(The slide below comes from the UK Government's 'Border Operating Model' case studies, which were released on 31 December 2020, 8 hours before the transition period ended.)
And what happens in a couple of weeks when the £23 million is gone? Do they shut up shop?
Also, note that the funds will only be given to firms that can show "genuine loss" as a result of Brexit.
So the mere fact of their disbursement proves *officially* that Brexit is damaging to the fishing industry.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's worth focusing on the "new" aspect of the new red tape and paperwork introduced by Brexit.
It's not "new new". They're the result of the rules that apply to the EU's interation with any third country. (Rules that the UK had a hand in drafting when we were a member.)
But the situation is more nuanced than that.
The rules are new for any UK firm that's never had to deal with a non-EU country before.
Likewise for many EU firms, which may have never sold outside the EU, precisely because it was so much more complicated than within the EU.
They're also new for the customs staff at the Channel ports (both sides) because there was no EU/non-EU border present before Brexit.
They're new for hauliers, very few of whom serve non-EU markets. Until the UK left, they never had to worry about much other than driving.
"Ports chaos will get WORSE: Ministers put troops on standby to clear backlog 'amid shortages of broccoli, tomatoes and cheese' as Liz Truss admits Brexit IS partly to blame"
Yes, it's irritating and frustrating as anything that they're only telling the truth NOW.
But it is still much better than the alternative (embraced by the Express) of continuing the lies and spin and automatic EU-blaming.
If there's any hope of our reaching a closer relationship with the EU, or rejoining again, there needs to be a big swing in public opinion (not all 17.4 million, but substantial numbers).
Material like this will be much more effective than anything the "Remain contingent" says.