Supply chain crisis: Tories poised to U-turn on foreign worker visas

[Silver]

Edited September 28, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[Wepwawet]

One of the issues here is the requirement for drivers who transport dangerous goods to have an ADR licence. This has to be renewed every five years, and the governent has announced that drivers whose licences expire by 31 December this year can have an extension to the 31st January next year. A one month extension, while better than nothing, is feeble considering that to an extent the ADR licence is a money making scam. Before the mid 90s it never existed, and lack of this qualification was not seen as an issue as a driver will be trained to operate his vehicle by his employer. Those firms that operate tankers already do in house training and issue competency certificates to drivers. If you do not operate a vehicle for a specific product for more than one year, you have to be re-tested. This costs nothing, and is a better way of ensuring that competant tanker drivers are on the roads than the ADR, which is for the most part is an exercise in labelling, which was done anyway before ADR came along. The exchequer will have made a vast amount of money from ADR, and, as lack of a valid licence will not affect road safety, should suspend ADR requirements until this mess is sorted out, and the "Working time directive" should also be thrown out the window. The tacho is there to stop drivers working excessive hours in one stretch, and all this extra stuff is not needed, except for those who like nothing better than to make petty rules and enforce them, and make money from them of course. Suspension of ADR will not result in mass disasters on the roads with tankers crashing all over the place, or drivers blowing up petrol stations because they don't know how to operate their vehicles, they do know how to operate safely, and without needing ADR.

Edited September 28, 2021 by Wepwawet

[Silver]

Just to clarify, Chris Kendall is in Brussels.

[Wepwawet]

Headlines that the Army is on standby to deliver fuel are not the full story. The Army does not operate a fleet of large tankers of the type you see at petrol stations, their fuel is delivered to them by those same civilian tankers, and has been for a very very long time. The Army operates smaller tankers that are for use in getting fuel from main logistics locations, supplied by civilian tankers, to more forward areas where it is then distributed at regimental level to front line units. Even this capability is quite small as the Army has shrunk so much, and I doupt would have much impact even if every single vehicle was used. One good aspect though is that military drivers, though of course needing to have taken a driving test just like everybody else, are exempt from all the other rules that civilian operators have to abide by, working hours for example.

[Essan]

I suspect the whole "army poised to help" is a more a PR thing to placate the mass hysteria

There are as many tanker drivers, driving as many tankers, as there were 2 weeks ago - plenty to deliver all the fuel we need.   BP had a slight issue  due to a reduction in drivers in one area, for undisclosed reasons (not Brexit unless that only happened last week?).   Delays in licence renewals may be a factor - indeed, may be the main problem.   But had it not been for the media, apart from a handful of stations temporarily running dry (with others in the area covering the shortfall) there would never have been any problem at all.

[Wepwawet]

16 minutes ago, Essan said:

I suspect the whole "army poised to help" is a more a PR thing to placate the mass hysteria

There are as many tanker drivers, driving as many tankers, as there were 2 weeks ago - plenty to deliver all the fuel we need.   BP had a slight issue  due to a reduction in drivers in one area, for undisclosed reasons (not Brexit unless that only happened last week?).   Delays in licence renewals may be a factor - indeed, may be the main problem.   But had it not been for the media, apart from a handful of stations temporarily running dry (with others in the area covering the shortfall) there would never have been any problem at all.

Yes, of course it's all just soothing words for the sheeple.

Another factor other than the ADR is that as the average age of HGV drivers in the UK is 50+, from that age they need to have regular medical examinations by their GP. But many folk cannot even get to see a GP if they think they have cancer or some other ailment, so I think HGV medicals will not be high up the list or priorities. Oh wait, the drivers have to pay for them from their own pocket direct to the medical practice, while patients coming in for a normal consultation pay nothing, at least directly to the practice. I'm probably being too cynical as who knows just what is going on with GP consultations these days, not much apparently.

[RAyMO]

On 9/26/2021 at 6:05 PM, NE1 said:

The UK is far from isolated, we are still big players on the World stage whether people like to admit it or not. 

right, demonstrated by 

1. having to run to the US for permission when Australia asked for help developing better subs;

2. having to hightail it out of Afghanistan because the US wasn't staying;

3. having zero input into the US (allies) decision to leave Afghanistan;

4. having to claim brilliant successes for trade deals which are merely re-implementations of trade deals we already had;

5. having to accept Australia's terms to get a trade deal with them;

6 asking Brazil for emergency food aid (denied by UK off course)

7 by not getting the US to commit to a trade deal in the foreseeable future.

