In fairness to Lance, the government has absolutely failed to modernise and upscale customs and border systems - and he is right to be outraged, but either way, he will still experience the full array of third country controls - all of which are a consequence of leaving the EEA.

But by the same token, the Brexit Party was at every point in the process demanding a walkout - which would have landed him with disruption worse than at present with tariffs that would have killed exports anyway.
At best, though, even if those "teething troubles" are resolved, food produce is still looking at an inspection rate of 20%, all at random, the the SPS paperwork, along with finding a responsible importer is a fixed feature of being outside the single market.
@LanceForman could and should have known this. It was in the Notices to Stakeholders. Moreover, he had the research facilities of the European Parliament at his disposal which he could have used for the benefit of his entire industry. So what was he doing with his time there?
None of what is happening at the border comes as any surprise to us because well in advance of the referendum we produced a plan, looking at the consequences of each option. The Brexit Party, despite its massive resources, elected not to do this kind of groundwork.
Supporters of Leave .EU and the Brexit Party became outraged at us for spelling out what was likely to happen - to the point of Arron Banks calling us remainers. You will not be surprised, therefore, that we are not massively sympathetic.
If BXP had produced a plan, they would have known what to avoid, and from their relative position of power, they could have directed the government after triggering Article 50. Instead they made shouty grunty noises about leaving with no deal.
The point was raised with self-styled working class champion, Claire Fox, who called EFta leavers "remainers in drag". The Brexit Party, is to a large extent responsible for the outcome - and the massive job losses that goes with it.
We saw Mummery demanding we take back "all our fish", completely ignorant of non tariff barriers or where she was going to sell those fish and now she's complaining she has no fish to sell. Goes back to that original refusal to produce a Brexit plan.
All the while we saw Tice/Forman prattling on about GATT24 - absolutely oblivious to the concept of SPS controls and third country border processes. They simply didn't have the first idea what they were talking about. If Forman wanted to stay in business, it was his job to know.
BXP refused to listen to trade bodies. They refused to listen to trade lawyers. They refused to listen to the Commission. They refused to listen to us. They got drunk on their own moronic notions of free trade and sovereignty - and now they're complaining about the hangover.
Since 2014, I've managed to pick up on aspects for trade ranging from food safety rules in the Cook Islands through to IMO rules on anti-fouling coats, and the more obscure WTO rules on intellectual property. So why is the entire Brexit Party still struggling with the basics?
Put simply, they weren't interested - even though it is in itself an interesting subject. The common theme here is Farage - who has always surrounded himself with braindead incurious morons who wouldn't challenge him. If you were a BXP MEP it's because you qualified as a moron.
But then never to be outclassed are Westminster MPs who, despite having (marginally) better information, STILL voted to leave the single market. So there we are. The basic take-home from all this is that our politicians are know-nothing fuckwits who can't be told anything.
So as much as the BXP morons don't get to whine, the SNP voted for the same outcome, as did most of the Labour party and remainer Lib Dems - even when they had Theresa May backed into a corner. They then voted down her deal and installed Boris Johnson.
Ultimately it stems from one basic problem. Politicians get most of their information from our heap of shit media, reading only what they want to hear. Politicians are the last people alive to believe what they say or care what they think despite media being almost as ignorant.

More from Government

Let me take a stab at this after years of reporting on Marine One, HMX-1, Continuity of Government, etc. None of this is definitive, but it could help explain what folks are seeing:

1.) HMX-1, which flies the VH-3D and VH-60N 'White Top' helicopters used to move... 1/X


the President and VP around, those helos being called Marine One or Two when either is onboard, need to train. The urban landing zones, including WH and VP Residence, are not simple to get in and out of. So, crews need some currency training. They are not just tasked with... 2/X

moving POTUS and VP to get them around the region and to Andrews AFB for long-haul flights, they are essential to Continuity of Government operations. This means that if a threat were to emerge, they need to be ready to snatch POTUS and VP in minutes. This is partially... 3/X

why they have a full forward operating location at Naval Support Activity Anacostia, just 3 miles from the WH. As such, practice is important and considering the state of things, it is critical now more than in any recent memory. 4/X

2.) Considering what happened last week, including mobs of Trump supporters screaming in unison to hang the VP for doing what the constitution states, absolutely despicable in every way, security has been tightened just as it has been all over. Using the helicopters instead.. 5/X

You May Also Like

"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."


We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".