Making and growing things at home

The Guardian decided to complain when I wrote on this website that were the EU to take the surprising course of seeking to damage their own trade with us, we would have plenty of options to make and grow things here for ourselves, or to import from elsewhere in the world with lower or no tariffs.

I was surprised that the Guardian seemed unaware that the Uk does already make 1.7m cars a year in this country. They seemed to muddle up cars made in UK factories with cars made by UK owned car makers. What matters – and what I was clearly talking about – was cars made in UK factories. If the factory is here so are the jobs, the sales, the profits and the investments. The Guardian should not be so dismissive of the great work done by Nissan, Toyota,Vauxhall,  Land Rover and Jaguar, to name but five who make significant numbers of vehicles here in the UK.

Even better news is out of the EU the UK will be free to slash tariffs on agricultural exports from emerging market economies if the EU imposes tariffs on our food imports from them by virtue of charging tariffs on our exports. The UK could remove tariffs on products we do not produce at home, gaining  other trading advantages for us with the emerging countries. We could simply remove the tariffs on food we have to buy abroad because it is not available at home just so we can buy more cheaply. We would obviously wish to help our own farmers to grow as much as possible for ourselves.

I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

125 Comments

  1. Roy Grainger
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 5:44 am | Permalink

    The problem is that as they wander around Islington the Guardian journalists don’t see any cars being made so they assume that applies to the rest of the country.

    • Mitchel
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      I’m not sure they’ll see that much more when/if they move back oop North to Manchester.

      • Hope
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

        JR, This is synonymous with yesterday’s blog. The US makes sure aid is provided by US products, led by US companies and US services. Why is this not the case with our aid? Why is May intent on wasting our taxes on the one hand with overseas aid and promoting higher taxes by Hammond in the other?

        May imposed gay marriage, she imposed mass immigration, she imposed the EU arrest warrant when she did not have to thereby undermining habeous corpus and common law rights that protected us for hundreds of years. I am sorry she it the likes of her will not get my vote. She acts in stark contrast of the public wish which is why people are turning away in droves from mainstream political parties. People like her.

        JR, unfortunately you defended Cameron who was opposed to your Tory thinking and you are doing exactly the same with May! Learn from your mistakes if you want change. The same for the voting public.

  2. Caterpillar
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 5:51 am | Permalink

    How much EU tariffs (and other barriers) have contributed to some African countries’ economic woes and thus economic migrants does need to be unpacked. On the face of it, it seems that EU has been somewhat unethical, and by association, until the UK leaves, so have we. Hopefully UK will show a better attitude once left.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:42 am | Permalink

      The same unethical approach with energy. Outsourcing our polution to China in the quest for affordable goods in the face of crippling energy costs at home.

    • Know-dice
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:43 am | Permalink

      Too true, it seems that the EU imposes high tariffs on finished goods from African countries and low tariffs on raw materials.

      This needs to change such that these countries that are rich in raw resources can stand and prosper on their initiatives…

      • David Price
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

        A case in point is the EU tariffs on coffee – Green coffee has a 0% tariff while roasted coffee attracts a 7.5% tariff.

    • Rawlsian
      Posted May 1, 2017 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

      Import tariffs for LDCs into EU are zero. Duty free, quota free access under Everything But Arms.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    You say “the UK will be free to slash tariffs on agricultural exports from emerging market economies IF ….. why IF? We should do this anyway.

    I see that may is the most popular PM for 40 years. Cameron could have been too. Had he been a low tax, pro growth, anti-EU, bonfire of red tape and cheap energy PM he would have walked the last two sitting duck elections. This instead of just lying that he was a “low tax Conservative at heart” and giving fake cast iron promises. May too could be even more popular if she followed Trump and made sensible and much needed tax cuts. Also if she stopped imitating Ed Miliband.

    • Mitchel
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:38 am | Permalink

      Just glancing at the Telegraph online I can see at least two issues that might dent that:-the government is breaking it’s pledge by agreeing to be bound by European Human Rights laws for a further five years and Boris is saying if the Americans want to take military action in Syria,we will have to follow them.

      What a spineless bunch!

      • Nig l
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

        The Torres have been dissembling on the HR act for years and, if true this is the evidence. I see that it is going to be spun as a ‘distraction’. So much for JR’s assurance that post Brexit means primacy of HMG. Surely any decision could be challenged in the European court and their decision will be based on the laws of the EU. Hence we will be controlled by the back door.

