Cant We Come Up with Something Better Than Liberal Democracy? – The New Yorker

If Purdy does not have a very detailed plan, he has at least a plan for a plan. He wants to transform American life through mass participation in engaged and shared decision-making, of the sort presaged by Zuccotti Park. To get where we need to go, he argues forcefully for a reformed Supreme Court and a new Constitutional Convention every three decades, to rewrite the whole damn thing.

The familiar parts of Purdys polemic have familiar rejoinders. Occupy Wall Street was a marginal, not a mass, movement, never gaining popular support, and Sanders ran twice and lost twice. Purdy blames market colonization for the Supreme Courts reactionary decision-making, but the Courts most reactionary decisions have little to do with the desires of capitalism or, anyway, of capitalists: the Goldman Sachs crowd is fine with womens autonomy, being significantly composed of liberal women, and would prefer fewer gun massacres. And though the struggle to maintain democratic institutions within a capitalist society has been intense, the struggle to maintain democratic institutions in anti-capitalist countries has been catastrophic. We do poorly, but the Chinese Communist Party does infinitely worse, even when it tilts toward some version of capitalism.

For that matter, would our democratic life really be improved by a new Constitutional Conventionto which Alex Joness followers, demanding to know where the U.F.O.s are being kept, are as likely to show up as Elizabeth Warrens followers, demanding that corporations be made to pay their fair share of taxes? The U.S. Constitution, undemocratic though it is, is surely an additive to the problem, not the problem itself. Parliamentary systems, like Canadas, have also been buffeted by populist and illiberal politics, while Brexit, a bit of rough-hewn majoritarian politics in a country without a written constitution, shows the dangers of relying on a one-night plebiscite.

Purdys basic political position seems to be that politics would be better if everyone shared his. Those of us who share his politics might agree, but perhaps with the proviso that the kind of sharing he is cheering for has more to do with the poetics of protest than with politics as generally understood. Politics, as he conceives it, is a way of getting all the people who agree with you to act in unison. This is a big part of democratic societies. Forming coalitions, assembling multitudes, encouraging action on urgent issues: these are all essential to a healthy country, even more than the business of filling in the circle next to a name you have just encountered for an office you know nothing about.

But the greatest service of politics isnt to enable the mobilization of people who have the same views; its to enable people to live together when their views differ. Politics is a way of getting our ideas to brawl in place of our persons. Though democracy is practiced when people march on Washington and assemble in parkswhen they feel that they have found a common voicepolitics is practiced when the shouting turns to swapping. Politics was Disraeli getting one over on the nineteenth-century Liberal Party by leaping to electoral reform for the working classes, thereby trying to gain their confidence; politics was Mandela making a deal with de Klerk to respect the white minority in exchange for a peaceful transition to majority rule. Politics is Biden courting and coaxing Manchin (whose replacement would be incomparably farther to the right) to make a green deal so long as it was no longer colored green. The difficulty with the Athenian synecdoche is that getting the part to act as the whole presupposes an agreement among the whole. There is no such agreement. Trumpism and Obamaism are not two expressions of one will for collective action; they are radically incommensurable views about whats needed.

Purdys faith in collective rationality as the spur to common actionhis less mystical version of Rousseaus general willleaves him not entirely immune to what could be called the Munchkinland theory of politics. This is the belief that although the majority population of any place might be intimidated and silenced by an oppressive forcecapitalism or special interests or the Churchthey would, given the chance, sing ding-dong in unison and celebrate their liberation. They just need a house dropped on their witch.

The perennial temptation of leftist politics is to suppose that opposition to its policies among the rank and file must be rooted in plutocratic manipulation, and therefore curable by the reassertion of the popular will. The evidence suggests, alas, that very often what looks like plutocratic manipulation really is the popular will. Many Munchkins like the witch, or at least work for the witch out of dislike for some other ascendant group of Munchkins. (Readers of the later L.Frank Baum books will recall that Munchkin Country is full of diverse and sometimes discordant groupings.) The awkward truth is that Thatcher and Reagan were free to give the plutocrats what they wanted because they were giving the people what they wanted: in one case, release from what had come to seem a stifling, union-heavy statist system; in the other, a spirit of national, call it tribal, self-affirmation. One can deplore these positions, but to deny that they were popular is to pretend that a two-decade Tory reign, in many ways not yet completed, and a forty-nine-state sweep in 1984 were mass delusions. Although pro-witch Munchkins may be called collaborators after their liberation, they persist in their ways, and resent their liberators quite as much as they ever feared the witch. Of course, I never liked all those scary messages she wrote in the sky with her broom, they whisper among themselves. But at least she got things done. Look at this place now. The bricks are all turning yellow.

Purdys vision of democracy would, of course, omit the bugs in the Athenian model: the misogyny, the slavery, the silver mines. But what if the original sin of the democratic vision lies right therewhat if, by the time we got to Athens, democratic practice was already fallen and hopelessly corrupted, with the slaves and the silver mines and the imperialism inherent to the Athenian model? This is the hair-raising thesis advanced by the illustrious Japanese philosopher Kjin Karatani. In his book Isonomia and the Origins of Philosophy, Athenian democracy is exposed as a false idol. He does not see this from some Straussian point of view, in which Platos secret compact of liars is a better form of government than the rabble throwing stones at Socrates. On the contrary, he is a staunch egalitarian, who believes that democracy actually exemplifies the basic oppressive rhythm of ruler and ruled. His ideal is, instead, isonomia, the condition of a society in which equal speaks to equal as equal, with none ruled or ruling, and he believes that such an order existed around the Ionian Islands of the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.E., before the rise of Athens.

If Purdy is susceptible to the Munchkinland theory of social change, Karatani is tempted by what might be called the Atlantis theory of political history. Once upon a time, there was a great, good place where life was beautiful, thought was free, and everyone was treated fairly. This good place was destroyed by some kind of earthquakeperhaps visited from outside, perhaps produced by an internal shaking of its own platesand vanished into the sea, though memories of it remain. The Atlantis in question may be Platos original idealized island, or it may be the pre-patriarchal society of Europe, or the annual meeting of Viking peasants in nightless Iceland. In every case, there was once a better place than this one, and our path to renewal lies in renewing its tenets.

Karatanis Atlantean view is plausibly detailed. The settlement around the Ionian Islands in the centuries after Homer (but before the imperial ascent of Athens) was marked by an escape from clan society; the islands welcomed immigrants of all kinds. Free of caste connections and tribal ties, the Ionians were able to engineer a new kind of equality. They didnt become hunter-gatherers, but they recuperated nomadism by the practice of foreign trade and manufacturing. Like fourteenth-century Venice or seventeenth-century Amsterdam, Ionia was a place where there wasnt much land to till, let alone a landed aristocracy to own and exploit the terrain and its tillers, and so people had to earn a living making and trading things. As a result, they were open in ways that mainland Greece was not.

A key point, in Karatanis account, is that Ionian trade wasnt captured by a state monopoly but conducted through networks of makers and traders. The earnings of trade, under those conditions, were more evenly distributed, and the freedom of movement put a limit on abusive political arrangements. The reason class divisions multiplied under the money economy in Athens was that from the outset political power was held by a land-owning nobility, he writes. That kind of inequality, and ruler-ruled relation, did not arise in Ionia. That is to say, isonomia obtained. If in a given polis such inequality and ruler-ruled relation did arise, people could simply move to another place.

For Karatani, working in a Marxian tradition, ideas tend to mirror the economic exigencies of their contexts, and he thinks that in Ionia they did. The line of philosophers who came of age around the islands, usually called the pre-Socratics, were notably unconcerned with hierarchy or with religious mysticism. They imagined the universe as governed by material, transactional exchanges. Thales, who lived in the Ionian city of Miletus and thought that everything was made of water, was making an essentially empirical attempt to understand the world without recourse to fate or divine supervision. (So, for Karatani, was Heraclitus, a century later, who thought everything was made of fire.) Karatani insists that the pre-Socratic physics is inseparable from an Ionian political ideology. Ionian physics posited an equilibrium of forces, not a hierarchy of them with a mystical overseer. Anaximander, Thales protg, introduced the principle of justice (or dik) as the law governing the natural world. The play of forces in the physical world, fluid and forever in exchange, mimicked and governed the forces in the social world. Isonomia was at the root of it all.

Isonomia in Ioniait has therhythm of a song lyric. One feels again the shape of a familiar and accurate historical meme: trading and manufacturing centers tend to be markedly more egalitarian than landholding ones. Democratic practices of one kind or anotherthough limited and oligarchic in Venice, bloodied by sporadic religious warfare in Hollandusually take root in such places, only to be trampled as power consolidates and an lite takes hold.

You said it. I heard it. Theres no taking it back, Harold!

Cartoon by David Sipress

Was Karatanis Atlantis, that utopia of isonomia, actually anything like this? Early on, he cheerfully admits that there are almost no historical or archaeological materials to give us an idea of what Ionian cities were really like. But he suggests that we can argue by indirect evidence and by drawing inferences in world history from cases that resemble Ionia. These turn out to include medieval Iceland, also a refuge for exiles, with its famous ingvellir, or meeting place, and pre-Revolutionary New England, settled by refugees as well, and marked by its isonomic townships and town meetings.

It is an odd way to argue history and has odd results. In Iceland, you can visit the ingvellir, where the Viking democrats gatheredand the next thing you are shown is the drowning pool, where women were executed. The drowning pool came into use later, to be sure, but is part of a similar social inheritance. Rough justice, the sagas make plain, is as much an Icelandic tradition as shared goods are. And one has only to read Hawthorne to have a very different view of life in those New England townships, especially for people who did not quite fit the pattern.

