Brexit - merged threads

[SpringDon]

Further investigation of the certificate of conformity (bored this afternoon) reveals that the importer or a representative (in the eu) of the manufacturer can sign. Not sure how that explain the ones I have signed form China but never mind.

So perfect solution reveals itself; amongst the thousands of remainer refugees fleeing to Europe in November, there must be a couple that will act as representatives for uk firms. How are you fixed for work, mr.retsdon?

[Rewulf]

4 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

They do if they're not already in the market place. That's been confirmed. Think of it like your MOT certificate. When it runs out at midnight your car doesn't suddenly become unsafe - but it does become non-conforming and you need to get it re-certified by a registered and approved tester before you can legally drive it on the road. Conformity is the same legal principle at work.

Well they would be if the business is already there.
What you are suggesting , is the EU revoke the existing UK conformity licences, because they havent done as theyre told, and accepted the EU written WA ?

And I say again , this can work both ways, but it wont , because we wont do it, and guess what ?

Neither will the EU .
Because if they did, they might as well climb into their own coffin , and nail it shut from the inside.

[JohnfromUK]

12 minutes ago, SpringDon said:

the importer or a representative (in the eu) of the manufacturer can sign

In theory they would need;

• The documentation set that defines the build status at the time of test (that forms the baseline for the Certificate of Conformance)
• Test results from an approved test house to demonstrate compliance with the CE mark test requirements
• A Certificate of Conformance (CofC) for each future shipment in which the manufacturer confirms they comply with the build standard baseline at which the original CE mark was granted. (i.e. the design, components and all parameters are the same)

A difference to the MoT test analogy above is that IF you make a material change (for example have a car chipped, or change suspension characteristics), CE marking may well require (in theory) retesting.  (E.g. chipping the engine may mean it no longer meets the emission specifications against which the CE mark was granted.)

Another example is if a manufacturer of a piece of furniture decides for reasons of supply availability, market popularity, cheaper price or whatever to change the material from which his furniture is made - he may well have to retest for fire safety/flammability.  Same applies to building materials (like Grenfell cladding) where fire safety is all part of compliance.

Edited August 6, 2019 by JohnfromUK

[Retsdon]

20 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Neither will the EU .
Because if they did, they might as well climb into their own coffin , and nail it shut from the inside.

The walking dead.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/brexit/brexit-preparedness_en

There's an awful lot of reading there. But you'll find that yes, in the absence of an agreement British certification will no longer be valid for Single Market conformity post Brexit.

[oowee]

Who will set the standards for goods and services, who will ensure standards of exports and who will rule when goods do not conform? All of these things are part of the trade agreement that will determine the level of checks required. Unless we have answers to these questions we can't determine what technology is required for control. 

An ID card system backed with biometric security would be very helpful in managing illegals and the like. 

[oowee]

11 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

The walking dead.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/brexit/brexit-preparedness_en

There's an awful lot of reading there. But you'll find that yes, in the absence of an agreement British certification will no longer be valid for Single Market conformity post Brexit.

Not wrong there lol. Interesting when you start to look closely. I picked this bit out as an example of how complex and convoluted the whole process could be.

The agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters on the consultations between the European Community and the Kingdom of Thailand under GATT Article XXIII (3), approved by Council Decision 96/317/EC (4), provides for the opening of an additional autonomous annual tariff quota of 10 500 tonnes of manioc starch, of which 10 000 tonnes are reserved for Thailand and 500 tonnes are available for all third countries. For management purposes, those 500 tonnes were added to WTO tariff quota under order number 09.0132 (CN 1108 14 00 manioc starch) that needs to be apportioned in view of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union. In view of this, the tariff quota of 500 tonnes (CN 1108 14 00 manioc starch) needs to be separated from the quantities that should be apportioned in view of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union and as such should be made available under a separate order number.

[Retsdon]

17 minutes ago, oowee said:

Not wrong there lol. Interesting when you start to look closely. I picked this bit out as an example of how complex and convoluted the whole process could be.

The agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters on the consultations between the European Community and the Kingdom of Thailand under GATT Article XXIII (3), approved by Council Decision 96/317/EC (4), provides for the opening of an additional autonomous annual tariff quota of 10 500 tonnes of manioc starch, of which 10 000 tonnes are reserved for Thailand and 500 tonnes are available for all third countries. For management purposes, those 500 tonnes were added to WTO tariff quota under order number 09.0132 (CN 1108 14 00 manioc starch) that needs to be apportioned in view of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union. In view of this, the tariff quota of 500 tonnes (CN 1108 14 00 manioc starch) needs to be separated from the quantities that should be apportioned in view of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union and as such should be made available under a separate order number.

It's one of the things that's not taken into account when people complain about the cost of the EU. Post Brexit all this stuff will have to be written and negotiated in-house and there'll need to be a whole extra tier or two of civil servants to do it. Not cheap....

[JohnfromUK]

29 minutes ago, oowee said:

Who will set the standards for goods and services,

Before I retired, most customer countries (apart from the EU) would accept 'national standards' of other nations.  For example American standards (ANSI, UL, MIL STD etc.), UK standards (British Standard (BS) or Def Stan), Australian standards etc. as well as EU standards (CE).  Many smaller counties preferred to certify to the appropriate American standards.

As far as I remember the EU in theory wouldn't accept anything anyone else had certified (which is why one sees very few USA  cars in Europe) - but to my certain knowledge, they always ignored the rules when it suited them for something they badly wanted ......... and enforced the rules rigorously elsewhere to keep a 'closed restricted market' and keep out cheaper (and often better) competition.

One reason many countries liked USA standards was that they were less prone to continual changing and tweaking that the CE mark stuff where the goalpost was always moving (narrower goal) and retesting was not needed nearly as often.

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Post Brexit all this stuff will have to be written and negotiated in-house and there'll need to be a whole extra tier or two of civil servants to do it. Not cheap....

You what ?

Its not cheap now !

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

As far as I remember the EU in theory wouldn't accept anything anyone else had certified (which is why one sees very few USA  cars in Europe) - but to my certain knowledge, they always ignored the rules when it suited them for something they badly wanted ......... and enforced the rules rigorously elsewhere to keep a 'closed restricted market' and keep out cheaper (and often better) competition.

Surely not ! 

[Retsdon]

2 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Its not cheap now !

Just wait - you're getting the economies of scale at the moment.....

[oowee]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

Before I retired, most customer countries (apart from the EU) would accept 'national standards' of other nations.  For example American standards (ANSI, UL, MIL STD etc.), UK standards (British Standard (BS) or Def Stan), Australian standards etc. as well as EU standards (CE).  Many smaller counties preferred to certify to the appropriate American standards.

As far as I remember the EU in theory wouldn't accept anything anyone else had certified (which is why one sees very few USA  cars in Europe) - but to my certain knowledge, they always ignored the rules when it suited them for something they badly wanted ......... and enforced the rules rigorously elsewhere to keep a 'closed restricted market' and keep out cheaper (and often better) competition.

One reason many countries liked USA standards was that they were less prone to continual changing and tweaking that the CE mark stuff where the goalpost was always moving (narrower goal) and retesting was not needed nearly as often.

As I understand it the equivalent standards are acceptable when trading WTO but if you want a free trade deal without tariff then a requirement is that you are required to submit to a legal framework of inspection and supervision that ensures your standards conform and that there is seamless redress. Unless you go for specific goods. 

[Retsdon]

5 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

As far as I remember the EU in theory wouldn't accept anything anyone else had certified (which is why one sees very few USA  cars in Europe) - but to my certain knowledge, they always ignored the rules when it suited them for something they badly wanted ......... and enforced the rules rigorously elsewhere to keep a 'closed restricted market' and keep out cheaper (and often better) competition.

But fair play, only very naive people believer that the EU is a philanthropic organization. It's a trade cartel that's skewed to benefit its membership. 

[Rewulf]

2 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Just wait - you're getting the economies of scale at the moment.....

So you keep saying, but thats because you have a strong bias toward remain..now.
I would remind you that this was not always the case.

When you first came on here , your opinion was far more balanced, what changed  ?

2 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

But fair play, only very naive people believer that the EU is a philanthropic organization. It's a trade cartel that's skewed to benefit its membership.  self

 

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

As I understand it the equivalent standards are acceptable when trading WTO but if you want a free trade deal without tariff then a requirement is that you are required to submit to a legal framework of inspection and supervision that ensures your standards conform and that there is seamless redress. Unless you go for specific goods. 

