Thread by @EmporersNewC

1. Why is Ford leaving?

Is it the risk of hard Brexit?
Or because we’re abandoning the Customs Union?
Is it because we’re leaving the Single Market?
Or is the Euro?

(Thread)

2. Don't forget the Euro, because currency is a big thing for Ford.

3. Judging by the consultations in Australia and the US, it’s a big thing for lots of companies.

4. Don’t just take their word for it, this is Anthony Bamford of JCB saying that currency fluctuations are a real problem.

5. To get around currency fluctuation, Ford hedges their money That costs money, and it also comes with risks. When the pound crashed after the referendum, they lost quite a lot of money.

6. It wasn’t a big surprise that Ford’s position suddenly came to light after some clueless twonk said that a 20% drop in the pound “might not be such a bad thing.”

7. A single currency obviously solves a number problems across borders in terms of buying goods and services, making it simpler to transfer capital and simplify cross-border labour. That’s one of the reasons it was introduced.

It’s a trade thing, not an ideology thing.

8. When the Euro was introduced the benefits to trade were seen early on, with a notable rise in activity between France and Germany.

9. It hasn’t come problems. I'm not currently an advocate, but while it's true the Euro has got structural issues, it does seem like the people who use it are less critical than those who don’t.

politico.eu/article/three-…

10. There has been a lot of myths developed about the Euro in the UK, like the suggestion the people who supported staying in the EU were exactly the same people who said we needed to join the Euro. Not true. (H/T @mrjamesob)

theguardian.com/politics/winto…

11. The IMF did not suggest we join the Euro. Here is the report:

imf.org/en/Publication…

In fact, at the time, the Eurosceptic press argued, after the report was published, that it was saying in “diplomatic language” the UK couldn’t join the Euro.

12. The official Euro campaign report didn’t say there would be Armageddon.

It said there would be risks on both side, and interestingly, it said the fact Eurosceptics had got things wrong before did not mean they shouldn’t be addressing the substance of their arguments.

13. That's quite different from the argument that Eurosceptics used during the referendum.

Instead their argument was based on the fact that companies, such as Unilever, got it wrong before so they're wrong this time.

But also quoting newspaper article titles, which is weird.

14. The article was about Niall FitzGerald, the chairman of Britain's biggest consumer brands group Unilever, who was complaining that he didn’t know what was going to happen with the Euro and he had investment decisions to make.

15. He actually did.

His company was dropping 75% of its brands. Unilever had major decisions to make in terms of investment.

Unilever has too many brands to fully hedge, so the company is particularly susceptible to currency movements.

16. However, Niall FitzGerald did say on another occasion that not being in the Euro would take away one of the most important reasons Unilever had to remain in the UK.

17. Unilever have since reconsidered their position in the UK, although the shareholders stopped them actually moving.

18. In the same Unilever article, PSA Peugeot Citroën is quoted as saying it would take into account the position on the euro when deciding whether to invest £100m in its Ryton plant near Coventry.

19. By 2006, the Ryton plant was closing. Pressure from European factories and the high number of imported components being some of the reasons cited.

20. That same Unilever article also talks about Black and Decker.

21. Black and Decker had declared that they were closing down in the previous week.

22. Nissan also featured in the Unilever article.

23. Despite all the Guardian titles to the contrary, Nissan only ever said that staying out of the Euro could affect future investment decisions, and they were going to do everything they could to adapt at the local level.

24. It doesn’t stop at that article, because Toyota is another company accused of getting it “wrong”.

25. The sustained strong pound had resulted in Toyota becoming a loss making operation. They had every reason to push the UK for a solution.

26. But Toyota also made it clear they did not believe it was a threat to their UK operation.

27. Instead choosing to pass the costs onto their suppliers and to spend more money abroad

28. While entering into a joint venture in Poland with PSA Peugeot Citroën (Remember them from earlier in the thread?)

29. Which is doing very well

30. Toyota and PSA Peugeot Citroën aren’t the only companies that invested money outside of the UK because of the strong pound. JCB did too.

31. It doesn’t end there. Another company pushing for Euro membership was Massey Ferguson.

32. Massey Ferguson shut down in 2002.

33. Dyson also threatened to leave if the UK didn’t enter the Euro

34. When Dyson did move he said the currency was “only one factor here”

35. And that’s the point.

Australian, Indian, US companies don’t invest in the UK to sell to China, they invest to sell into Europe.

The currency is “only one factor”, the Single Market will be another factor in the future of potential investors.

36. The additional facilitation costs with be another “only one factor”.

37. The UK’s manufacturing IFDI dropped significantly from 1999 to 2011, and what is clear is the companies supporting joining the Euro have either removed investment or diverted it offshore.

None of those businesses were crying wolf.

38. If Ford leaves, it won’t be because of 'no deal', or leaving the Customs Union, or leaving the Single Market, or not being in the Euro.

It will be because of No Deal and leaving the Customs Union and leaving the Single Market and not being in the Euro.

Things add up
/End