Karatanis historical approachprojecting his ideals upon an idealized pasthas other confounding consequences. What are we to make, for instance, of his insistence that the poems of Homer, the bard of Ionia, are not aristocratic? In truth, the force of the occasional protests against aristocratic practices in Homer are moving because of their rarity, rather like the cries of the peasants in King Lear. Blood will tell is pretty much the motto on every inspired page. But Karatani needs Homer to be isonomic and will make him so. More practically, how did Ionians resolve the perpetual fact of political conflict? Perpetual secession seems to be the answer; when things get bad, simply go to another island. (The old liberal huff Im moving to Canada! is more serious when Canada is just a rowboat ride away.) This is not always ridiculous advicea series of successive secessions in New England is how we got Rhode Islandbut it doesnt seem like much of a plan for settled modern countries.

Greek islands before the rise of Athens, chilly and isolated medieval Iceland, the New England townships of the Colonial era: these sound like oddly sparse and remote spots to build a dream on. Perhaps all such dreams can be built only so. Reading Karatanis account of ancient Ionia, one recalls the parallel dream of ancient Sparta, the militaristic state that so inspired authoritarians from Plato to Hitler. An isonomic Ionia is infinitely preferable to an authoritarian Sparta but seems of the same imaginative kind. We cant build back better from a place that didnt really exist. Certainly, from what little we do know, the Ionians seem not to have been egalitarian at all in the sense we mean and have gone far toward achievingthe aim of equality between the sexes, or among religious groups, or among ethnicities or sexualities. Yet the basic inquiry into the possibility of human relationships that Karatani undertakes is moving, even inspiring. Though he doesnt cite them, his Ionians most resemble the classic anarchists, of the Mikhail Bakunin or Emma Goldman kind: repudiating all power relations, ruler to ruled, in a way that shames more timid liberal imaginations.

The rest is here:

Cant We Come Up with Something Better Than Liberal Democracy? - The New Yorker

Europe has learned nothing from Brexit – POLITICO.eu

Dr. Eoin Drea is senior research officer at the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies.

It remains remarkable that for such a seismic event, Brexit continues to be most noticeable by its absence in the formulation of future European Union strategy. From the Conference on the Future of Europe to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyens state of the union address, Brexit, Britain and the future of the Anglo-EU relationship struggle to elicit a single reference or positive soundbite.

This in itself is a remarkable achievement given Britains unique role in the EU landscape. A European economic giant and a 47-year veteran of (mostly positive) EU policymaking is now deemed less relevant than Brussels unspecified vision for connected Global Gateway.

It is almost as if as in many a Parisians dreams Britain never really existed at all.

Alas, as the first anniversary of Brexit approaches, its clear that the EU has learned every wrong lesson from the divorce. Riled by the deliberately provocative actions of successive British governments since 2016, the EU has been unable to separate the U.K.s bark from its bite and the danger this poses is swiftly growing.

Consider how the EUs current approach to discussing Britain is based entirely on a strategy of moving past Brexit.

This is an approach that has been strengthened by the pandemic, which has allowed the EU to subsume Brexit within a broader reimagining of a more relevant, more assertive, more global union.

Europe, in its own mind, has bigger fish to fry.

But while moving past Brexit may make the EU feel better about being jilted by one of its biggest members, it is a woefully short-sighted approach to understanding Brexits potential consequences for its own long-term development.

Another weakness in the EUs approach to understanding Brexit is that it has obsessively focused on Brexiteer misrepresentations of Europe.

This its not me, its you approach has constructed a narrative that views Brexit as a wholly disfigured British issue. Feeding into lazy tropes of British detachment, this blueprint has trapped the EU in easy tales of British exceptionalism.

No real attempt has been made to place the U.K.s engagement in Europe in the specific context of the European integration process. Brexit was never just a wholly British affair. It was also shaped by the strategic choices made in Brussels over several decades.

The final EU miscalculation when it comes to Britain may be its most damaging. Brussels is continuing to underestimate the U.Ks strategic importance and refusing to acknowledge or even contemplate the political risks of an even mildly successful Britain.

The EUs focus on the grinding technical details of protecting the single market due to Britains annoying but highly effective diversionary focus on Northern Ireland has resulted in Brussels misjudging the medium-term risks of Britain as a strategic competitor.

But that risk is real.

The coming years will bring a stabilization of Britains internal politics and a refocusing of the countrys economic priorities in areas where it has existing strengths. Finance, education, security and defense, Fintech and AI are just some of those areas that could lead to a stable, and relatively dynamic, economic framework for the country.

And for all the talk of the economic costs of Brexit and COVID-19, Britains economic outlook in terms of public debt, economic growth and unemployment remain considerably better than most other major European economies, with the exception of Germany.

Britain isnt Italy, no matter how much the EU might wish it so.

Britains return to growth will be complemented by London doubling down on its strategic partnerships with the United States and the other English-speaking economies of the Anglosphere.

Although completely derided in the EU, Britains relationship with the U.S. remains the underpinning of its post-EU identity. This is a relationship whose strategic importance has been masked by Brusselss perceptions of British weakness.

For Westminster, it is irrelevant whether Britain is viewed as Washingtons most important partner Londons preferred choice or as a vassal of the U.S., in the words of Clment Beaune, Frances minister of state for European affairs.

Even subjugation brings the benefits of proximity, relevance and inclusion in Washingtons wider geopolitical strategies. These are benefits lacking in other EU member countries relationships with the Anglosphere, as evidenced by the recent controversy over Australian submarines and the AUKUS defense pact.

Its clear that the EU needs to adopt a new strategy toward Britain. All the hard talk in Schuman coffee shops in Brussels of punishing or going hard on Britain if the Northern Ireland Protocols Article 16 is invoked is ridiculous. Europe missed its chance to impose its economic power on Westminster during the Brexit negotiations.

What recent British actions have really shown is that beyond the political theatrics, Prime Minister Boris Johnsons plan is simply to keep the Brexit fires burning at home through a constant feed of mutual Anglo-EU antagonism. An EU overreaction to British goading is the ultimate aim.

So, rather than succumbing to every little British provocation, Europe needs to take the long view and claim the high ground. Brussels should shrug off British threats with a smile, talk the language of strategic partnership through gritted teeth and understand that Brexit doesnt start and end with the Irish border and angry French fishermen.

Theres a much bigger game at play.

Because Britain wont always be a political disaster. Soon it will be a serious economic threat.

Go here to read the rest:

Europe has learned nothing from Brexit - POLITICO.eu

‘Tear up the ENTIRE deal!’ Boris urged to strike back in Brexit row if EU refuses to cave – Daily Express

The UK's Brexit minister Lord Frost has continued to insist the Northern Ireland Protocol is not working, and has called for large parts of the mechanism to be completely overhauled. He has continued to demand the removal of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) from the deal, which would effectively act as a referee between the two sides in any future disputes. The EU has flat-out rejected this and so far several rounds of talks between London and Brussels have failed to make any significant breakthrough.

This has led Lord Frost to warn the UK could trigger Article 16 of the Protocol, which could see the deal significantly overhauled or completely torn apart.

But Brussels has said it will retaliate, sparking fears of a potentially destructive trade war that would send tensions between the two sides soaring.

Ben Harris-Quinney, chairman of the Bow Group think tank, believes the EU is gradually "softening" its stance in talks, a move the UK should move to embrace.

However, he warned if progress can't be made in the negotiations soon and the EU won't move from its position, "it is better to scrap the entire deal".

Mr Harris-Quinney told Express.co.uk: "The EU remains unwilling to make significant concessions on goods and use of the ECJ as final court of arbitration.

"The EU began by formally refusing to renegotiate the Northern Irish Protocol, but we are now effectively in a renegotiation, so there is a genuine softening and that should be embraced.

"The UK was the party to begin the renegotiation, and there is no point entering into that process and not solving the problem.

"We need to resolve the issue now and if the EU are unwilling to budge then it is better to scrap the entire deal than to continue a circumstance that clearly is not working, creating only further discord and uncertainty."

READ MORE:France rushes to its Caribbean islands as fury surges over pandemic

The politics expert has urged the UK to trigger Article 16 and "force a conclusion" if the EU continues its hard-line stance on key issues such as checks on goods and the role of the ECJ.

But he also fears the EU could once again gain the upper hand while there also being a risk Britain has not fully prepared for the chaotic fallout triggering Article 16 could inflict.

Mr Harris-Quinney added: "If the EU is not willing to budge on key issues like goods checks and ECJ arbitration, the Government should trigger Article 16 and force a conclusion, rather than allowing the status quo and negotiations to carry on indefinitely.

"The Government has however taken a naive approach thus far, there is a danger of being out-manoeuvred by the EU again, and there is a risk that they have not adequately prepared or positioned themselves for the potential fallout of triggering Article 16."

DON'T MISSBoris risks losing US ally: ministers don't understand Irish feeling[REPORT]Brexiteer hits out at bloc as he urges Macron to listen to Boris[COMMENTS]Macron's hatred of Britain will keep migrants coming says PAUL BALDWIN[OPINION]

On Friday, Lord Frost warned a "significant" gap remains between the UK and the EU after crunch talks aimed at resolving the Protocol issues once again ended in stalemate.

The Brexit minister repeated a threat to use Article 16 of the protocol to override some of the rules he negotiated because of the impact on Northern Ireland.

Lord Frost said in a statement: "We would still like to find a negotiated solution.

"But the gap between our positions is still significant and we are ready to use Article 16 to protect the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement if other solutions cannot be found."

Following the talks with his UK counterpart, European Commission vice president Maros Sefcovic said a "decisive push" is required to get a medicines deal over the line.

The pair will hold further talks on possible changes to the Northern Ireland Protocol in Brussels this week.