 

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

One of the issues here is the requirement for drivers who transport dangerous goods to have an ADR licence. This has to be renewed every five years

And I'll add that renewing an ADR licence is not the same as renewing a TV licence as it involves, for tanker drivers, being taken off the road for five days to sit in a classroom and essentially redo the entire initial course again. This is bonkers, but $$$

[toast]

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

 A one month extension, while better than nothing, is feeble considering that to an extent the ADR licence is a money making scam.

ADR regulations isnt a moneymaking scam but a procedure that ensures that drivers transport dangerous goods in a manner that minimizes the potential danger to people and the environment. In addition, ADR regulations serves the purpose of self-protection of drivers as well to avoid potential harm by wrong declared/packed/labeled dangerous goods.

Quote

Before the mid 90s it never existed, and lack of this qualification was not seen as an issue as a driver will be trained to operate his vehicle by his employer.

ADR isnt about how to operate a vehicle, its about knowledge how to transport dangerous goods in compliance with dangerous goods regulations.

Quote

Those firms that operate tankers already do in house training and issue competency certificates to drivers.

The permission to transport dangerous fluids in tanks on the road is an extension of the standard ADR training. Logistik companies dont have the permission to self-certify drivers to be ADR ready.

Quote

This costs nothing, and is a better way of ensuring that competant tanker drivers are on the roads than the ADR, which is for the most part is an exercise in labelling, which was done anyway before ADR came along.

Here you are wrong again because its not just because of labeling.

Quote

Suspension of ADR will not result in mass disasters on the roads with tankers crashing all over the place, or drivers blowing up petrol stations because they don't know how to operate their vehicles, they do know how to operate safely, and without needing ADR.

Again, ADR isnt about how to operate a vehicle.

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, toast said:

ADR regulations isnt a moneymaking scam but a procedure that ensures that drivers transport dangerous goods in a manner that minimizes the potential danger to people and the environment. In addition, ADR regulations serves the purpose of self-protection of drivers as well to avoid potential harm by wrong declared/packed/labeled dangerous goods.

ADR isnt about how to operate a vehicle, its about knowledge how to transport dangerous goods in compliance with dangerous goods regulations.

The permission to transport dangerous fluids in tanks on the road is an extension of the standard ADR training. Logistik companies dont have the permission to self-certify drivers to be ADR ready.

Here you are wrong again because its not just because of labeling.

Again, ADR isnt about how to operate a vehicle.

It's a money making scam. A driver transports dangerous good in safety in the first instance because they have been trained to drive and been tested. The hours they can drive are dictated by the tachograph. They have then been trained to operate specific types of vehicle, and that includes the delivery mechanisms and all safety proceedures, including the safety of the public, by their employer. Agency drivers will not be allowed to drive and operate any of a firms vehicles until they have been trained and tested. Training will take place in a firms premises and out on the road on the job under instruction by an experienced driver. Drivers will be assesed at regular intervals by an outside agency employing experienced drivers, and ex police and military driving instructors. Tanker drivers will receive roll-over training once every four years. This involves driving specially adapted tankers, both articulated and rigid, on a test track. They will drive the vehicle in a manner so as to cause a roll-over, prevented by outriggers, so see how this happens and how they can drive in a manner to prevent this, and they also do brake tests on various types of road surface in order to see how jack-knifing can occur, and how to control this. The labelling of vehicles is something that predates ADR by many years, as is instruction on BLEVE, first aid and use of fire extinguishers, and the loading of vehicles. Drivers will be in-house re-tested on product specific vehicles if they have not operated one for more than one year. None of this requires an ADR, and if the ADR was so important, how come everybody managed quite well before it became compulsory in the mid/late 90s. The major problems were always with drivers going to long without a break, sorted by the tacho, not ADR, and ever improving standards in construction of the vehicles, again nothing to do with ADR which does not set automotive standards, but does set regulations on type and positioning of hazchem plates and other labelling. About half a day of an ADR refresher is spent on how sea containers should be labelled, important info I've no doubt for Joe Bloggs driving a BP fuel tanker around the Midlands, or being told that flour can explode, something that will be covered in a hopper drivers training, and was long before ADR. What ADR did was to tell us all what we already knew and what we were already doing, and charged us for it, great, thanks. What we did before ADR did not fundamentally change after ADR, the only noticable change was a reduced bank balance.

 

I'll add some context for anybody not up to speed on this ADR business, and why I'm calling it a scam.

