![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
This article was written by a friend of mine who cannot put it under their own name but is happy for it to be shared
The company I work in will have to move the business to Europe because the law states we can only operate from inside the EU. That doesn't mean we will have to physically move (I'll have to commute, probably) but it does mean that all the tax this company pays will now go back to Europe and all the jobs we create in future will be based in Europe.
We've switched the recruitment of three new members of staff to the European office already. The UK office will be an outpost and it's possible that eventually it will close altogether.
The legislation we work with is called REACH. http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/regulations/reach/
It governs the rules on the safety of registering, importing and exporting chemicals in the EU. In order for the UK to import anything from the EU in order to manufacture stuff, the whole regulation needs to be renegotiated. It's the longest and most complicated piece of regulation in existence and aspects of it change annually.
It took Switzerland 7 years to renegotiate theirs and it cost them an absolute fortune to do and maintain. Tax payer money.
Here's an article from 2008 about the issues that Switzerland was facing at the time: https://chemicalwatch.com/592/switzerland-faces-tough-choices-on-reach (subscription only)
Here's an article about what is in place currently - note that it is on it's 4th revision by 2012: http://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/CH/Swiss_Chemicals_Ordinance_ChemO.html
Anyway, say you work for a company who prints books. One of the things you need is ink. Ink is made here in the UK with chemicals imported from the EU. The ink factory is licensed and they've been making ink merrily for 50 years. But now they can't buy the chemicals to make ink from the EU without employing a representative inside the EU to do their paperwork. Same chemicals from the same manufacturers as before, but a whole new cost and lots of red tape to do so.
Another option is to import directly from China or India. So, you need to employ a representative in China or India to do your paperwork. Also the Chinese chemicals industry isn't as well regulated as that of the EU, neither is the Indian. Don't get me wrong, they are in process of sorting that out but they are way behind the EU on that front. So, do you get what you pay for? Possibly. Is it cheaper? Well yes, before Brexit it possibly was but now you have to pay a representative and the Chinese and Indian companies won't miss a trick in putting their cost up. Supply and demand.
OK, so you try to import from the US. Good luck. You'll need to employ a representative in the US to do your paperwork for you and the US regulation is far far more stringent than the EU so there are hoops you must jump through. It's going to take time. Time is money.
These are best case scenarios IF the UK manages to negotiate its own regulation and it follows similar lines to that of REACH, which it will have to, otherwise the EU and the US won't deal with the UK. After all, who wants less safety data on the chemicals we use every day?
So, who carries the additional cost burden here? The ink factory in the UK, either increases their costs for ink or reduces their staff / overheads.
The printing company has to pay increased prices for ink, so have to increase their prices for printing or reduce their overheads / staff.
It's that simple. You don't know whether your job at the print company will exist when the renegotiated deal for import / export is finally ready. In short, everything is going to cost more and take longer.
Now apply what I've said above to petrochemicals. Basically the base for more or less everything you use in some form or another. The plastic in your home, the fuel in your car, the tiny plastic caplets your drugs come in. Well, they'll be OK because they are huge multinational companies and have been moving their staff out of the UK to subsidiary offices in various parts of Europe, that already existed, since Brexit became a behemoth on the horizon. They've sorted all that out and none of that business will be done in the UK going forward, none of the tax will go into the UK and the staff, when replaced, will be replaced in Europe.
Now apply the same principles to companies like Nissan, BMW, Pfizer and any other non British owned companies manufacturing goods and employing staff in the UK.Why would you employ people in the UK when you can employ people in Europe taking into consideration the mountain of red tape, time and money that getting anything imported or exported to the EU?
Can you see how TOTALLY screwed we are now?
Even if everything comes out as well as it possibly can.
Even if the renegotiated regulation goes through in half the time it took the Swiss and even if the rest of the world are unfailingly kind to LITTLE Britain.
Even then, we are totally and utterly screwed.
And that's why I'm angry. Not just because I'll have to commute to Europe.
Not just because we might lose several of our staff members.
Not just because it directly affects me.
Because it's not about immigration. It's about you, your families, your children.