Link:

'Tear up the ENTIRE deal!' Boris urged to strike back in Brexit row if EU refuses to cave - Daily Express

Ask a Brexit economic expert anything about the current situation between the UK and the EU – The Independent

The Brexit heat is still firmly lodged on the government as negotiations and discussions around next steps continue.

Only this week it emerged that before Brexit Britains chief Brexit negotiator warned that leaving the single market and customs union would cost 1,500 per person.

Lord Frost is now among the hardest of Brexiteers in the government arguing this week that the UK needs to ditch a European-style economy entirely.

Meanwhile, Frenchfishermenhave said they plan to blockade the channel tunnel in protest at Britains refusal to issue them with work licences.

The running dispute over the post-Brexit fishing rights is expected to boil over on Friday and cause even more disruption to UK supply chains.

The channel tunnel is a vital artery and carried vast volumes of freight and passenger traffic between the continent and the UK.

Not only that but in a week when 27 people died while trying to cross the English Channel, it is also clear that Britain leaving the EUs sphere of cooperation has made it harder to police Britains sea border, not easier.

So where does all this leave when it comes to the Brexit deal and what is likely to happen next?

To answer some of your latest Brexit questions we have got a Brexit economics expert on hand.

Victoria Hewson is the Institute of Economic Affairs Head of Regulatory Affairs and Research Associate. She will be on hand to answer your Brexit questions in the comments section below on Friday, 26 November, between 1-2pm.

Victoria is a lawyer and practiced for 12 years in the fields of technology and financial services, before joining the Legatum Institute Special Trade Commission to focus on trade and regulatory policy.

She has published work on the implications and opportunities of Brexit in financial services and movement of goods and the issues in connection with the Irish border. Before entering the legal profession Victoria worked for Procter & Gamble in the UK and Germany.

Register to submit your question in the comments box under this article. If youre not already a member, click sign up in the comments section to leave your question.

Dont worry if you cant see your question they will be hidden until Victoria joins the conversation to answer them.

Then join us live on this page from 1-2pm as Victoria tackles as many of your travel queries as she can within an hour.

Here is the original post:

Ask a Brexit economic expert anything about the current situation between the UK and the EU - The Independent

Northern Ireland is huge in TV, but post-Brexit reality is far less glitzy – The Guardian

Bars are full, restaurants are turning away customers who dont have reservations and, judging by the people laden with bags, the Christmas shopping season is already under way. Belfast has known plenty of crises down the decades but this doesnt feel like one of them.

Instead, on a Thursday evening in November, Northern Irelands capital has the air of any other big provincial UK city, with a thriving hospitality sector and plenty of money changing hands. Were it not for the accents, it could be Leeds or Manchester.

But as with Leeds and Manchester, scars are visible just a short walk from the city centre, and in Belfast these result not just from the impact of industrial decline but from the Troubles, too. The Berlin Wall may have come down; the peace wall separating the Falls and Shankill roads has not.

Brexit has added a new level of complexity to the highly charged politics of Northern Ireland. The protocol agreed by London and Brussels prevented a hard border being created between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland by putting a barrier between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK in the Irish Sea.

If the plan was to make the peace process more secure, it didnt work. Unionist politicians say strict interpretation of the protocol by the EU has made the agreement unworkable, and Brexit minister Lord Frost has for weeks been threatening to invoke article 16, which puts an emergency brake on the Northern Ireland chapter of the UK-EU deal. That could trigger a full-blown trade war, which would be devastating for businesses already feeling the impact of the extra trade friction.

Archie Norman, chairman of Marks & Spencer, says: At the moment things are not too bad. We do have border constraints but they are deal-able-with. Things are a lot better than they are in the Republic of Ireland or in continental Europe, where weve announced a restructuring of our food operations.

Norman insists there isnt a food safety problem. Our food standards are higher than those in continental Europe. The sensible thing would be to agree to product equivalence, where we would agree not to drop standards. If we were planning any variations, we would notify the EU and they could then decide what to do about it.

In the grand scale of things the economic issue is so trivial. Northern Ireland has a similar population to Hertfordshire. Of course it matters hugely politically, but there is no hazard to anyone from produce from the rest of the UK arriving there. We are at risk of going to war over nothing.

Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis wants a deal that gives exporters the best of both worlds access to the EU single market and the UK internal market.

The conditions are met to trigger article 16, he said, but we dont want to use it. We would much rather come to an agreement with the EU. Thats achievable with a different implementation process.

Lewis says the public discourse over Northern Ireland focuses on Brexit and the Troubles, and it is hard to cut through that so businesses and individuals see the opportunities that exist. Everyone wants to talk about the protocol and the legacy of the past. There is a different story going on.

One part of that story is the boom in Northern Irelands film and TV industry catalysed by Game of Thrones. What began with some modest pump-priming in 2010 led to eight blockbuster series and acted as a magnet for other productions. We invested heavily in the pilot. We took a risk and it paid off, said Richard Williams, chief executive of Northern Ireland Screen.

GoT blazed a trail: after it came, among others, Line of Duty, Derry Girls, Dalgleish, a new mini-series based on Henry Fieldings novel Tom Jones, and The Northman, a new Viking revenge film starring Nicole Kidman. Belfast now has three film studios, and Williams says the success of the industry is a shining example of what was meant to happen post the Good Friday agreement.

PAC group a manufacturing firm in north Belfast that comes up with solutions to engineering problems may lack the stardust of a new Kidman movie, but in its way it is emblematic of the Northern Ireland economy: small (45 employees) but growing fast post-lockdown, and now running into supply constraints.

Darren Leslie, the companys business development director and one of its founders, said: Things are starting to bounce back. Everybody is busy. Nobody can get people. Workload is going through the roof. We are having trouble finding the right people and keeping them.

More than any other part of the UK, Northern Ireland is a land of contrasts. It has by far the highest share of public sector employment, yet Queens Belfast boasts the most spin-offs of any university, and over the past 25 years public-private partnership has helped build an impressive cybersecurity cluster. It is the poorest region and the happiest.

John Turner, professor of finance at Queens, said Northern Ireland had an abundance of social capital that may explain high happiness levels. People have come through the Troubles and can deal with adversity. Maybe it has made people a bit more resilient.

Graham Brownlow of Queens Universitys management school said Northern Ireland had three sets of economic problems. First, it shared in the problems of the UK economic model and was entwined in that. Second, the UKs weaknesses such as poor productivity and low investment in R&D, were magnified in Northern Ireland. Finally, it had its own unique problems: the protocol, the shared border, and the fact that the Good Friday agreement didnt really take account of the need to run for economic reconstruction alongside political reconciliation.

A lot of people suggest solutions that dont deal with all the sets of problems. Theyll suggest a silver-bullet solution such as having the same low rate of corporation tax as the republic but there isnt one, Brownlow says.

The Troubles held the economy back, leading to weaker investment and trade. Public spending plugged the gap, and has been rebadged since the Good Friday agreement to form part of the peace dividend. But political instability has been holding back the economy since partition in 1921, and in the early 1960s the Treasury pressed for closure of the shipbuilders Harland and Wolff as part of an economic restructuring.

The close links between politicians and businesspeople foster cronyism. The education system remains largely fractured along Catholic-Protestant lines. Northern Ireland has the largest proportion of Neets young people not in employment, education or training in the UK. Small businesses tend to stay small.

Owen Reidy, assistant general secretary at the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, also complained of a lack of a long-term strategy, and of squabbling local politicians possibily over-estimating their importance: This is a little place on the fringes of Europe. There is too much emphasis on looking south, looking east or looking across the Atlantic.

Some look to daddy in London; some look to mummy in Dublin. But mummy and daddy are not that interested any more.

Ever since Milton Friedman coined the phrase, economists have been arguing about the merits of helicopter money drops of free cash designed to encourage consumers to spend. Northern Ireland is putting the theory to test.

Taking its lead from a scheme tried in Jersey last year, every adult in the country has been given a Mastercard loaded with 100 that they have to spend before mid-December. In an attempt to support local businesses and encourage high street footfall, the money cant be spent online.

Gordon Lyons, Northern Irelands minister of the economy, says if every adult spends up to the 100 limit, there will be a 140m boost to the economy. We wanted to give businesses an immediate shot in the arm and we are at the peak of the scheme right now.

Lyons is hoping for an even bigger boost thanks to a multiplier effect from, say, someone buying a new washing machine and needing to hire a plumber to fit it. Mastercard says there was a discernible multiplier effect in Jersey.

Even so, some say the money from the UK governments Covid recovery fund might have been used more effectively. Peter Bryson of Save the Children in Northern Ireland said helicopter money would be better spent on topping up the incomes of those on universal credit or child payments to the one in four Northern Irish children living in poverty.

SDLP politician Matthew OToole asked: Is this the right time for a stimulus? People are going to be using it on Black Friday and it is hard to see it having an added stimulus.

He thinks it a fascinating economic experiment, though. People will be doing PhDs on it for years.

See the article here:

Northern Ireland is huge in TV, but post-Brexit reality is far less glitzy - The Guardian

Only 18 per cent of Britons think Brexit is going well, poll finds – The Independent

Fewer than one in five people in Great Britain believe Brexit has been a success, a YouGov poll has found.

Meanwhile, 52 per cent of respondents think that things have gone badly since the transition period ended 11 months ago.

The percentage of Britons dissatisfied with the effects of the divorce hovered around 40 per cent at the start of the year. However, this figure has shot up in recent months, following the petrol crisis in September, which was sparked by a shortage of HGV drivers.

The latest numbers are likely to make grim reading for a government that continues to suggest Brexit is in the best interest of the country.

The electorate now thinks Brexit is the largest single issue facing the UK, according to an Ipsos Mori survey carried out last month.

Some 28 per cent of people viewed it as the most pressing concern, slightly more than those who thought the pandemic should be the governments main focus.

In September, it was the other way around, with 37 per cent of voters deciding Covid-19 was the nations most urgent problem and 20 per cent thinking it was Brexit.

The increased concern over Brexit came around the same time that Richard Hughes, the chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) warned that the decision to leave the bloc would reduce our long run GDP by around 4 per cent.

By comparison, Mr Hughes, speaking after the Budget was announced on 27 October, estimated that the impact of the pandemic would lower the countrys GDP by roughly another 2 per cent.

Other Brexit headaches include the UKs ongoing fishing dispute with France, which flared up again on Friday, as French fishermen blocked ports and the Channel Tunnel over a disagreement about operating licences.

Follow this link:

Only 18 per cent of Britons think Brexit is going well, poll finds - The Independent

Our Brexit deal is the reason Channel crossings are out of control – The Independent

One of the biggest issues concerning the government is what to do about asylum seekers crossing the English Channel. About 8,460 made the crossing in 2020, but more than 23,000 have done so this year. The government has undoubtedly been taken by surprise and didnt anticipate such a major spike in crossings.

These journeys are perilous. Last Wednesday saw the deadliest tragedy yet, as 27 drowned while making the crossing, including several children.

In response, former government ministers have accused the home secretary Priti Patel of making it up as she goes along, as she seems to have neither a workable plan to reduce numbers nor any explanation for why crossings are at record levels on her watch.

So far, the ideas offered are nonsense, unlawful, or both. One idea was to process all asylum seekers in Albania at an estimated cost of 100k each. However, the Albanian ambassador said this would never happen as its against international law. Earlier, there had been talk of suggestions that processing might happen elsewhere, for instance in Gibraltar or Rwanda, but the government said the reports were groundless speculation.

A second idea is to push refugees back, putting those in sinking rafts, including women and children, in grave danger. This has been branded inhumane and unconscionable by Labour, but it is also a breach of the Merchant Shipping (Safety of Navigation) Regulations 2020, which require the rescue of those in distress at sea.

For her part, Patel has spent most of her energy pointing fingers rather than solving problems. She has blamed open borders, even though there have been post-Covid restrictions in place; and the French authorities for not doing more, even though the UK was reportedly in arrears with regard to financially supporting such efforts. No doubt more can and should be done on the French coast.

Yet none of this explains why now; why so many more people are crossing the English Channel since 2019 than ever before. It is not because the water is warmer, or the waves less rough; its not that there is less Channel traffic, or that better rafts are being used. The one big thing that has happened, and that may play a key role in explaining the increase, is the prime ministers Brexit deal.

The relevant problem with Brexit is that, in exiting the European Union, the UK left what was arguably one of the most popular immigration policies among the British public: the Dublin III Regulation. This is an EU agreement among member states that if anyone sets foot in another EU country first, they can be returned to that country. Under the Dublin Regulation, anyone found leaving French shores to come to England could be returned as per this agreement.

The issue now is that leaving the European Union has meant leaving the Dublin Regulation. The government was repeatedly asked by Labour during the Brexit negotiations whether the Dublin Regulation membership would be part of any deal; in essence, the government either forgot or did not take it seriously, leaving any mention of it out of the final deal and nothing to replace it.

This matters, because the regulatory change will have been noticed. It means that, since the prime ministers oven-ready deal was accepted despite having no provision for dealing with Dublin Regulation cases, anyone travelling post-Brexit to Britain will arrive without the rule in place that means they can be returned to another country in the EU. What is worse is that the government has failed to create any extradition treaties to address this matter, and so faces extra hurdles in trying to enforce returns. This has contributed to the UKs enforced returns being at a record low.

So, despite the tough-sounding rhetoric of processing individuals abroad, which other countries have rejected or resisted on the grounds that it is unlawful, the government has no grip on how this situation came into being in the first place.

Now, those who make the crossing know it will be difficult to return them to France. Plus, with the Home Office taking longer and longer to process and assess applications, arrivals also know they will be unlikely to be going anywhere soon, and will be able to reside in the UK for months or even years as their applications are slowly considered.

It was a clear failure of Brexit talks to omit the inclusion of the Dublin Regulation or some other alternative in its place, just as it is a failure of caseload management that the Home Office is understaffed and under-resourced.

Frankly, if Patel is looking for someone to blame, she should look in the mirror when standing next to the prime minister. Their shortsighted handling of negotiations has led us to where we are today. They did not take back control, but gave it up in a rush. Until they learn lessons and correct their oversight, things may get much worse for them.

Thom Brooks is a professor of law and government at Durham University

Read the original post:

Our Brexit deal is the reason Channel crossings are out of control - The Independent

In Montclair, our very own Brexit (On The Other Hand) – Montclair Local

Element 5 Digital via Unsplash

By RICHIE CHEVATFor Montclair Local

Well, we did it! We fixed education in Montclair. Congratulations all around.

With the new elected school board, we have definitely made our educational establishment more accountable? Responsive? How about elected? We can say for sure that the new school board will be much more elected than previous ones.

Feel better? Good, because thats about all we know. Like the people of the UK voting for Brexit, we took a firm stand that will result in who can say? When will the first elections take place? What will happen to the repairs desperately needed for the schools? How exactly is this new system going to improve, you know education?

It certainly sounds more democratic, which we all know is a good thing (well, most of us). But what this new system really does is establish the following qualifications for school board: Candidates will need 1) $20,000 to $30,000 to spend on an election campaign and 2) an axe to grind. Why the axe? Because why else are you going to spend $20,000 to $30,000 to win a seat on the Montclair school board?

Visit MontclairLocal.news/donations to make your tax-deductible contribution today, to keep Montclair Local strong and help us do even more to serve the amazing community of Montclair.

Funny thing about axes. They make you think of words like chop, cut, hack or maul. They have labels that read, Use in case of fire. Never in the whole history of axes has there been one with a label that read Use in case of guaranteeing quality education for all students.

If you dont think people have an axe to grind about education, perhaps I can introduce you to a little concept called Critical Race Theory. Or remind you of every argument weve ever had about education in this town. Theres always an axe to grind and its always called chop, cut or slash.

Across the country, right-wing nuts are mobilizing to storm school boards, take them over and promote insane conspiracy theories. But that would never happen in Montclair, would it? At least, not openly. School board candidates tend to have innocuous, generic slogans along the lines of Good Schools for a Good Montclair, or maybe Better Schools for a Better Montclair, or how about The Best Schools for a

Well, you get the idea.

And dont worry, it wont just be right-wing nut jobs trying to hijack our schools. There will be more than a few good liberals with self-identified brilliant, innovative ideas for improving schools while running them like a business and employing technology to disrupt old paradigms while reducing costs and boosting efficiencies. Or something like that. On top of that, now every single school improvement, like fixing the staircases, will have to go up for a town-wide vote. That sounds like a lot of fun.

It will be up to those of us who care about guaranteeing quality education for all, which we can only hope is more than the 30 percent of residents who have students in the public schools, to mobilize ourselves in every single election and decipher which of the generic-sounding slogans represents halfway decent candidates. Or, perhaps well run our own candidates you know, Superlative Schools for a Superlative Montclair? I mean how hard could it be? Plus, hardly anyone votes in local elections, so we should be able to on the other hand, it could be a lot harder than it seems.

On the other other hand, maybe the referendum didnt go far enough. One of the main things the school board does is select the superintendent, but that doesnt seem right, does it? To make things truly accountable and responsive we ought to elect the superintendent too, right? And what about principals? Elections for everybody!

Well, we seem to have covered everything. Wait! What about, you know, education? Every year the school board writes up a list of truly admirable goals for our schools and hands them to the (unelected!) superintendent to implement. And the superintendent does their best to make those goals a reality. For the most part, everyone involved seems to genuinely want to improve educational opportunities for our kids.

But this all happens in a constrained framework of what is possible. Lowering class size, raising teacher pay, adding learning specialists, universal Pre-K (which we used to have until it was cut by the axe-grinders) and a whole host of possible improvements are always off the table, for one simple reason: money. And to address that, wed have to consider things like, Should education be paid for by property taxes? and What responsibility do we have to address inequality? and How can schools truly guarantee quality education for all, which involves a lot of stuff beyond the control of our town, so lets not even get into it?

Instead, lets celebrate. We did it!

Richie Chevat is a writer, activist and Montclair resident for more than 30 years. Hes the author of the comic sci-fi novel Rate Me Red, the play Who Needs Men? and the young reader version of A Queer History of the United States, among other works. He can often be seen running errands around town on his bike.

Visit link:

In Montclair, our very own Brexit (On The Other Hand) - Montclair Local

‘One area where we lost control’ Brexit cost UK border sovereignty after EU alliance ended – Daily Express

The UK has been embroiled in a tense battle of wills with France over the growing number of attempts to cross the Channel onto British shores. The debate became embittered following the death of 27 people on Wednesday, with the two Governments now putting pressure on each other for immediate action to put an end to the crossings. Former Ambassador to the US Sir Kim Darroch said the debate showed Brexit resulted in the UK "losing control" over its borders despite Britons hoping to regain fuller control by leaving the European Union.

Sir Kim told LBC: "Let's remember that when we were in the EU, under the Dublin Convention, there were rules that allowed us to send migrants back to the EU country in which they first arrived.

"People will tell you they weren't much used, they were complicated, we only sent back a very handful of people.

"But we at least had that then. And with Brexit, which British people voted for so there we are, we don't have that anymore.

"So, in terms of taking back control, this is one area where we lost control."

JUST IN: 'Ireland never believed Brexit would happen!' ex-Irish ambassador lifts lid on EU row

The former diplomat also challenged Boris Johnson's tactics to pressure France into additional action to tackle the migrant crisis in the Channel.

