only of common sense, but also of the Government’s commitment to preserving high levels of animal and human health in the UK.”
Brexit cheerleader Jacob Rees-Mogg is asked by ITV why abandoning the new border checks will save £1bn when the understanding was that post-Brexit checks were not going to be disruptive, to which he replies: “That’s why we are not adopting them. This would have been an act of self-harm if we had gone ahead with it.”
James Withers, of Scotland Food and Drink, said: “This is quite something. Implementing the Brexit deal as agreed would be ‘an act of self-harm’. And cost of the checks would make imports unaffordable. What an earth does he think has happened to our exports then, that do face all these checks?! I weep.”
This is quite something.
— James Withers (@scotfoodjames) April 28, 2022
Implementing the Brexit deal as agreed would be “an act of self harm”.
And cost of the checks would make imports unaffordable.
What an earth does he think has happened to our exports then, that do face all these checks?! I weep. pic.twitter.com/swkvLFQXZn
The preparatory work ports have done for the July implementation has been a waste of time and money also.
Business editor Ian McConnell says in his Called to Account column this week: “It has seemed from day one of the Brexit campaign that many of the supporters of this entirely damaging odyssey have failed to grasp the reality that the British Empire has gone for good.”
The wider impact of the cost of living crisis was highlighted by deputy business editor Scott Wright who asks whether the inflation crisis will pose a threat to the city centre revival.
Elsewhere this week Ayrshire’s Buzzworks Holdings has hailed the acquisition of three new venues, writes Kristy Dorsey and Mark Williamson says North Sea believers are being vindicated.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel