mraniki

Rishi sunak claims to want to promote British science and research. The prime minister rightly says the country has great strengths in areas that range from artificial intelligence to life sciences, though it also faces some obstacles. One of these is its post-Brexit absence from Horizon, the European Union’s (and the world’s) biggest collaborative research programme. The Brexit trade agreement signed in late 2020 by Boris Johnson, Mr Sunak’s predecessor but one, provided for Britain to remain associated with Horizon. But the plan for this fell through because of a fierce row over the Brexit terms for Northern Ireland. When Mr Sunak settled the Northern Irish question in the Windsor framework, in February, the eu repeated its promise of an early deal on Horizon. Although the terms for this were broadly agreed on by early July, nothing was settled. Mr Sunak’s decision whether to associate with Horizon may come soon. British scientists are clamouring to get back as soon as possible, but for Mr Sunak there seem to be three arguments against. One is a value-for-money concern that, after missing out on two years of Horizon’s current seven-year cycle, the Treasury might end up paying in more than it gets out. The second is a desire for Britain to control its own research programme, rather than outsource a chunk to Brussels. And the third is a dislike among hardline Tory Brexiteers for any closer links to the eu. None of these stands up to scrutiny. On value for money, Britain’s strong research base has in the past made it a big net beneficiary of Horizon. A provision also exists for financial adjustment to compensate for the years it has missed. It is anyway wrongheaded to treat a programme like Horizon in zero-sum terms. Its biggest advantage lies in the cross-fertilisation of ideas that benefits all participants, no matter which countries are paying in. Its main output is research, not money. Taking back control has superficial appeal, and the government is trumpeting its planned Britain-only project, Pioneer, as a fallback if it does not join Horizon. Yet Britain has a poor record of government support for research. A domestic programme cannot match either the size or the collaboration offered by Horizon, which has the added advantage of a seven-year budget that cannot easily be raided by grasping finance ministries. As for dislike of the eu, even fervent Brexiteers should see Horizon in a more positive light. Hardliners often argued that Britain could keep many benefits of membership despite leaving the club. It would be difficult to find a better example of how this can be done than Horizon. The programme’s strengths have persuaded many non-eu members, from Israel to Ukraine, to sign up as associates. New Zealand has just joined. Canada and Japan hope to follow. That makes Britain’s absence look odder still. Perhaps the hardliners calculate that a failure to rejoin Horizon would severely dent wider hopes for improved relations between Britain and the eu. If the two sides cannot agree over Horizon, which is in the Brexit trade deal, what hope is there of other new agreements? Yet Mr Sunak and the opposition leader, Sir Keir Starmer, both claim to want better arrangements in such areas as the movement of people, trade in electric vehicles and technical standards. Researchers and universities say the delay over Horizon has already had a cost in lost grants and weaker cross-border collaboration. Rejoining would help attract investment and talent from abroad. Going it alone would not. If Mr Sunak is serious about supporting British science, he should stop dithering and sign up to Horizon without delay.■7

UK ministers are set to announce a further delay to post-Brexit border controls on animal and plant products coming from the EU, amid fears that extra bureaucracy on imported goods will fuel inflation.

The decision to delay the new import regime at Britain’s ports, which had been due to start in October, is also intended to give companies and port operators yet more time to implement the arrangements.

The news comes ahead of a meeting of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee on Thursday, which is wrestling with persistently high inflation.

There have been repeated delays to the introduction of a post-Brexit border control regime for goods entering the UK from the EU. British exports to the EU are already subject to full checks.

Under the Brexit Pubs Guarantee brought into effect on 1 August 2023, pubs will now always pay less alcohol duty than supermarkets to prevent them being undercut. The government has pledged that the duty pubs and bars pay on these drinks will always be less than the duty retailers pay.

The leading London to Paris organised cycling event, officially partnered with the Tour de France in recent years, will run its current closed road format for a final time in 2024 on account of the ‘ever-growing complications of Brexit’ associated with organising an international cycling event.

The three-day closed-road event, organised by UK-based company Hotchillee, finishes each year beneath the Eiffel Tower a day ahead of the Grand Tour finale and is accompanied by a Tour de France escort.

The event, which has seen over 10,000 riders participate across two decades, is accompanied by extensive support cars and crew and has frequently been ridden by Tour de France winners and ex-pro cyclists, including Magnus Bäckstedt, Sarah Storey, Sean Kelly and Stephen Roche.

While aiming to continue beyond 2024 in a new format, organisers have cited several difficulties in hosting the closed-road event over recent years, from carbon footprint to road closures to Brexit. Principal among the event's challenges, though, has been that organisers are no longer able to move competitor's bikes across the UK-France border frictionlessly.

“Those voters do not want to have a conversation about Brexit,” said Joshua Simons, the director of Labour Together, a think-tank close to Labour leadership. How dare they prioritise one group of voters over all others?

Ellwood thinks that the election will bring release and hope: “I can see all parties embracing the idea of rejoining the single market… I put money on it that it happens in the next five years.” After so many years of Brexit thought compliance, will this country be in a fit state to take such big steps? I don’t think so.