The Prime Minister sparked the fury of Emmanuel Macron after he released a letter addressed to the French President in which he set out his demands on Twitter.

Sir Kim said: "It was designed to show to the domestic audience that the Prime Minister and Number 10 were gripping the issue and were putting some pressure on the French to do something.

"And implicitly signalling that basically, the fault is on the other side of the Channel."

READ MORE: France tells Patel she's 'no longer welcome' at migrant talks after 'unacceptable' letter

But despite the tension over the past few days, Home Office minister Damian Hinds insisted relations between France and the UK remain "strong."

Mr Hinds defended the Prime Minister's letter to President Macron as "exceptionally supportive and collaborative".

Mr Johnson called for joint UK-French patrols by border officials along French beaches to stop boats leaving, which Paris has long resisted.

Mr Johnson also called for talks to begin on a bilateral returns agreement, saying it could have "an immediate and significant impact" on attempts to cross the Channel after the UK left a European Union returns agreement with Brexit.

View post:

'One area where we lost control' Brexit cost UK border sovereignty after EU alliance ended - Daily Express

Immigration to UK slumped in 2020 due to COVID and Brexit – Reuters

British Border Force staff lead a migrant mother with her child on her back into Dover harbour, in Dover, Britain, June 6, 2021. REUTERS/Paul Childs

Register

LONDON, Nov 25 (Reuters) - Net immigration to Britain fell by almost 90% last year to its lowest level since 1993 due to the impact of COVID-19 and Brexit, official figures showed on Thursday.

The Office for National Statistics released a first provisional estimate showing that 34,000 more people moved to Britain last year than emigrated, down from 271,000 in 2019.

"Immigration was much lower in 2020 than in previous years, likely caused by a combination of the coronavirus pandemic and Brexit," the ONS said.

Register

Concern about unrestricted immigration from the European Union - which exceeded 200,000 on a net basis in 2015 - was a major feature of 2016's Brexit referendum. More recently, businesses have complained of labour shortages due to a lack of immigrants.

Britain left the European Union at the end of January 2020 - although EU citizens kept the right to move to Britain until the end of the year - but COVID caused foreign travel to grind to a halt from late March 2020.

The pandemic also severely hampered the ONS's ability to collect migration data as it stopped its traditional practice of surveying passengers at airports and ports.

The provisional data is based on experimental statistical modelling and is likely to be revised, with plausible estimates for 2020 ranging from net immigration of 125,000 to net emigration of 58,000, the ONS said.

Looking at non-British EU nationals alone, there was a net emigration of around 94,000, the ONS estimated.

Unlike most European countries, Britain does not have a system of identity cards or compulsory registration for residents that would make it easy to check migration flows.

"Although there is no evidence of an exodus from the UK in 2020, global travel restrictions meant the movement of people was limited, with all data sources suggesting migration fell to the lowest level seen for many years," ONS statistician Jay Lindop said.

Register

Reporting by David Milliken; editing by Guy Faulconbridge

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

See the original post:

Immigration to UK slumped in 2020 due to COVID and Brexit - Reuters

Brexit talks on the brink as EU refuses to back down – countdown to Article 16 begins – Daily Express

The Brexit minister met with his EU counterpartMaros Sefcovic this afternoon for face-to-face discussions on the Protocol. Talks have already been extended beyond the initial timetable proposed by the UK as both sides frantically try to avoid the suspension of the Brexit treaty via the legal mechanism of Article 16.

While it is understood some progress was made in some areas today, talks once again ended without results.

With Lord Frost warning he will not let discussions become unnecessarily lengthy, each meeting without a breakthrough pushes Britain closer to deploying the nuclear option.

Following today's meeting, the Brexit minister said: "European Commission Vice President Maros Sefcovic and I met today in London to take stock of discussions on the Northern Ireland Protocol.

"We discussed the full range of issues causing difficulties in Northern Ireland.

READ MORE ON OUR BREXIT LIVE BLOG

A solution on the matter must be found within "weeks" if there is to be a solution that does not require Article 16 according to officials.

While there is some hope a long term fix will be found on medicines, the UK mood is more downbeat on other areas.

Despite constructive discussions, no significant progress has been made on easing the flow of goods to Northern Ireland across the Irish Sea.

The protocol effectively places Northern Ireland in the EU's single market for goods to help avoid a hard border with Ireland.

But this has led to checks on goods crossing from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, creating a barrier to trade within the UK.

Lord Frost wants Brussels to agree to scrap all checks on goods set to remain in Northern Ireland with little chance of leaking into the EU single market.

In a statement of his own following today's talks, Mr Sefcovic said there was the need for urgency to reach a solution, as time begins to run out.

He said: "A decisive push is needed to ensure predictability."

The two men will meet again next Friday for further discussions.

Continue reading here:

Brexit talks on the brink as EU refuses to back down - countdown to Article 16 begins - Daily Express

The Brexit project is betraying everything Margaret Thatcher stood for – New Statesman

It has been Margaret Thatcher Week for some in the Conservative Party. Monday (22 November) marked the 31st anniversary of her fall from power, and the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS, a think tank she helped form) commemorated the occasion by hosting the Margaret Thatcher Conference on Trade. To underline her continued significance and relevance, both David Frost and the Prime Minister addressed the conference.

Some peoples minds may have recently drifted back to November 1990 as they recalled a blonde, charismatic, electorally successful but divisive prime minister losing the confidence of their MPs and being forced from office.

I would not draw the parallels too far. As I argued last week, I do not think Conservative MPs are about to remove Boris Johnson. In addition, because she was such a substantial figure, her defenestration was an extraordinary moment in our political history that will not be replicated, even by Boris Johnsons eventual political demise.

The post-1990 history of the Conservative Party has been defined by the events of that November. Which side were you on? For the Lady, or against?

Margaret Thatcher may have lost office but a powerful new legend was created. She perished because she resisted the moves to a European super-state; her pro-European cabinet colleagues had betrayed her at the end but even before that, she had been forced into the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) against her better judgement; and she was clear-eyed as to the risks of UK membership of the single currency. She was punished, much of the Conservative Party has concluded, for being right about Europe.

Sign up for The New Statesmans newsletters Tick the boxes of the newsletters you would like to receive. Morning Call Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. World Review The New Statesmans global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. The New Statesman Daily The best of the New Statesman, delivered to your inbox every weekday morning. Green Times A weekly round-up of The New Statesman's climate, environment and sustainability content. This Week in Business A handy, three-minute glance at the week ahead in companies, markets, regulation and investment, landing in your inbox every Monday morning. The Culture Edit Our weekly culture newsletter from books and art to pop culture and memes sent every Friday. Weekly Highlights A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. From the archive A weekly dig into the New Statesmans archive of over 100 years of stellar and influential journalism, sent each Wednesday. Events and Offers Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.

Of course, the truth is a little more complicated. The poll tax was a colossal error and cost Thatcher support. Had she survived, Labour may well have won the next general election. I think she was right about the ERM but its strongest advocate, Nigel Lawson, was and is a prominent Eurosceptic. And her scepticism about the single currency was justified, but even without her we stayed outside it.

Nonetheless, for many Conservatives the events of November 1990 were an occasion when they picked a side the Eurosceptic side, the anti-establishment side, the plucky, heroic and romantic side and few had reason to regret it.

A generation later, unexpectedly large numbers of Conservative politicians and then Conservative voters, when faced with a binary choice, went for the romantic option Leave. It is easy to believe that for some this was an act of consistency. If you were Eurosceptic in 1990, you supported Margaret Thatcher, and if you were Eurosceptic in 2016, you backed Brexit. Pick a side and stick to it.

On this point, however, the truth is a lot more complicated. Contrary to the hopes of many of its advocates, Brexit does not constitute continuity Thatcherism.

The Prime Ministers speech to the CPS post-conference dinner on 22 November will not be as long remembered as his performance in front of the Confederation of British Industry earlier the same day, during which he referenced Peppa Pig and lost his place in his notes. It was, however, interesting in its appraisal of Thatcher. Johnson professed to be a Thatcher fan and noted the amazing things she did for free markets and her critical role in support of free trade. But he also declares that she has a blot on her record and she had a blind spot. Not only did she campaign to join the common market that handed away this countrys ability to control its own trade policy, but that she was later persuaded that she needed to go further and agree to another cession of powers in the mid-1980s by creating the single market.

The cognitive dissonance is striking. In a speech supposedly celebrating free trade and Margaret Thatcher, Johnson criticised the two policies she supported joining the common market and creating the single market that did most to remove trade barriers.

Brexiteer free-traders appear incapable of understanding some straightforward points that Thatcher grasped when in office. Free trade is not defined solely by tariffs (as it largely was in the 19th century); non-tariff barriers are a bigger issue in modern economies (see the governments complaints about Britain-to-Northern Ireland trade); and that the most effective means of reducing them is a system of shared rules with institutions to enforce them. You can withdraw from those institutions, but it comes at a cost of higher trade barriers.

David Frosts speech at the conference argued that the UK must use its new autonomy to diverge from the European social model and, if not, we will not succeed. His formula for success consists of low taxes (I agree with the Chancellor our goal must be to lower taxes, which some took as a dig at the Prime Minister Et tu, Frostie?) light-touch and proportionate regulation and free trade.

This is all very Thatcherite but a world away from the realities of Brexit. Free trade, as I have mentioned, has been diminished as we have erected barriers with our largest market; businesses face a mountain of new regulatory burdens if they wish to trade with the EU; and taxes are going up, in part because the economy will be 4 per cent smaller than it would otherwise have been. Meanwhile, the Conservatives support has become more social democratic in its outlook.

Brexit may have been seen by its advocates as a reaffirmation of Thatcherism, but the reality is that in giving us a higher taxed, more bureaucratic, less open economy it is its repudiation.

