Consequences Of Brexit [Part 9] Read First Post Before Posting

[m williamson]

22 minutes ago, geared said:

Sounds like it's the near half billion quid in subsidies that won the day, along with the £300m offered to the same company for their steel plant.

 

The UK needs domestic battery manufacturing, we're way behind the EU.  We can't get that any other way than putting some (lots of) money on the table.

Unfortunately that's the way it is now.

The government and the right wing media love to big up any deals we make, but at what cost?

This country has a fantastic reputation for invention and innovation, foreign businesses have been attracted to investing here for years but now we're having to bribe them in order to cover the additional cost of doing business which wasn't there prior to Brexit.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/nissan-offered-80m-of-govt-cash-in-brexit-vote-fallout-11628069

 

https://www.ft.com/content/01191c5e-287b-11e9-a5ab-ff8ef2b976c7

 

[Axe]

12 minutes ago, m williamson said:

Unfortunately that's the way it is now.

The government and the right wing media love to big up any deals we make, but at what cost?

This country has a fantastic reputation for invention and innovation, foreign businesses have been attracted to investing here for years but now we're having to bribe them in order to cover the additional cost of doing business which wasn't there prior to Brexit.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/nissan-offered-80m-of-govt-cash-in-brexit-vote-fallout-11628069

 

https://www.ft.com/content/01191c5e-287b-11e9-a5ab-ff8ef2b976c7

 

Subsidies are nothing new.  The Japanese car manufactures chose the UK in the 1980s  to build factories due to incentives.   EU car manufactures built factories in Slovakia rather than their own countries due to incentives.  German manufacturers are currently asking the EU to allow subsidies to be able to compete in the USA due to the USA green subsidy regime.  Leaving the EU has made it easier for the UK government to give subsidies or incentives to attract new investment.  

 

You mentioned the word bribery which is an illegal activity unlike subsidies which are legal.  You are wrong to use the word bribery in the context you have used it.

[Guest ThaBoom]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/24/brexit-food-trade-barriers-have-cost-uk-households-7bn-report-finds

 

Not surprising 😒 

[m williamson]

10 minutes ago, Axe said:

Subsidies are nothing new.  The Japanese car manufactures chose the UK in the 1980s  to build factories due to incentives.   EU car manufactures built factories in Slovakia rather than their own countries due to incentives.  German manufacturers are currently asking the EU to allow subsidies to be able to compete in the USA due to the USA green subsidy regime.  Leaving the EU has made it easier for the UK government to give subsidies or incentives to attract new investment.  

 

You mentioned the word bribery which is an illegal activity unlike subsidies which are legal.  You are wrong to use the word bribery in the context you have used it.

Nit picking. If something is offered to a person or an organisation in order to persuade that person or organisation to do something that they otherwise wouldn't be prepared to do it's a bribe.

Governments make the rules so it isn't illegal and they can call it what they want, but the fact is that it's a bribe in reality.

Yes, there has always been incentives offered to persuade companies to invest, it happens everywhere. The difference is that we are now having to indemnify companies against losses caused by a specific situation which we brought about.

We've had to do that with companies which were already established here and had already been given incentives to come in the first place.

Those companies were content to do business here, they had a well trained and highly skilled workforce but have had obstacles placed in front of them that didn't previously exist so have demanded recompense. 

 

 

[geared]

Worth noting that the EU are preparing a counter-offer to TATA, so thanks to Brexit we now find ourselves in direct competition with the worlds largest trading bloc to attract large business here.

 

 

[Axe]

33 minutes ago, m williamson said:

Nit picking. If something is offered to a person or an organisation in order to persuade that person or organisation to do something that they otherwise wouldn't be prepared to do it's a bribe.

Governments make the rules so it isn't illegal and they can call it what they want, but the fact is that it's a bribe in reality.

Yes, there has always been incentives offered to persuade companies to invest, it happens everywhere. The difference is that we are now having to indemnify companies against losses caused by a specific situation which we brought about.

We've had to do that with companies which were already established here and had already been given incentives to come in the first place.

Those companies were content to do business here, they had a well trained and highly skilled workforce but have had obstacles placed in front of them that didn't previously exist so have demanded recompense. 

 

 

Someone appearing in a court of law accused of bribery are unlikely to bold well by using nit picking as their defence.   Accepting a bribe is not the same as accepting a subsidy.  Bribery is a form of corruption unlike subsidies which are an incentive intended to help industry and create jobs. 

