Bringing goods from the EU

[Peterm1000]

Well no, in our case they took our money and gave us about half of it back.

I think that's a false understanding... It was less than 1% of taxpayer's tax bills. For most people it was about £1 a week. An amount that is quickly exceeded if you ever want to import anything (the original purpose of this thread). People pay £15 a month for a bank account that gives them free travel insurance and AA cover. The £1 a week was an absolute bargain - the right to work anywhere in the EU, to transport as much booze or cigs as you wanted for a fraction of the cost in the UK, the right to come and go to the EU whenever you wanted. One booze cruise to Calais and you've easily covered the £50 EU membership cost you a year.

Oh and by the way, high tax payers (who footed the majority of that EU tax) were very clearly for Remain and support for Leave was much higher amongst non-tax payers. Support for Leave declined substantially as household earnings increased. So actually, for a very significant number of Leave voters it wasn't "our money" that was being taken at all.

 

[doctor Bob]

I wonder what wee Jimmy Krankie is making of it all. I bet she's packing her fireworks away and having a rethink.

Looks like the EU have done more to unit opposing factions within the UK in 24hrs than any UK polititian or political party has done in 4 years.

 

[Jake]

Terrible messaging for a UK audience, but we are a third country. Also no angels in this. Our use of the emergency approvals process meant we grabbed the available doses from the Dutch production facilities because the UK ones we basically paid for with advance payments and grants aren't on stream until December (of this year). And AZ have told the EU their supply has to be throttled because their partner's new Belgian site isn't producing as well as they hoped, while promising us that our full order will be filled from the EU sites, which the EU also pre-funded with advance payments.

None of this will trouble the jingoist press and its groupie-think followers.

 

[doctor Bob]

Terrible messaging for a UK audience, but we are a third country. Also no angels in this. Our use of the emergency approvals process meant we grabbed the available doses from the Dutch production facilities because the UK ones we basically paid for with advance payments and grants aren't on stream until December (of this year). And AZ have told the EU their supply has to be throttled because their partner's new Belgian site isn't producing as well as they hoped, while promising us that our full order will be filled from the EU sites, which the EU also pre-funded with advance payments.

Damage done Jake. EU tweets doing blame game. European Press ripping them to pieces. Terrible 24hrs for EU.

 

[Jake]

It was pretty a stupid escalation of words for sure. I'd put a bet on them having got a quiet assurance from our govt before backing off though.

 

[artie]

Noel or anyone from NI, I'm curious as to what your feelings are with whats happening with the border (article 16).

Sorry.
I don't do soap operas

 

[Noel]

Noel or anyone from NI, I'm curious as to what your feelings are with whats happening with the border (article 16).

A mess.
Arlene on R4 complaining about it. Ironic that her party has been calling to invoke A16 past few weeks.....
Of course her party was in the minority pushing Brexit, collapsing May’s backstop, thrown under the bus by Johnson and now boo hooing “it’s not fair, big boys did it..”.

 

[Rorschach]

The EU showed their hand on the vaccine row right away because they made a big song and dance about it and appealed to moral principles for AZ. You know as soon as someone does this that they are on shaky legal ground and they made a mistake and are trying to cover it up
If they had been confident in their contract they would have simply instructed the lawyers (they have enough of them) and AZ would have quickly capitulated.

Our handling of the vaccine acquisition and roll out is a definite benefit of Brexit, though of course I realise that is a complete fluke.

 

[Jester129]

They have learnt their lesson since then.

Really, they have not. Look at the headlines today about the vaccine 'war'!

 

[doctor Bob]

It was pretty a stupid escalation of words for sure. I'd put a bet on them having got a quiet assurance from our govt before backing off though.

Maybe, but like I say damage is done.

 

[Rorschach]

Really, they have not. Look at the headlines today about the vaccine 'war'!

I am confused, you have taken my quote completely out of context.

 

[doctor Bob]

A mess.
Arlene on R4 complaining about it. Ironic that her party has been calling to invoke A16 past few weeks.....
Of course her party was in the minority pushing Brexit, collapsing May’s backstop, thrown under the bus by Johnson and now boo hooing “it’s not fair, big boys did it..”.

Is that it Noel, bit thin on the ground compared to the normal 3000 word essay. doesn't really help explain the situation from your prospective.
Are you excusing the EU (a mess), but still having a dig at others (Arlene on R4 blah, blah .......)
Must be painful.......

Also to quote Robin, classic whataboutary.

 

[McAldo]

Delays usually result in something arriving late. Why would it result in a return? We have no brexit here, but plenty mailing delays, especially due to covid rates and different countries' reactions to them. No air ems from Japan, for example (though all of the private delivery companies continue to work in and out of there by air).

DPD was not clear about the reasons but, quoting from their reply:

" I cannot apologise enough about the problems with delivery. I'm afraid we are seeing quite a lot of problems with parcels being exported to Europe at the moment, as a result of the Brexit changes, which is why your parcel has been returned to sender.

I appreciate how frustrating this must be, and I'm so sorry that your parcel is again showing as on its way back to the return address. I believe that the issue that caused this has now been resolved, but if you'd prefer for us to refund your order in light of the problems I understand entirely, and can of course arrange this for you once you've received the parcel back. "

So, I am sending it for the third time, hoping the "issues", whatever they were, are now solved.

Regarding delays only producing delays in delivery, rather than returns, this might well depend on the courier.
DPD-local is the cheapest option to send to the EU, at least as a normal customer booking door to door collection for single parcels.
Other options cost upwards of 60% more. The difference was even more pronouced before January, with Royal Mail charging £65 for the same parcel DPD-local woud deliver for £19 or so.