[See also: The best way to boost economic growth is to reverse hard Brexit]

See the original post:

The Brexit project is betraying everything Margaret Thatcher stood for - New Statesman

Its Brexmas! From turkeys to alcohol, how will shortages affect Christmas? – The Guardian

With less than a month to go until Christmas, many retailers are not only having to deal with the impact of the pandemic and a global supply chain crisis but are also experiencing the full impact of Brexit on festive demands for the first time.

Here we talk to the people behind four key components of the festive period to see whether we will notice the impact in our houses and at our tables this year.

CHRISTMAS TREES

An estimated six to eight million Christmas trees are sold every year in the UK each of which has to be felled, pulled out of the field, packed and handed over to the customer.

Usually growers rely on the help of a seasonal workforce to get the job done, many of whom come from outside the UK. But this year, as a result of Brexit, growers have had to find local labourers to step in who may not be as skilled and as a result took longer to do the work. It is feared that this, along with Brexit-related transport issues, could lead to tree shortages.

Christopher Hood, the director and founder of Swindon-based Needlefresh, the UKs largest supplier of trees to blue-chip retail businesses such as Waitrose and Tesco, said that in more than 30 years of working in the business, this season has been one of his hardest and the first time that he has really felt the Brexit effect.

This is the first year weve had real challenges with labour and with transport. We felt it much more this year than last year. He usually hires 80 to 90 people each year, many of whom usually come from eastern Europe. But this year he had to find and train local labourers.

Another factor causing issues is transport, caused by a shortage of HGV drivers and the fact that most British trees are grown in Scotland.

Hood, whose company uses 700 lorries a year to move trees around the country, said: Were having to work a lot harder to get the results and were having to ask customers to be much more flexible as to when they take delivery of the trees.

While he believes he will satisfy all of his tree orders, he has heard that some growers are getting extremely behind. He said it is too early to say whether there will be shortages, but that it will become apparent in the next two weeks. It wont be a matter of availability of product, it will be the ability to get that product to market.

The British Christmas Tree Growers Association reported a rise in early inquiries from retailers but urged shoppers not to panic.

ALCOHOL

Amid Brexit border control issues, shortages of HGV drivers and other staff, combined with pandemic business closures and global shipping disruption, industry leaders have warned of a cocktail of chaos that they say could lead to Christmas alcohol shortages.

In a letter to transport secretary Grant Shapps last week a group of 48 wine and spirits companies said rising costs and supply chain chaos have caused delays in wine and spirit deliveries which could lead to empty drinks aisles in supermarkets.

Miles Beale, the chief executive of the Wine and Spirit Trade Association, which coordinated the letter, said the confluence of factors has led to problems in the supply chain leaving our wine and spirit members faced with major issues getting deliveries to supermarkets, off-licences, pubs and restaurants. He called on the government to take action as a matter of urgency to save British business from facing huge losses.

Pierre Mansour, director of wine at Stevenage-based the Wine Society, said despite having planned for Brexit since the middle of last year, it has made moving stock from vineyards in Europe to the UK the most logistically and operationally challenging Christmas weve had to date.

In the last 12 weeks of 2019, not including bar, pub and restaurant sales, over 403 million bottles of wine and spirits were sold in the UK, according to Nielsen data, with a total value of 3.4bn. Will there be enough to go around this year?

With shipping times doubled, Mansour advised people to order early, especially if they want a specific brand. Already he said demand is higher than this time last year, which was a record-breaking year for the cooperative wine merchant, with many customers ordering magnums for, Covid-permitting, big family gatherings.

TOYS AND GIFTS

After months of talk of fears of empty shelves in toy shops as a result of the global shipping crisis, industry leaders say there will be toys on the shelves after all, but that if youre looking for something specific, its best to buy it sooner rather than later.

Brexit has led to labour shortages in warehouses and especially for HGV drivers, leading to shortages throughout the supply chain.

Roland Earl, director general of the British Toy & Hobby Association, said: There will be toys in the shops but there might not be as many choices as there might be in a normal year. For those seeking a specific gift, he advised people to buy it when they see it rather than wait because once it sells out restocking is difficult.

This festive season has been, he said, a bit of a nightmare for the industry with multiple things all happening at the same time.

FOOD

While fears around turkey availability appear to have calmed for now, after the government introduced a temporary visa scheme for seasonal poultry workers, the supply of other Christmas staples such as pigs in blankets is still less than certain.

Earlier this month the National Pig Association said thousands of pigs had been culled on British farms, and thousands of more were likely to follow, because of a shortage of skilled labour in the UK following Brexit and warned of a catastrophic collapse in the price of pork.

The government has introduced an emergency visa scheme for 800 butchers to come from outside the UK in the run-up to Christmas but they are reportedly not expected to start work until January.

Sophie Hope, a pig farmer at Alexander and Angell Farms in Gloucestershire, said a shortage of skilled workers in processing plants who usually come from the EU has led to a backlog of pigs. That in turn has led to some farmers having to cull pigs on site which means they cannot be sold. Others end up with pigs that are too big and lose half their value. Hope believes there will be shortages of British pork at Christmas. Theres not a shortage of pigs on the ground, but theyre not being able to be slaughtered and processed, she said. She fears shops may instead import pork to fill gaps on shelves, which she said, obviously doesnt help us British farmers at all.

Meanwhile, shoppers appear to be getting their orders for Christmas food in early. Marks & Spencer said it closed its Christmas food-order service early this year because all the slots were taken more quickly than normal despite having more slots: Theres not been a supply issue but certainly shoppers did shop early.

A government spokesperson said the food supply chain is highly resilient and has coped well in responding to unprecedented challenges.

Continue reading here:

Its Brexmas! From turkeys to alcohol, how will shortages affect Christmas? - The Guardian

Brexit chaos as Britons breaking 90-day Schengen rule given 24 hours to return to UK – Daily Express

After the UK left the EU last year and the Brexit transition period ended, British nationals were regarded as third country citizens by Brussels. Britons saw their freedom of movement within the 27-member trading bloc come to an end. UK travellers may still visit the Schengen Area without a visa but are limited to stays of up to 90 days during a 180-day period. The Schengen Area is designed to do away with passport and border controls for the zones 26 member states.

The group of countries signed up to Schengen is slightly different to the EUs 27 member states.

One of the Schengen countries where the 90-day rule now applies to Britons is Spain, which attracts millions of UK travellers each year.

Maura Hillen, a legal expert in the country, told Express.co.uk how the authorities there were implementing the EUs 90-day rule.

The Irish expat, who has lived in Spain for 14 years, and has campaigned for the rights of British expats, is the spokesperson of the property association Abusos Urbansticos Andaluca No.

She warned that Britons who dont have Spanish residency who overstay their welcome could now be given marching orders to return to the UK because of the EUs 90-day stay rule, and that repeat offenders can even be detained.

JUST IN:Covid: Lock it down now! Panic at major threat of vaccine resistant variant

In Spain, overstaying is considered a serious breach of the law, which can result in fines of up to 10,000 (8,462), a ban from the Schengen Area for six months to five years, and even expulsion from the country.

Ms Hillen said the punishments were dependent on the circumstances of where and when Britons are found to have broken the 90-day limit.

She said: It depends on if you're in the airport or if they pick you up in a town where they know you can get a flight, they might give you 24 hours to get out of the country.

But otherwise, if they know you need to travel to actually reach a port, they might give you three or four days to leave the country or if there's extenuating circumstances, they can give you longer.

But if you're a repeat offender or if you're not very compliant, I believe they do have the power to put you in a detention centre.

Ms Hillen told Express.co.uk: It depends on your circumstances. It depends on the humour of the particular border official on the day.

The expert said her friend, a retired border official, had also suggested the Spanish authorities may take a subjective approach in their application of the law.

She said: If you have a legitimate reason for overstaying they might say make sure you get back to your home country within the next three days and they may not put a note on your record.

The expert added that, although the authorities have the power to detain Britons who overstay their welcome, it is not really an option that they would go for.

Britons can appeal against rejected residency applications via two avenues, each of which has to be completed within a month.

Ms Hillen said: I have heard of instances where people were already residents here, but their residency applications were rejected when they applied for residency, perhaps because they lived so far under the radar, they couldn't prove they've lived here.

In those circumstances if you're already in the country and your residency is turned down, you're given a period of time to appeal.

If the appeal is turned down, then I do understand that you're given your marching orders to return to your own country within a particular time period.

Read the original post:

Brexit chaos as Britons breaking 90-day Schengen rule given 24 hours to return to UK - Daily Express

Declaration opposing the Brexit Protocol signed in 250 Orange Halls – Evening Standard

A

declaration has been signed at hundreds of locations across Northern Ireland urging Boris Johnson to listen to unionist opposition to the Brexit Protocol.

There is anger among unionists and loyalists at the post-Brexit trade arrangements which see the region treated differently to the rest of the United Kingdom to avoid placing a hard border in Ireland.

The declaration, organised by the Orange Order, was signed on tables covered in Union flags at an estimated 250 Orange Halls across Northern Ireland.

The initiative had echoes of the signing of the Ulster Covenant in 1912 against home rule in Ireland. That was signed by almost 500,000, some reportedly with their own blood.

Harold Henning, deputy grand master of the Orange Order, said the declaration is in support of the anti-protocol stance taken by leaders of the unionist parties.

He said there is strong feeling against Northern Ireland being treated differently to the rest of the United Kingdom, and the impact this has on businesses.

Mr Henning, who visited several of the halls where the declaration was signed, said people are frustrated.

There was also an opportunity to sign the declaration online.

Mr Henning said they will not know the total number of signatures until they are collated next week, but said he assumed tens of thousands have already signed it.

When you have all the unionist-elected politicians against the protocol, why is the message not getting through? he told the PA news agency.