For tanker drivers the initial course is five days, and costs £500. If you have about 20 drivers per course, this will generate £10,000 for the training firm. They will have to take their running costs out of this. In my experience these firms have two instructors and work from one classroom they have rented in a building. Their expenditures will be in rent and stationary, and one or two fire extinguishers. You don't stay overnight, so meals are not provided, if you want lunch you have to buy your own from the local pub or cafe. How much the instructors pay themselves I have no idea, but if they run initial and refresher courses for, say, 47 weeks of the year as they have to have a holiday, they will rake in potentially up to £470,000 a year. I don't expect that they manage this as not all courses cost the full £500, but I doubt this figure will be off by a substantial amount. When ADR started it was a one day course conducted in house, five years later the first refresher lasted one morning, typically all the drivers attending on a saturday morning at their place of work. The instructor was one guy, usually an ex police or military instructor. All this was free. It was by the second refresher that it all changed and went to external sources and up to five days for a refresher, and certainly five days for the initial course. I really wish I could have thought this one up as I would have retired with a shed full of money years ago.

Edited September 28, 2021 by Wepwawet

[Essan]

2 hours ago, RAyMO said:

6 asking Brazil for emergency food aid (denied by UK off course)

 

 

That's just nuts

[L.A.T.1961]

Rachel Reeves: Labour will not bring back freedom of movement.

Shadow chancellor says returning unlimited immigration from Europe would not solve the HGV crisis.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/09/27/rachel-reeves-labour-will-not-bring-back-freedom-movement/

[toast]

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

- comment removed -

I dont think I`m willing to continue our dialogue further as the gab in between your level of knowledge and mine about the matter is to big to find some consensus. My experience is based on >20 years in global special logistic, including general handling of dangerous goods air/road with stuff like explosives, toxic substances and infectious substances like HIV, Ebola, Marburg virus, bird flue and all the others. I managed dangerous goods transports for research institutes, CROs, labs and space agencies like ESA and NASA as well. I had an ADR cerification and an IATA Dangerous Goods certification as well. Means, I know what I´m talking about. But you dont.

[Wepwawet]

1 minute ago, toast said:

I dont think I`m willing to continue our dialogue further as the gab in between your level of knowledge and mine about the matter is to big to find some consensus. My experience is based on >20 years in global special logistic, including general handling of dangerous goods air/road with stuff like explosives, toxic substances and infectious substances like HIV, Ebola, Marburg virus, bird flue and all the others. I managed dangerous goods transports for research institutes, CROs, labs and space agencies like ESA and NASA as well. I had an ADR cerification and an IATA Dangerous Goods certification as well. Means, I know what I´m talking about. But you dont.

Sonny, I spent 22 years dealing with dangerous materials in the Army, then another 30 years involved in transporting, storing and using liquified gases. I was there before ADR, saw it come in, and saw how it became used as a cash cow. It's not a difference of experience, though clearly mine extends for a far greater period, it's a difference of seeing how it has been implemented.

[Silver]

8 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

And I'll add that renewing an ADR licence is not the same as renewing a TV licence as it involves, for tanker drivers, being taken off the road for five days to sit in a classroom and essentially redo the entire initial course again. This is bonkers, but $$$

A lot of people,myself included, have to have annual refreshers on basic procedures. We would all like to 'act the old soldier's, 'I've done this for donkeys years', 'no one can teach me anything,' but the refereshers are for safety and security.

Edited September 28, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[Wepwawet]

43 minutes ago, The Silver Shroud said:

A lot of people,myself included, have to annual refreshers on basic procedures. We would all like to 'act the old soldier's, 'I've done this for donkeys years', 'no one can teach me anything,' but the refereshers are for safety and security.

Of course there's nothing wrong in being tested periodically, but most of the regulations just not not apply to the drivers. A guy driving an O2 tanker just needs to make sure he has the correct hazchem plates and that they are clean, that he has the required number of fire extinguishers and that they are full and in date, that he has a first aid kit. These, and many other checks, are all made daily before driving off, and some checks are done multiple times a day, and hardly needs a refresher course. He does not need to know how many boxes of lighter fuel he can carry, none obviously, or what type of plates and documentation he needs on a sea journey he will never take. He gets first aid and fire extinguisher practise in house, he does not forget parking restrictions as he drives the thing every working day. He does not need to be told every five years about the dangers of a BLEVE as he lives with the potential for this every working day. It's not so much having a refresher that is an issue, it's that when ADR came it the refreshers were exactly to the point of what the drivers needed to know, and that came down to a few hours with a test at the end, no complaints about that at all, but up to five days for tanker drivers, with most of it a total waste of time and money is ridiculous. Note that I mentioned that if you had not operated a vehicle with a specific product for more than one year, say an O2 driver had spent over a year driving LN2 tankers, then he needs to be retested on operating an O2 tanker again before being allowed on the road. That' s more stringent than ADR, and actually necessary for technical reasons that I won't go into as it's too boring, however, a BLEVE is not boring, so for anybody who is not familiar with them, and nobody wants to be, it is a Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion, as seen here, and five year reminders are hardly needed.