[m williamson]

8 minutes ago, Axe said:

Someone appearing in a court of law accused of bribery are unlikely to bold well by using nit picking as their defence.   Accepting a bribe is not the same as accepting a subsidy.  Bribery is a form of corruption unlike subsidies which are an incentive intended to help industry and create jobs. 

Complete deflection in a failed attempt to detract from the actual subject. It doesn't matter what you call it, this is a discussion forum not a court of law.

It is costing the country money we can ill afford in order to retain businesses that would have been perfectly happy to stay here without the extra financial inducement if they hadn't had increased costs forced upon them by the country taking leave of its senses.

Given the circumstances it's the right thing for the government to do. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the UK employed in the automobile manufacturing. There are thousands more making a living out of the spinoffs of that business. If the companies left it would cause devastation to thousands of families and the loss of tax to the government would be huge.

I've no objection to the extra incentives, I'm simply pointing out that they would have been unnecessary if it wasn't for Brexit.

[Axe]

25 minutes ago, m williamson said:

Complete deflection in a failed attempt to detract from the actual subject. It doesn't matter what you call it, this is a discussion forum not a court of law.

It is costing the country money we can ill afford in order to retain businesses that would have been perfectly happy to stay here without the extra financial inducement if they hadn't had increased costs forced upon them by the country taking leave of its senses.

Given the circumstances it's the right thing for the government to do. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the UK employed in the automobile manufacturing. There are thousands more making a living out of the spinoffs of that business. If the companies left it would cause devastation to thousands of families and the loss of tax to the government would be huge.

I've no objection to the extra incentives, I'm simply pointing out that they would have been unnecessary if it wasn't for Brexit.

A poor contribution.  The UK were in the EU when they offered incentives to Japanese car manufactures in the 1980s to build factories in the UK.  Slovakia were in the EU and offered incentives to car manufactures to build factories in their country.   One of the principles of the EU is supposed to be harmonisation which is where everything  is suppose to be the same in all EU countries which clearly is not the true situation otherwise German and other EU car manufactures would not have built factories in Slovakia instead of their own country.   UK governments  were guilty of enforcing EU rules more stringently than other EU members while they were members.

 

If it was not for Brexit then Jaguar Land Rover would have not chosen the UK to build the new battery factory because the UK government would have followed the  EU rules more vigorously than Slovakia and not offered the subsidies they are now legally free to offer. 

[butlers]

Net migration to the UK hits record 606,000 in 2021.

 

[m williamson]

12 hours ago, Axe said:

A poor contribution.  The UK were in the EU when they offered incentives to Japanese car manufactures in the 1980s to build factories in the UK.  Slovakia were in the EU and offered incentives to car manufactures to build factories in their country.   One of the principles of the EU is supposed to be harmonisation which is where everything  is suppose to be the same in all EU countries which clearly is not the true situation otherwise German and other EU car manufactures would not have built factories in Slovakia instead of their own country.   UK governments  were guilty of enforcing EU rules more stringently than other EU members while they were members.

 

If it was not for Brexit then Jaguar Land Rover would have not chosen the UK to build the new battery factory because the UK government would have followed the  EU rules more vigorously than Slovakia and not offered the subsidies they are now legally free to offer. 

Try reading comments before replying. See my post # 6128 fourth and fifth lines down.

Yes, we know that countries offer incentives in order to get companies to invest in the first place but that's not what's happening now.

We are having to offer incentives to persuade countries to Stay here. That shouldn't be neccessary, we have the workforce with the skills to help these companies make profit. We've altered that because of Brexit and as a result we're having to compensate them . Money that could have been used to benefit the public is now being provided to foreign companys.

 

As for Jaguar Land Rover we've had to offer them a significant ' incentive ' to manufacture batterys here even though they already have a site at Solihull.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/19/jaguar-land-rover-offered-500m-in-subsidies-to-build-battery-plant-in-uk

 

Jaguar Land Rover were founded in Britain and were famous world wide as an example of British engineering. They are now owned by the Tata Group which is an Indian Corporation headquartered in Mumbai and we have to pay them to continue manufacturing here.

 

At least you've finally managed to come up a Brexit  advantage, we can now pay larger amounts out to companies in order to persuade them to remain. Obviously they probably wouldn't have thought about leaving in the first place if it wasn't for Brexit but never mind.