People are coming out to sign and say, hold on, listen to us.

At this stage we are leaving it to our politicians to try and sort this out, and I hope they can do it, and I hope our Prime Minister listens, and I hope Europe listens, because thus far, they have not been listening.

Mr Henning said the declaration will be presented to Mr Johnson at Downing Street.

Earlier this year, demonstrations against the protocol organised on social media were followed by rioting, but Mr Henning described the declaration as a peaceful means to express frustrations.

He added there could be further moves taken if deemed necessary.

There will be more, this is one part at this time and well see what progresses, but hopefully theyll listen, he said.

I dont think there will be another declaration but there will be moves in other directions to keep the pressure on and get the message out to Dublin, Europe, and to our Prime Minister, who needs to listen to the unionist people of Northern Ireland.

It may be more gatherings, rallies, thats in the future. At the minute, its being left to the politicians to do their best to sort it out.

DUP MP Carla Lockhart was among those who signed the declaration at Carleton Street Orange Hall on Saturday.

She said it was great to see a steady stream of people joining in.

It shows the strength of feeling there is on the ground amongst the unionist people against the protocol, the damage it is doing economically and constitutionally to Northern Ireland, she said.

Talks remain ongoing between the UK and EU about the protocol under which Northern Ireland effectively remains in the single market for goods.

This helps to avoid a hard border with Ireland but increases checks and barriers to trade on goods crossing the Irish Sea from Great Britain, making it a source of tension in unionist communities.

The DUP has urged the Government to trigger Article 16 of the protocol, which would suspend parts of the agreement and risk a major escalation in tensions with the EU

Ms Lockhart added: We at Westminster will continue to fight the protocol, we will continue to urge the government to urgently act and trigger Article 16.

The protocol must go.

View post:

Declaration opposing the Brexit Protocol signed in 250 Orange Halls - Evening Standard

EU fury as Brexit talk ‘disruptions’ risk losing 7bn UK funds and ‘undermines’ bloc – Daily Express

Britain was excluded from the 80billion Horizon Europe project amid tension over the Northern Ireland protocol issue and post-Brexit disputes over fishing licenses. While Britain has been told it can re-join if those disputes are settled, modern history professor Jan Palmowski argues the prolonged back-and-forth is weakening the EU's stance globally. Prof Palmowski, of University of Warwick, wrote: Disrupting this seamless collaboration with partners in the UK and Switzerlandwhich is also excluded from associate-member status due to problems with wider negotiations with the EUwill undermine the global competitiveness of European science in the EU and beyond.

While some experts fear exclusion from the project could be harmful for British science, Prof Palmowski believes the UK may have the upper hand in this situation.

He wrote: Europes research and innovation sector has been vocal in calling on the EU to fulfil its treaty obligations and activate UK association.

But in doing so, is it complicit in allowing the UK to cherry-pick, opting for collaboration when it suits and non-compliance at other times?

Lord Frost lashed out at the EU earlier this month for ignoring the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), an aspect of the Brexit deal he claimed has not been violated by Britain.

But the UK remains banned from Horizon Europe - despite this being a feature of the TCA.

He told the House of Lords: We agreed we would participate in this in the TCA.

"The TCA is clear, the UK shall participate and the relevant protocol shall be adopted, that is an obligation.

"If it became clear that the EU will not deliver that obligation and it has not done so far we will regard them as in breach of Article 710 of the TCA."

And with the UK still currently banned, it means the UK may use the 6.9billion of funds allocated for Horizon Europe for their own alternative plan.

Chancellor Rishi Sunak confirmed the nearly 7billion fund allocated for the UKs Horizon Europe membership could be spent on domestic research in a four-year commitment.

READ MORE:Archaeology breakthrough as rare roman mosaic found in UK field

The initial plans was to contribute 2.1billion annually to the programme so British scientists and researchers could have access to an array of European science projects.

The UK has expressed a strong interest in being included in the project, and Mr Palmowski has suggested that the EU could benefit from UK involvement too.

He wrote: Both sides have an interest in UK association to Horizon Europe. Past funding from research and innovation programmes, including from the European Research Council, underpins the research that led to the breakthrough BioNTech and Oxford vaccines that have helped both sides of the Channel return to some semblance of normality.

Funding from European Framework Programmes has been instrumental in addressing global crises, from the Covid pandemic to the Ebola virus.

But with Article 16 on the cards, there are fears that Britain may never be allowed to re-join the project.

DON'T MISSArchaeology breakthrough: 13-year-old makes 1300BC hoard discovery[REVEAL]Maya breakthrough with incredible underwater find[INSIHGT]La Palma volcano warning: 'Unstoppable' lava clocked at record speeds[REPORT]

While Article 16 could be triggered by either side, Lord Frost has said this is very much on the table".

And Vice European Commissioner Maros Sefcovic warned triggering Article 16 could have serious consequences.

James Wilsdon, from the Universty of Sheffield, toldExpress.co.uk: "If Article 16 is invoked, I would think that it would take our association with the project off the table entirely.

"In terms of where the science piece of this sits, clearly the Commission has been very explicit that they don't see a resolution to the trade association agreement without a resolution of those bigger questions."

More here:

EU fury as Brexit talk 'disruptions' risk losing 7bn UK funds and 'undermines' bloc - Daily Express

Harvester owner warns Brexit and rising costs will dent UK hospitality – The Guardian

The pub and restaurant group Mitchells & Butlers has warned that problems caused by Brexit and rising costs will hurt the hospitality sector, just as businesses return to profit after the easing of pandemic restrictions.

The company, which owns pub chains including ONeills and restaurant brands such as Harvester, said Brexit was still an important event for the market and had created risks for the sector, most notably around the supply and cost of products and workforce shortages. It said higher energy bills and increased staff wages were also weighing on the sector.

Mitchells & Butlers which also runs All Bar One, Toby Carvery and Miller & Carter said customers began to return to its 1,600 UK venues when lockdown restrictions were relaxed in the spring. Its sales bounced back in August and September and it is now receiving bookings for Christmas parties.

Announcing its annual results, the group said its suburban locations were trading better than those in city centres, as continued home working meant people visited their local rather than a branch near their workplace. Footfall in major cities has been slowly increasing in recent months, a trend the company expects to continue.

Pub and restaurant-goers want to socialise with others in a way they cannot at home following pandemic restrictions, the group said, as it reported a pre-tax loss of 42m for the year to 25 September, compared with 123m a year earlier.

Mitchells & Butlers said it had returned to profitability in recent months and its like-for-like sales were 2.7% higher than pre-Covid levels during the past eight weeks.

Christmas bookings at its venues had begun later than in previous years, but were now coming in, said Phil Urban, the companys chief executive, although this years get-togethers look to be smaller than usual.

We are seeing bookings in the cities and the suburbs, right across all our portfolio, he said.

We have some big venues, particularly in London, that can take some big size parties and what we are probably seeing less of so far, is a company coming in and saying can we take your whole venue for a night. But thats not to say they wont be replaced by people having smaller-sized parties. We are encouraged on bookings.

On Wednesday, wine and spirits companies warned there could be alcohol shortages in the UK over the festive season, as a result of the lack of HGV drivers. Mitchells & Butlers said it had several medium-sized Mercedes-Benz Sprinter vans on standby, ready to collect goods from depots in the event of a missed delivery by lorry.

We have product in the supply chain, but either the supplier cant get it to the depot or from the depot to the site. Its a localised issue. The problem is we dont know where it will be until it doesnt turn up, Urban said. He added he was able in some cases to send vans to depots to collect supplies, rather than wait for our logistics to reschedule.

Mitchells & Butlers said it was working to offset the impact of rising costs, but warned they would have a residual impact on its performance in the current financial year.

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

Higher utility bills remain a concern for the company, while it will also have to pay its staff more from next April as they benefit from the rise in the national living wage to 9.50 an hour for workers aged 23 and over.

Amid rising costs, the company called for the government to extend the temporary reduction in the rate of VAT on food and sales of non-alcoholic drinks, which currently stands at 12.5% but is due to return to the pre-Covid 20% level next April.

The company said the temporary tax cut was worth 81m to the business during the year to September.

Read more:

Harvester owner warns Brexit and rising costs will dent UK hospitality - The Guardian

Post-Brexit, the idea of European Union faces another challenge this time from Belarus and Poland – Firstpost

Given the challenges ahead, the European Union will need to show flexibility to keep both its flock and its values together.

Representational image. Reuters

As the Merkel era ends in Germany, the country and the European Union (EU) are being reminded of the perils that remain, despite her best efforts. The crisis in Poland, and with Belarus have highlighted the contradictions which the EU faces.

The more recent crisis has been at the Polish border with Belarus, which has also impacted the Belarus-Lithuania border. Belarus is accused of admitting large numbers of West Asian migrants and unleashing them at the borders of the EU, mainly Poland and Lithuania. This is purported to be a retaliation for EU sanctions on Belarus following the election of President Alexander Lukashenko last year. The sanctions hurt enough for Belarus to adopt this unique model of pushing migrants into the EU.

Nearly 35,000 migrants are said to be around the Belarus-Polish border. Most of them are Kurds, but others are from Syria, Iraq and other places. Belarus is accused of easing immigration controls and encouraging large numbers of flights to bring them in and then visibly guide them towards the Polish border to put pressure on the EU. Most of the Kurds intend to cross Polish territory to enter Germany where they have relatives or friends. Thus, Germany could face the tribulation of another wave of migration, which signaled the last years of the Merkel era in 2015. Merkel herself stepped in to talk to Lukashenko and others to ease the crisis which raises anxieties.

Soon, Merkel will not be the Chancellor of Germany, but the problem of migration into the EU, particularly into Germany, will remain.