And ADR does not stop this, good driving and vehicle maintainance does

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by Wepwawet

[Guest Br Cornelius]

9 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Of course there's nothing wrong in being tested periodically, but most of the regulations just not not apply to the drivers. A guy driving an O2 tanker just needs to make sure he has the correct hazchem plates and that they are clean, that he has the required number of fire extinguishers and that they are full and in date, that he has a first aid kit. These, and many other checks, are all made daily before driving off, and some checks are done multiple times a day, and hardly needs a refresher course. He does not need to know how many boxes of lighter fuel he can carry, none obviously, or what type of plates and documentation he needs on a sea journey he will never take. He gets first aid and fire extinguisher practise in house, he does not forget parking restrictions as he drives the thing every working day. He does not need to be told every five years about the dangers of a BLEVE as he lives with the potential for this every working day. It's not so much having a refresher that is an issue, it's that when ADR came it the refreshers were exactly to the point of what the drivers needed to know, and that came down to a few hours with a test at the end, no compliants about that at all, but up to five days for tanker drivers, with most of it a total waste of time and money. Note that I mentioned that if you had not operated a vehicle with a specific product for more than one year, say an O2 driver had spent over a year driving LN2 tankers, then he needs to be retested on operating an O2 tanker again before being allowed on the road. That' s more stringent than ADR, and actually necessary for technical reasons that I won't go into as it's too boring, however, a BLEVE is not boring, so for anybody who is not familiar with them, and nobody wants to be, it is a Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosion, as seen here, and five year reminders are hardly needed.

 

Having been responsible for receiving deliveries of hazardous chemicals I can tell you that what you are saying is bull****. The delivery driver is responsible for the unloading of those hazardous chemicals and it is literally him that stops disasters from happening. This is far more than labels - its safe procedures and extreme vigilance. At least two peoples lives are in his hands every time he makes a delivery.

Training is what makes this possible>

I undertake a very basic safety course every 4 years in order to do my job, and let me say every time I learn something new and it reminds me of the sometimes fatal outcomes of complacency.

Br Cornelius

Edited September 28, 2021 by Br Cornelius

[Wepwawet]

47 minutes ago, Br Cornelius said:

Having been responsible for receiving deliveries of hazardous chemicals I can tell you that what you are saying is bull****. The delivery driver is responsible for the unloading of those hazardous chemicals and it is literally him that stops disasters from happening. This is far more than labels - its safe procedures and extreme vigilance. At least two peoples lives are in his hands every time he makes a delivery.

Training is what makes this possible

Br Cornelius

I think you need to read my post again, as I am coming from the position that good training on the operational use of the vehicle, driving and operating dispensing equipment, is the key to being safe, not knowing what hazchem plates to use on a sea journey that the driver will never take, or knowing how many boxes of lighter fuel he can carry for the size of his vehicle, when that is not applicable to him. Being responsible for training in my Army days, and having written the training manual for my company as a civi, I know this very well.

I wrote this in my post that you quote "and some checks are done multiple times a day", where and in what circumstances do you think these additional checks are made, customers premises perhaps, and before moving off from having a break. Basic safety refreshers were held every two months where I worked, and all incidents, either in house, very rare, or in other firms and even in other countries, were discussed. The video about BLEVEs I have not seen every five years on an ADR refresher, but at least once a year in house, and other material.

At each customer, and even on refilling in the depot, a dynamic risk assesment was required to be carried out, and a folder was carried that had a plan of all the relevant locations at a customers premises, and all potential known risks. The dynamic risk assesment was needed to be carried out on every visit to factor in any changes since the last visit, and any factors that might have a potential risk that are not a permanent risk, for instance other deliveries taking place or work being carried out. You don't want to be delivering O2 with a welder near by, or a worker lurking about having a smoke.