Some kind of solution is in the interest of all parties and the one being pursued is that Gibraltar be part of Schengen, an area without internal border controls. The border between Gibraltar and Spain – which started out as a fence erected in 1909 to stop dogs with tobacco strapped to their backs running across the isthmus – would be no more and there would be free movement of people and goods between Gibraltar and Spain. However, the EU insists that Spain would then have responsibility for the EU’s external border and the idea that Spanish officials would be on Gibraltarian territory is something close to anathema for many Gibraltarians as it triggers a profound anxiety of a Fascist and irridentist Spain which shut the border in 1969. This is an anxiety sharpened by the electioneering of the right-wing Vox party whose leader, Santiago Abascal, said anything short of sovereignty over Gibraltar would be a ‘betrayal’, and the recovering of sovereignty over Gibraltar was in the centre right People’s Party’s (PP) July manifesto.

For Gibraltarians, the idea of ‘Spanish boots on the ground’ is a profound red line. One current proposal is that Frontex, the European Union Border and Coastguard Agency, maintain the Schengen border for a four-year transition period after which Spanish officials take over. The Gibraltar Government is quite clear that this is unacceptable.

The border has a profound significance for Gibraltarian identity. Even when crossing it can be hot and tiring and deeply frustrating, it also provides a deep sense of security for Gibraltarians. Without the border not only do Gibraltarians feel physically threatened but there are profound identitarian issues too, since that border – mental and physical – has a role in maintaining Gibraltarian identity. It is difficult to exaggerate the anxiety the prospect of uniformed Spanish officials on Gibraltarian soil produces among Gibraltarians, and this is especially so when not only Spain’s far-right Vox party but increasingly the PP are reviving a nationalist politics long thought defunct although in the recent Spanish elections it is widely understood that the PP’s willingness to govern with Vox cost them votes.

Tuna from Mauritius sourced as an alternative to Great Britain following Brexit took nine months to reach its Northern Ireland customer after a paperwork mistake, the Belfast Telegraph can reveal. Henderson Foodservice said it turned to Mauritius as a source because getting tinned tuna from Great Britain was no longer commercially viable under post-Brexit arrangements. But managing director Cathal Geoghegan, who’s also the recently appointed president of the NI Chamber of Commerce, said an order made in September last year was not successfully delivered until June. Normally, deliveries from Mauritius would take two to three months, compared to two or three weeks for orders coming from Liverpool.

He explained that the tins of tuna were initially turned away at Belfast Harbour because an administrator in Mauritius had ticked the destination box marked ‘Great Britain’ instead of ‘UK’. “The key driver here was from a commercial perspective, as taking the tuna in from the previous Great Britain supply chain/route would have resulted in an additional tariff payable of some 24%, which we would have had to unfortunately pass onto our customer base. "Therefore our decision was focused on ensuring a competitive product price for our customer base.” The tuna from Mauritius was finally delivered in June. “That’s a live example of the bureaucracy of Brexit problems,” said Mr Geoghegan. The business had been forced to find emergency sources of tuna at an inflated cost as a result of the error, he said. But Mr Geoghegan said he hoped the Windsor Framework could solve some of the problems of trading between Great Britain and NI since Brexit.

However, he stressed it would not cure every ill, adding: “Business needs to be part of the solutions and discussion with UK and EU government, and that's where the Chamber comes into its own.” Checks on fishery products entering ports are completed by district councils under the authority of the Food Standards Agency (FSA). The FSA confirmed that Henderson Foodservice's shipment had been stopped. It said: “Consignments of products of animal origin, such as canned tuna, in line with official controls legislation governing imports, must be accompanied by an appropriate export health certificate certifying the product meets public health rules applicable within the country of import. “In this instance, the certifying officer in the country of export completed an incorrect certificate and so it could not lawfully enter Northern Ireland on first arrival. "It is important for traders to ensure consignments are accompanied by the correct certificate for the country of import to avoid such issues arising.”

Mr Geoghegan spoke to the Belfast Telegraph as a House of Lords committee concluded that the Windsor Framework had improved upon the NI Protocol but that problems remain. Peers’ report on the economic, political, legal and constitutional impact of the deal found the framework's benefits included the eased movement of retail goods; agri-food produce, including chilled meats; parcels; pets; and human medicines via the green lane. Goods being sent from Great Britain can stay in the green lane if they are not being sent on to the Republic, while those at risk of being sent over the border will be placed in a red lane, which will be subject to more checks. Peers cautioned that for some businesses the processes under the framework will be more burdensome than under the protocol as it is currently being implemented. That is because the protocol, as it stands, is still being operated inside grace periods and with exemptions.

Mr Geoghegan confirmed that the new ‘green and red lane’ arrangement meant different rules for different parts of the Henderson Group, which owns Henderson Foodservice. “We operate north and south of the border, whereas my sister business, Henderson Wholesale, which operates the Spar franchise in the north of Ireland, solely operates north of the border. “All goods Henderson Wholesale takes through from Great Britain can come through the green channel. “But unfortunately all the goods that we take through from UK into NI for Henderson Foodservice will have to come through the red channel, because there is a risk that they will be sold in the Republic.” And the framework does not alter the application of tariffs needed to bring items such as tuna from Great Britain in future, he said. Former DUP MP Lord Dodds said the House of Lords report highlighted problems which made the framework even more burdensome than the protocol. “One key conclusion is that the Windsor Framework makes things worse for many businesses compared to what they have experienced up to now,” he said. “The original protocol was unworkable and could not be implemented without major damage to our economy. That led to grace periods and easements. "Now these are to be done away with and replaced with the more onerous and burdensome Windsor Framework provisions.”

Academics say any gains will depend on the possible future expansion of the CTPPP, which as things stand looks both unlikely and undesirable.