This has overtaken the internal EU problems which Brussels was having with Warsaw. A judgement by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal (PCT) in response to a case introduced by the Prime Minister of Poland, Mateusz Morawiecki, held that Poland's national legislation was not subordinate to EU laws and commitments. This raised serious issues of compliance by EU member states with EU laws which they undertook when they joined the EU.

The PCT emphasised the incompatibility of Polish laws with four particular articles of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU). These are Article 1, Article 2, Article 4(3), and Article 19.

Article 1 laid the foundation of the EU. Article 2 lays down normative values including rule of law, freedom, democracy, equality, and respect for human rights. Article 4(3) emphasises mutual respect in assisting each other in implementing tasks emerging from the treaties. Article 19 permits the European Court of Justice (CJEU) to ensure that in the interpretation and application of treaties, the EU law is observed. By enunciating incompatibility, the Polish establishment has in effect rejected the enforceability of the EU laws in Poland

Among the issues which Poland is accused of violating are controls over the media, curbing LGBT and abortion rights, and circumscribing judicial independence. Supporters of the Polish efforts see it asserting its sovereignty in an indirect manner to enhance economic well-being. The ruling right-wing Law and Justice Party (PiS) has strong popular support which has not diminished despite its curbing of rights and judicial and media independence.

Poland is the largest economy in Central Europe and its economic resilience has grown since it joined the EU in 2004. About 73 percent of Polish exports go to EU countries; the EU accounts for 88 percent of FDI inflows; thousands of Polish workers are employed in other EU countries, showing the economic interdependence of Poland and the EU. However, due to its violation of EU values and laws, the EU has stopped funds of euro 57 billion of which euro 23 billion was granted for dealing with the pandemic and euro 34 billion loan under the special dispensation which the EU passed last year.

This seems unlikely due to the economic interdependence. Also, the ruling and opposition parties are both pro-Europe. It is more likely that Poland needs the EU euro 57 billion which is on hold and is leveraging various domestic positions to pressurise Brussels. Former president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, who is an opposition leader of the Civic Platform in Poland, supports a defence of a European Poland. The current regime is willing to put that concept at risk to secure a better deal from Brussels. It faces an election in 2022 and wants to burnish its credentials.

In the midst of this crisis, came the Belarus effort to thrust migrants into Poland. Poland reacted with severity and used strong tactics to prevent the entry of migrants which Poland feared would be stranded within Poland as other EU countries may not accept them. This led to a strange situation where internally the EU was uncomfortable with Polish actions but externally was bound to defend it.

The Polish Prime Minister has been on a tour of the Baltic countries to lobby support for the Polish position relating to migration. He then visited France, Slovenia, Germany and the UK to discuss a united European position. Brussel's fear is that this diplomatic effort is also to gain sympathy for Poland on internal EU issues.

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has spoken of three ways in which the Commission can respond: Legally challenging the court ruling, withholding EU funds, and suspending Polands rights as a member state. The suspension of emergency funds is underway. Suspending Poland is an unlikely option. Legally challenging the PCT ruling in the European Court of Justice (CJEU) may be the stopgap option.

The problem is that such voices of dissent while staying within the EU are growing in several members and the EU will need to show flexibility to keep both its flock and its values together.

The writer is a former Ambassador to Germany. Views expressed are personal.

See the rest here:

Post-Brexit, the idea of European Union faces another challenge this time from Belarus and Poland - Firstpost

ART TRENDS 2022: Brexit and Art – will ongoing uncertainty continue to stifle the art market? – Euronews

Earlier this month, The Spectator, a conservative British magazine established in 1828, sold an NFT of what its editor, Fraser Nelson, said is perhaps the best-known of all its front covers. Produced for the magazines 18 June 2016 edition by the political cartoonist Morten Morland, the image shows a Union Jack emblazoned butterfly emerging triumphant from a collapsing box dotted with EU stars. The text reads, Out - and into the world.

As Nelson has written, the cover acted as the magazines announcement that it was backing Brexit, only days before the UK public voted in the referendum that would see the country follow that course. The image was something of a hit with pro-Brexit Britons but was also relatively rare in being a professionally-produced, notable piece of artwork that fell on that side of the argument.

While The Spectators cover successfully got its message across to an appreciative audience, contemporary art produced in reaction to Brexit has tended to take a Remainer line. Not surprising, supporters of Brexit might say, given the internationalist, left-leaning art world aligns nicely with the kinds of liberal elites they were hoping to dethrone. For anti-Brexit Remainers, though, an alternative vision of Morlands butterfly might have been an ascendent dusty moth, with a Northern Ireland-sized chunk missing from one of its wings.

As we all know, it has been a long journey since the butterfly burst out of its box. The protracted negotiations between the UK and EU over the formers exit have led to post Brexit regulations finally coming into play at the same time as the continent has been dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. While UK consumers have become used to empty supermarket shelves, petrol queues and shipping delays, its not always easy to separate out Brexit-induced self-harm from the effects of the pandemic. Like other industries, the art world has faced a situation where Brexit and Covid-19 have come together to hit hard with a combination of blows. The most forceful strikes have come from the pandemic, but complications directly attributable to Brexit are also becoming apparent.

For UK and EU galleries, the biggest Brexit issue is now the increased cost, paperwork and effort involved in moving artwork between the two regulatory regimes. European galleries attending Londons Frieze art fair in October this year, for example, noted the increased difficulty of getting their artists work to what is the biggest annual event in the UK art scene.

Brexit is also starting to impact arts education, with EU students coming to the UK now having to pay the considerable tuition fees applicable to international students from the rest of the world. Correspondingly, UK art students have lost the easy access they once had to courses across the continent, some of which previously afforded them free tuition.

Whether such factors have a negative or realigning effect on the commercial art world long-term remains to be seen. Asked whether Brexit has negatively affected the art market from a UK perspective, a spokesperson for the auction house Christies was notably upbeat, saying Our London sales are international; in this years (2021) Art Basel / UBS Report on the global art market, it was stated that 87% of the value of the UK market was made up of non-EU trade. So we remain confident that London will remain at the centre of the global art market.

The spokesperson added that this years Frieze was well attended, with a real buzz, and that many had travelled from around Europe and the US to attend. They also noted that 2021 sales have been strong, with bidding activity in recent London auctions fairly evenly split between Europe, Asia and the Americas.

The global nature of operations like Christies that sit at the top of the art market means they are well adjusted to having to deal with different regulatory regimes. Leading UK and EU galleries are also perfectly at home attending art fairs in the USA and Hong Kong, and in selling work to collectors in China and the Middle East. Londons central position within this system bodes well for the kind of open, global Britain that The Spectator editor Nelson suggests is embodied by Morlands butterfly image. Even so, the spokesperson for Christies acknowledges that there have been "changes to adapt to because of Brexit."

"For example, those who have bought and sold via our Paris or London salesrooms, but are based in the opposite city, will notice the mechanics and processes for shipping and tax have changed. As a global business, we know the procedures as we use them regularly. Problems may arise with external suppliers (i.e. shipping) with the increased volume, but we have anticipated this with our regular suppliers and Christies team. For other players in our industry, though, it has been more challenging.

Offering his perspective across the sea from the UK, Fons Hof, the longstanding director of the Art Rotterdam art fair, says that the combination of Brexit and COVID-19 has had a definite impact: Yes, there is definitely a big difference. The Corona measurements for non-EU galleries made it difficult to participate in the last, postponed edition of Art Rotterdam in July. Also transporting the artworks has become a lot more complicated for English galleries. The small galleries in particular did not oversee all this and decided not to participate. Nevertheless, I expect that these English galleries will also get used to the temporary import of works of art when they do a fair in the EU. And with that, I think the participation of English galleries will normalise again in the future.

With the 23rd edition of Art Rotterdam set to take place from 10 to 13 February 2022, Hof believes that the worst is behind us regarding COVID-19 and Brexit. Although strict measurements are now expected again, and some art fairs may have to be moved again, the organisations have much more experience in dealing with the Pandemic and everyone has become much more flexible. In addition, I think that museum visits and a visit to an art fair are easy to regulate and adapt to the conditions of a safe visit.

The full impact of Brexit on the European art world is unlikely to be known until the dust has settled on new regulations that came into force in 2021 and organisations have had time to assess how restrictions on residency and working rights, as well as the movement of both people and artworks between the EU and UK, are affecting their operation. Also unknown will be the impact of new arrangements yet to be agreed upon, more arm-wrestling between the politicians involved, and the possible retraction of things currently in force.

Like the rest of us, the art world will have to play a waiting game. Its possible that the consequences of Brexit at a macro level may not be too great. On an individual level, though, there will be plenty of people in art sharing in the burden of no longer having the same level of freedom to live, work, study and travel as easily as they once did between the UK and its European neighbours.

See the rest here:

ART TRENDS 2022: Brexit and Art - will ongoing uncertainty continue to stifle the art market? - Euronews

Customer experiences are crashing in the post-Brexit hospitality world – The Independent

In a line that could have tripped off the tongue of Basil Fawlty, the table behind me was presented with an interesting dilemma: would they be ok with a burnt pizza, or did they want to wait for a fresh one to be made?

The latter option would take a while, though, warned their young server, and the diners wearily plumped for burnt. Amid the chaos of this al fresco cafe, overseen by a trio of apologetic teens, a plate of charred dough for just shy of 14 was deemed preferable to more delays or no food at all.

As a snapshot of post-Brexit UK hospitality, it was a telling indictment of both industry standards and customer expectations. If its not already clear from the growing number of hastily chalked Staff Wanted signs in pub, restaurant and hotel carparks, the exodus of European hospitality staff has left a substantial void in the sector, and its translating into some pretty crushing customer experiences.

Visit link:

Customer experiences are crashing in the post-Brexit hospitality world - The Independent