Edited September 28, 2021 by Wepwawet

[NE1]

9 hours ago, RAyMO said:

right, demonstrated by 

1. having to run to the US for permission when Australia asked for help developing better subs;

2. having to hightail it out of Afghanistan because the US wasn't staying;

3. having zero input into the US (allies) decision to leave Afghanistan;

4. having to claim brilliant successes for trade deals which are merely re-implementations of trade deals we already had;

5. having to accept Australia's terms to get a trade deal with them;

6 asking Brazil for emergency food aid (denied by UK off course)

7 by not getting the US to commit to a trade deal in the foreseeable future.

 

I don’t really want to derail this thread further but i would be happy to speak to you regarding all of the points you made Raymo in another thread if you wish?

I will say quickly however about points 2 & 3, not sure where you get this idea that we hightailed it out of Afghanistan because the US decided not to stay and we had no say in what went on. You do realise that the vast majority of British forces left Afghanistan in October 2014 as part of ISAF right? We handed Camp Bastion over to the Afghan Army and kept between 700-800 troops there for training/advisory purposes.

The US didn’t sign a troop withdrawal agreement with the Taliban until February 2020 by which time there were still some 10 to 15 thousand US troops stationed over there that’s nearly 6 years after our combat operations had ended. 

[NE1]

On 9/27/2021 at 10:18 AM, toast said:

Thats correct but dont you think that the management of your country failed because it seems they did not had the additional driver shortage on their radar during 5 years time? Hell, thats project management for beginners.

Or failed the idea to get unemployed UK drivers into jobs, filling the gabs caused by the EU driver ban?

What you have just said Toast I respect and i do agree with to an extent however I still stand by my belief that Brexit is not the sole purpose of the shortage like some on here are making out. I would like to throw something back towards you and others.

For the past several years a large portion of members of Parliament and the media have attempted to block and make Brexit as hard as possible for the current government to get over the line. All of those wasted debates in the commons and constant back and forth made it in my opinion very hard for the government to proceed with any proposed plans on anything. I’m not given them a free pass here. I don’t particularly like the Conservatives and i like Boris even less however having a constant up hill battle against your peers in the house did not help our situation.

Do you not believe that if the decision to leave was respected and accepted earlier then the government and its bodies could have focused on other pressing matters like actually making Brexit work and gaining a foothold and understanding the finer details, I.E sorting out potential driver shortages? Not saying it would of happened but it is certainly food for thought. 

[Silver]

4 hours ago, NE1 said:

What you have just said Toast I respect and i do agree with to an extent however I still stand by my belief that Brexit is not the sole purpose of the shortage like some on here are making out. I would like to throw something back towards you and others.

For the past several years a large portion of members of Parliament and the media have attempted to block and make Brexit as hard as possible for the current government to get over the line. All of those wasted debates in the commons and constant back and forth made it in my opinion very hard for the government to proceed with any proposed plans on anything. I’m not given them a free pass here. I don’t particularly like the Conservatives and i like Boris even less however having a constant up hill battle against your peers in the house did not help our situation.

Do you not believe that if the decision to leave was respected and accepted earlier then the government and its bodies could have focused on other pressing matters like actually making Brexit work and gaining a foothold and understanding the finer details, I.E sorting out potential driver shortages? Not saying it would of happened but it is certainly food for thought. 

I so love this!  If Brexit is a disaster for the UK, it is the fault of the people who didn't want it, not the people who did want it! We are hearing this more and more, with slight variations- it is the fault of the EU, or the people who negotiated it. It is never Brexit itself.

And understanding the finer details? Do you realise what you have written? A vote was held, promising sunlit uplands, prosperity, sovereignty, more money for the NHS, less immigration, etc, etc, and no one had thought of the finer details? Like who would do the actual work once we had expelled all the foreigners? Like who we would trade with once we had ripped up our trade agreements with our closest trading partners? These were just 'finer details' which we could sort out once we had decided to become "sovereign"?

 

Edited September 29, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[NE1]

2 hours ago, The Silver Shroud said:

I so love this!  If Brexit is a disaster for the UK, it is the fault of the people who didn't want it, not the people who did want it! We are hearing this more and more, with slight variations- it is the fault of the EU, or the people who negotiated it. It is never Brexit itself.

And understanding the finer details? Do you realise what you have written? A vote was held, promising sunlit uplands, prosperity, sovereignty, more money for the NHS, less immigration, etc, etc, and no one had thought of the finer details? Like who would do the actual work once we had expelled all the foreigners? Like who we would trade with once we had ripped up our trade agreements with our closest trading partners? These were just 'finer details' which we could sort out once we had decided to become "sovereign"?