Of that I cannot be certain as I was 'technical' and pricing was another sort of magic entirely.

 

4 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

But fair play, only very naive people believer that the EU is a philanthropic organization. It's a trade cartel that's skewed to benefit its membership.

It's certainly a trade cartel.  Whether it really benefits its members is more dubious.  Having to meet all the EU standards can push up your price such that it is uncompetitive outside the EU ........

Protected markets can simply be a way of discouraging competition and therefore efficiency.

[oowee]

 

3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Of that I cannot be certain as I was 'technical' and pricing was another sort of magic entirely.

 

It's certainly a trade cartel.  Whether it really benefits its members is more dubious.  Having to meet all the EU standards can push up your price such that it is uncompetitive outside the EU ........

Protected markets can simply be a way of discouraging competition and therefore efficiency.

Depends how you are measuring efficiency. If you waive production standards , pensions, holidays, working hours efficiency may increase but at what price?

Either way it looks like we are about to find out as no deal now looks to be unstopable. 

[Retsdon]

20 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

When you first came on here , your opinion was far more balanced, what changed  ?

The ineptitude of those charged with conducting the Brexit process. I say that I don't care, but really I do. I have family in the UK, and for better or worse its my country., Not to mention that at some point I have a state pension coming and it would be a bit of a pest if it turns out to be worthless. And from everything I've read and gleaned, not from Remain biased media but mostly from original sources  or specialists in international trade, the current path that  the country is on is almost certainly catastrophic.  As a I've pointed out before, in normal circumstances when a plan doesn't work you revert to the status quo ante. Nothing gained but nothing lost either. That means, at the very least, acceptance of May's Agreement which would have allowed some kind of breathing space outside the Single Market of the EU. Instead we have a government that's driven purely by domestic political considerations and which is not the least concerned with anything other than remaining in power for another 5 years and they're prepared to drive the country clean over the cliff to do it. From what I can see they're nothing but a gang of spivs and chancers, without a shred of integrity amongst them. They'e going to ruin the country.

16 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Protected markets can simply be a way of discouraging competition and therefore efficiency.

True. But on the other hand.....  how many people in the UK would want to see their  domestic job market thrown open to global competition? Immigrants with lower wage standards was one of the drivers of Brexit. People wanted their own market (their jobs) protected from 'unfair'  and 'substandard' competition. These things are all in the eye of the beholder.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Retsdon

[Blackstone]

On 05/08/2019 at 16:53, Retsdon said:

It's remarkable that hardline Brexiters who are so adamant that the UK should control its own borders are utterly dismissive of the members of the EU trade club wanting to control theirs There's a kind of cognitive dissidence at work here. The exact same mindset spills over into the bizarre logical fallacy that a crash-out Brexit should hold no fears for the UK but that the EU will 'blink first' because it fears a catastrophic loss in trade. Given that the trade balance is about equal, and given  that this balance is split between a single country on the one hand and 27 on the other......

But of course for many Brexit is not about reason anymore. It's become a faith-based religion instead and logic has become irrelevant.

Hear hear.

[Rewulf]

9 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

The ineptitude of those charged with conducting the Brexit process. I say that I don't care, but really I do. I have family in the UK, and for better or worse its my country., Not to mention that at some point I have a state pension coming and it would be a bit of a pest if it turns out to be worthless. And from everything I've read and gleaned, not from Remain biased media but mostly from original sources  or specialists in international trade, the current path that  the country is on is almost certainly catastrophic.  As a I've pointed out before, in normal circumstances when a plan doesn't work you revert to the status quo ante. Nothing gained but nothing lost either. That means, at the very least, acceptance of May's Agreement which would have allowed some kind of breathing space outside the Single Market of the EU. Instead we have a government that's driven purely by domestic political considerations and which is not the least concerned with anything other than remaining in power for another 5 years and they're prepared to drive the country clean over the cliff to do it. From what I can see they're nothing but a gang of spivs and chancers, without a shred of integrity amongst them. They'e going to ruin the country

Most of those who have been fudging the Brexit process over the past 3 years are gone, May chief among them.
They set the whole thing up to fail, hoping the public would get that sick of it , they could call another Ref and get the vote to remain.

They got it wrong in 2016 , and they got it wrong about a 2nd Ref, most of the public still want out, if that wasnt a fact , we wouldnt be having this conversation.