Delays are not going to be cost free to the courier. Keeping a truck stuck in Dover for an undetermined number of hours or days means paying for the driver time and other associated expenses, while jeoparding the logistics. The delay might be determined by government priorities putting parcels ike mine at the very botto of the queue for custom checks and other procedures. Keeping the package at the depot awaiting also cost money because contingency space runs out quickly, and getting an extra warehouse is a long term investment.

So, some cheap couriers might find it less expensive to simply return the parcel and offer to refund. After all their local warehouses and drivers are not paid extra to do that, or very litte more compared to the alternatives. It should be said that they only did something about it when I chased them aggressively, it is not like I received any explanation or refund offers upon receiving it back.
Which again points to costs saving, the less people asks for a refund or a rebooking imediately, the less manageable it all becomes for the company.

 

[doctor Bob]

Now there is talk of the EU invoking emergency powers of article 122, basically means they want to take total control of AZ, occupation of a private company, taking interlectual rights and control of the factories.
Looks like they really want to make a proper mess of it.

 

[doctor Bob]

I suspect a quiet day on the thread....................

 

[RobinBHM]

Whilst EUs vaccine balls up is a goal for Brexiters.....damage caused by leaving the Single Market rolls on.

 

[doctor Bob]

Whilst EUs vaccine balls up is a goal for Brexiters.....damage caused by leaving the Single Market rolls on.

Surely it's an own goal, not just a deflection but UvdL, picked up the ball in defence passed it to half her brexit team, dribbled around her team mates and scored a cracking goal. Celebrated for 2 hrs and then realised that no one was cheering, thought about it for a few more hours and then told everyone it wasn't a goal and that she hadn't meant to shot from 20 yards out and that it was a ball boy encouraging her which made the oversight happen.
Now she is invoking article 122, which basically means she is taking ownership of the pitch and goalposts and football, and she will go home, for tea, if no one likes it.
She's been in charge of the team for 3 days, maybe 4, and she's lost the fans already.

 

[Jake]

It looks like the EU misread the strength of their contractual hand vs AZ. Interesting argument because AZ promised them it had no prior contractual obligations which would prevent impede hinder it from fulfilling its supply obligations to the EU. As AZ had a 'best endeavours' duty (really high) to fulfill supply schedule to the EU I think the Commission read that as cast iron and that AZ would be in breach if they didn't at least throttle UK supplies proportionally to the throttle on UK supplies (which has been their ask for weeks)

But I think that's wrong, as best endeavours do not oblige you to breach obligations to third parties. So the prior agreement with the UK did not prevent hinder etc AZ from using Its best endeavours, it just had already reduced the scope of what it could with best endeavours at the time it contracted with the EU.

As for the row generally, picture the reverse. All AZ production is in the UK and and we paid for a new factory which is struggling but the EU is refusing to accept a proportional cut in supply, with the effect that the UK is shorter of supply than the EU despite it all being produced in the UK. I think I know how jingoists woukd paint that one, and I am absolutely sure this UK government would be threatening all sorts of emergency measures.

 

[InTheHighlands]

It looks like the EU misread the strength of their contractual hand vs AZ. Interesting argument because AZ promised them it had no prior contractual obligations which would prevent impede hinder it from fulfilling its supply obligations to the EU. As AZ had a 'best endeavours' duty (really high) to fulfill supply schedule to the EU I think the Commission read that as cast iron and that AZ would be in breach if they didn't at least throttle UK supplies proportionally to the throttle on UK supplies (which has been their ask for weeks)

But I think that's wrong, as best endeavours do not oblige you to breach obligations to third parties. So the prior agreement with the UK did not prevent hinder etc AZ from using Its best endeavours, it just had already reduced the scope of what it could with best endeavours at the time it contracted with the EU.

As for the row generally, picture the reverse. All AZ production is in the UK and and we paid for a new factory which is struggling but the EU is refusing to accept a proportional cut in supply, with the effect that the UK is shorter of supply than the EU despite it all being produced in the UK. I think I know how jingoists woukd paint that one, and I am absolutely sure this UK government would be threatening all sorts of emergency measures.

I've read the contract - and, from a previous life, am used to reading such things........

It looks to me that the EU are pointing at Clause 5.4, where the UK factories are mentioned. There's room for some ambiguity, but my reading of 5.4 is that it's a clause put in by the EU seeking AZ's Best Endeavours to manufacture IN the EU (presumably because of confidence in standards and/or to keep the money spent locally) and they state that the UK factories will be deemed to satisfy this requirement. It's NOT a clause focussed on manufacturing FOR the EU.

The clause goes on to say that the EU will try to help find alternative manufacturing sites in the EU in the event of production problems etc. And then goes on to say how they will approve sites outside the EU if all else fails.

The EU seem to be misrepresenting the contract..........

 

[doctor Bob]

It looks like the EU misread the strength of their contractual hand vs AZ. Interesting argument because AZ promised them it had no prior contractual obligations which would prevent impede hinder it from fulfilling its supply obligations to the EU. As AZ had a 'best endeavours' duty (really high) to fulfill supply schedule to the EU I think the Commission read that as cast iron and that AZ would be in breach if they didn't at least throttle UK supplies proportionally to the throttle on UK supplies (which has been their ask for weeks)

But I think that's wrong, as best endeavours do not oblige you to breach obligations to third parties. So the prior agreement with the UK did not prevent hinder etc AZ from using Its best endeavours, it just had already reduced the scope of what it could with best endeavours at the time it contracted with the EU.

As for the row generally, picture the reverse. All AZ production is in the UK and and we paid for a new factory which is struggling but the EU is refusing to accept a proportional cut in supply, with the effect that the UK is shorter of supply than the EU despite it all being produced in the UK. I think I know how jingoists woukd paint that one, and I am absolutely sure this UK government would be threatening all sorts of emergency measures.

Just classic whataboutary Jake, as Robin would say.