 

Expelled all the foreigners? Stop being over dramatic. Over 3.5 million remained in the UK through the EU citizenship Scheme, that’s around 2.5% of the total UK population. We also have many people from outside the EU living here so hardy an expulsion of foreigners. You do know people from the EU can still come and work here right we haven’t banned anyone? 

You say we ripped up our trade agreements. Raymo said we just re-implemented our old trade agreements we had with everyone. Which is it? 

[Silver]

32 minutes ago, NE1 said:

Expelled all the foreigners? Stop being over dramatic. Over 3.5 million remained in the UK through the EU citizenship Scheme, that’s around 2.5% of the total UK population. We also have many people from outside the EU living here so hardy an expulsion of foreigners. You do know people from the EU can still come and work here right we haven’t banned anyone? 

You say we ripped up our trade agreements. Raymo said we just re-implemented our old trade agreements we had with everyone. Which is it? 

This is what Brexit was supposed to be according to arch-Brexiter Tory MP Daniel Hannan (I've edited it because of length but the whole article is in the link and worth a laugh). What went wrong- oh, just that Brexit was a pipe-dream, a nostalgic yearing for an England that never was, sometime in a glorious past :

"Financial services are booming – not only in London, but in Birmingham, Leeds and Edinburgh too. ....... London unchallenged.

Other cities, too, have boomed, not least Liverpool and Glasgow, .......

Shale oil and gas came on tap, almost providentially, just as the North Sea reserves were depleting, with most of the infrastructure already in place. ......

..... A points-based immigration system invites the world’s top talent; and the consequent sense of having had to win a place competitively means that new settlers arrive with commensurate pride and patriotism.

Unsurprisingly, several other European countries have opted to copy Britain’s deal with the EU....
The United Kingdom now leads a 22-state bloc that forms a free trade area with the EU, but remains outside its political structures. ......

Perhaps the greatest benefit, though, is not easy to quantify. Britain has recovered its self-belief. As we left the EU, we straightened our backs, looked about us, and realised that we were still a nation to be reckoned with: the world’s fifth economy and fourth military power, ........ We knew that our song had not yet been sung."

I've never known a country with less self-belief, and the only song we are singing is a swan song.

What Britain looks like after Brexit - Reaction

Edited September 29, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[Silver]

33 minutes ago, NE1 said:

Expelled all the foreigners? Stop being over dramatic. Over 3.5 million remained in the UK through the EU citizenship Scheme, that’s around 2.5% of the total UK population. We also have many people from outside the EU living here so hardy an expulsion of foreigners. You do know people from the EU can still come and work here right we haven’t banned anyone? 

You say we ripped up our trade agreements. Raymo said we just re-implemented our old trade agreements we had with everyone. Which is it? 

You are being deliberately obtuse or just lack understanding.

We ripped up the agreements we had with the EU and other countries through membership of the Single Market, and "rolled them over" as best we could as an independent, less powerful, country. Sometimes, as with Japan, less favourably.

Honestly, I really believe that if Brexiters understood trade and politics, Brexit could never have happened: Daniel Hannan, David Davis, Liz Truss, all as thick as mince. Some were just duplicitous, like Farage.

Edited September 29, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[toast]

8 hours ago, NE1 said:

What you have just said Toast I respect and i do agree with to an extent however I still stand by my belief that Brexit is not the sole purpose of the shortage like some on here are making out.

I never said that the current driver shortage is a result of C19 only but the brexit boosted the shortage.

Quote

For the past several years a large portion of members of Parliament and the media have attempted to block and make Brexit as hard as possible for the current government to get over the line. All of those wasted debates in the commons and constant back and forth made it in my opinion very hard for the government to proceed with any proposed plans on anything. I’m not given them a free pass here. I don’t particularly like the Conservatives and i like Boris even less however having a constant up hill battle against your peers in the house did not help our situation.

I dont think the above is an acceptable excuse or a logical explanation. Every big change is the sum of many small changes and I`m in the opinion that the UK government totally ignored the micro scale, means, simple last mile logistics. I have no information on hands yet but I also think that UK logistic associations have foreseen a shortage, or the risk of,  years ago already.

Quote

Do you not believe that if the decision to leave was respected and accepted earlier then the government and its bodies could have focused on other pressing matters like actually making Brexit work and gaining a foothold and understanding the finer details, I.E sorting out potential driver shortages? Not saying it would of happened but it is certainly food for thought.

No.