So, the government were that sure of the path of the vote and process got it wrong.
The BOE and treasury heads , got it wrong.
These top analysts and economic experts, who predicted a shrinking economy and recession , got it wrong.
The shadow government, who thought they could swoop in and gain power on the back of the mess and indecision , got it wrong, and now languish in the doldrums of British politics.
The EU , thought they could break the back of Parliament, force us into a corner, and take whatever deal they deemed fit to offer us, yes youve got it (pattern emerging yet ?)
GOT IT WRONG !
But youve read somewhere its going to be a CATASTROPHE? Sorry , but Im not buying it , and as time goes by , less and less people are supporting this view.
Because virtually NOTHING we have been told by remainers has come true.

Boris was going to be a disaster , bumbling racist, oaf that he is ect ect .....But wait.. after 2 weeks of government from these 'spivs and chancers' Im seeing progress, Im seeing strategy, hope, popularity ... and a solution ?
Im seeing an anti EU party with strong leadership waiting in the wings to swoop in if this government doesnt deliver.
Im seeing an opposition that has got NOTHING left to say.

Most of all Im seeing a population who seem OK with the direction we are taking, there are actually LESS anti Brexit demos now, is this resignation ?
Or have the puppet masters who enable them realise the battle has been lost ?

Because I cant see any way they can win now, we are leaving, and its about time too.

17 minutes ago, Blackstone said:

Hear hear.

You worried about your pension too ?

[Retsdon]

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Boris was going to be a disaster ,

Well, like the rest of your 'they got it wrong' comment, nothing's actually happened yet. We're still in the EU.

Anyway,  if the UK crashes out without a deal in October and you can still post your post 12 months later - I'll happily, yes happily, admit that we, the pessimists, got it wrong. But then if we turn out to have been correct, I will expect you to man up and do the same. Fair's fair...

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Well, like the rest of your 'they got it wrong' comment, nothing's actually happened yet. We're still in the EU.

The got it wrongs , are all about things that were predicted post Ref. and never happened, you are predicting thing post Brexit that may or may not happen.
All im saying , is the judgement and forcasting of remainers is found to be somewhat..dire.

 

8 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Anyway,  if the UK crashes out without a deal in October and you can still post your post 12 months later - I'll happily, yes happily, admit that we, the pessimists, got it wrong. But then if we turn out to have been correct, I will expect you to man up and do the same. Fair's fair...

Of course I will, from my windswept tent in the UN safe zone, north of the devastated areas of what was once the UK 

Ill be honest with you, from the way this has been handled by our government, the meddling of foreign influencers, and the remain bias of most of the media, never mind the propaganda of the EU , Im surprised we are where we are, many times I thought A50 would get revoked.
Do you know why it wasnt ??

Because the majority of the people of this country, and a small group of politicians who actually wanted to enact that majorities wishes, wanted it , and wouldnt be deterred.
Because to have cancelled Brexit against those wishes would have been such an undemocratic act of political dishonesty, this country would never have been the same again.
So thats one disaster averted , on to the next 😄

[Raja Clavata]

I think someone’s getting a bit too excited and counting their chickens just a tad too early here, but hey, time will tell...

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I think someone’s getting a bit too excited and counting their chickens just a tad too early here, but hey, time will tell...

We live in exciting times .
But are not the predictions of Brexit doom the exact same thing ?

Time will tell, but at least we will find out whether we were right or wrong, rather than never knowing at all ?

Carpe Diem ? 

 

[Cantrem ember]

11 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I think someone’s getting a bit too excited and counting their chickens just a tad too early here, but hey, time will tell...

You really do want it all to go horribly wrong, don't you?

[SpringDon]

15 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

<snip>

Of course I will, from my windswept tent in the UN safe zone, north of the devastated areas of what was once the UK 

<snip>

I’ll be in the devastated areas. When it all goes mad max, I think my knowledge of seventies Superbikes (particularly gs Suzuki’s) will prove invaluable. ‘Course the rest of you will probably get eaten.

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, SpringDon said:

I’ll be in the devastated areas. When it all goes mad max, I think my knowledge of seventies Superbikes (particularly gs Suzuki’s) will prove invaluable. ‘Course the rest of you will probably get eaten.

Do I have time to build a bunker ? Cloverfield lane style 😄