When all this chest beating is over, what will you be left with? Not much, but what you do have will be far more expensive.
The company I work in will have to move the business to Europe because the law states we can only operate from inside the EU. That doesn't mean we will have to physically move (I'll have to commute, probably) but it does mean that all the tax this company pays will now go back to Europe and all the jobs we create in future will be based in Europe.
We've switched the recruitment of three new members of staff to the European office already. The UK office will be an outpost and it's possible that eventually it will close altogether.
The legislation we work with is called REACH. http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/regulations/reach/
It governs the rules on the safety of registering, importing and exporting chemicals in the EU. In order for the UK to import anything from the EU in order to manufacture stuff, the whole regulation needs to be renegotiated. It's the longest and most complicated piece of regulation in existence and aspects of it change annually.
It took Switzerland 7 years to renegotiate theirs and it cost them an absolute fortune to do and maintain. Tax payer money.
Anyway, say you work for a company who prints books. One of the things you need is ink. Ink is made here in the UK with chemicals imported from the EU. The ink factory is licensed and they've been making ink merrily for 50 years. But now they can't buy the chemicals to make ink from the EU without employing a representative inside the EU to do their paperwork. Same chemicals from the same manufacturers as before, but a whole new cost and lots of red tape to do so.
Another option is to import directly from China or India. So, you need to employ a representative in China or India to do your paperwork. Also the Chinese chemicals industry isn't as well regulated as that of the EU, neither is the Indian. Don't get me wrong, they are in process of sorting that out but they are way behind the EU on that front. So, do you get what you pay for? Possibly. Is it cheaper? Well yes, before Brexit it possibly was but now you have to pay a representative and the Chinese and Indian companies won't miss a trick in putting their cost up. Supply and demand.
OK, so you try to import from the US. Good luck. You'll need to employ a representative in the US to do your paperwork for you and the US regulation is far far more stringent than the EU so there are hoops you must jump through. It's going to take time. Time is money.
These are best case scenarios IF the UK manages to negotiate its own regulation and it follows similar lines to that of REACH, which it will have to, otherwise the EU and the US won't deal with the UK. After all, who wants less safety data on the chemicals we use every day?
So, who carries the additional cost burden here? The ink factory in the UK, either increases their costs for ink or reduces their staff / overheads.
The printing company has to pay increased prices for ink, so have to increase their prices for printing or reduce their overheads / staff.
It's that simple. You don't know whether your job at the print company will exist when the renegotiated deal for import / export is finally ready. In short, everything is going to cost more and take longer.
Now apply what I've said above to petrochemicals. Basically the base for more or less everything you use in some form or another. The plastic in your home, the fuel in your car, the tiny plastic caplets your drugs come in. Well, they'll be OK because they are huge multinational companies and have been moving their staff out of the UK to subsidiary offices in various parts of Europe, that already existed, since Brexit became a behemoth on the horizon. They've sorted all that out and none of that business will be done in the UK going forward, none of the tax will go into the UK and the staff, when replaced, will be replaced in Europe.
Now apply the same principles to companies like Nissan, BMW, Pfizer and any other non British owned companies manufacturing goods and employing staff in the UK.Why would you employ people in the UK when you can employ people in Europe taking into consideration the mountain of red tape, time and money that getting anything imported or exported to the EU?
Can you see how TOTALLY screwed we are now?
Even if everything comes out as well as it possibly can.
Even if the renegotiated regulation goes through in half the time it took the Swiss and even if the rest of the world are unfailingly kind to LITTLE Britain.
Even then, we are totally and utterly screwed.
And that's why I'm angry. Not just because I'll have to commute to Europe.
Not just because we might lose several of our staff members.
Not just because it directly affects me.
Because it's not about immigration. It's about you, your families, your children.
When all this chest beating is over, what will you be left with? Not much, but what you do have will be far more expensive.
no subject
Date: 2016-06-26 04:03 pm (UTC)Is it OK to point an MP at it?
no subject
Date: 2016-06-26 04:09 pm (UTC)I believe it is OK for you to point anyone you like at this so that's a yes to the MP.