        There are already ‘leaks’ that we will pay into their budget post 2019. Get ready for all the other ‘give aways’

        I have lost count of how many red lines HMG has given up over the years. My confidence that this will now stop is zero.

        Reply The ECHR is not part of the EU or its court, the ECJ

        • Hope
          Posted April 27, 2017 at 5:39 pm | Permalink

          JR,myou are correct but fail to mention Cameron promised to stop ECHR and bring in his own British Bill of Rights. Later claimed the Lib Dumbs prevented this and that and the other. Today he is promoting paying the EU before negotiations. Has he lost leave of his senses? The same man who forcefully d falsely claimed he would not pay the extra demand but actually paid double! Cast iron shyster who stood next to Hollande smirking while made veiled threats to our country.

        • Nig l
          Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

          You are being disingenuous. Theresa May said only a year ago that this court binds our hands, stops us getting rid of terrorists etc and over the years has made plain both her annoyance with it and opposition to it. So actually keeping it is the distraction not the other way round. How short political memories are.

          • Lifelogic
            Posted April 29, 2017 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

            Indeed.

      • Tony Sharp
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

        Erm – the EHRC is actually part of the Conventions we have entered into as members of the Council of Europe – it is not an EU body. May is best to concentrate on one thing – ie Brexit- at a time. there shall be a ‘following wind’ in the future to withdraw from CoE ECHR in future.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted April 28, 2017 at 2:42 am | Permalink

          The idea that government should concentrate on one thing at a time is very silly indeed. Government is about managing all sort of things at once.

          A bit like saying a business should concentrate on one thing at a time. This year chaps we will just concentrate on production chaps, lets forget about sales, order processing, purchases, finance, recruitment, HR, accounting, maintaining the buildings, the inventory, paying the wages, dealing with HMRC, forward planning and all those other annoying distractions!

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

        Dear Mitchel–You got the last bit very wrong, missing out the “in response to the use by Assad of chemical weapons” and also not accurately reporting what Boris said about its being “very difficult to say No”. Your beginning bit wasn’t so hot either: the, totally separate, EU Brexit negotiations are difficult and prolix enough as they are.

        • Mitchel
          Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

          “very difficult to say no” -semantics.Do you think he/May would say no in their eagerness to please?Boris is even suggesting parliament might not be involved in the decision.

          I didn’t link the HMRC to the EU(as you say a separate issue but a Tory pledge nonetheless),the subsequent poster may have.

        • getahead
          Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

          “in response to the alleged use by Assad of chemical weapons”
          No proof has been shown.

          • Leslie Singleton
            Posted April 28, 2017 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

            Attn getahead–You are getting confused with Blair & Co and their lies on their imaginary WMD–the position with Assad and Chemical Weapons (Don’t you watch Television?) is as obvious as can be–Yes I agree that we don’t have absolute certainty, well spotted, but wait for that and you’ll wait a long time

          • anon
            Posted April 29, 2017 at 2:27 am | Permalink

            who needs “proof” the BBC says so!

    • Peter Wood
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:06 am | Permalink

      Sadly Mr. Cameron was a great disappointment; more of a tory/Blair than a real conservative. I do hope that Mrs. May has given the former premier of Luxemburg a succinct instruction on the strength of the UK, and our terms of leaving the incompetent EU bureaucracy.

      • getahead
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

        Cameron was a messenger boy for his elite sponsors. A totally untrustworthy specimen.

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:38 am | Permalink

      Forget the low tax you propose. It’s too right-wing for most voters here in the UK. If we go for the low tax you propose, we’d do terrible in the elections.

      The British are more like the Germans, Dutch, and Scandanavians who all have relatively high tax (higher than the UK) and successful economies, compared to the Americans. You’re trying sell American-style Conservatism to British people. It won’t work except lose the Tories votes at the general election (especially after the disastrous Steve Bannon Republicanism we’ve had recently, which is just as much an anathema as socialism or social liberalism is to most Tory voters here).

      Mrs May is popular because she represents the views of the majority Conservative voters in this country. And she even appeals to many who traditionally support other parties. She is the nearest thing we have to Mrs Merkel, a sane, clever and tough (without bravado and vanity) Conservative who has been hugely successful in Germany over the last decade or so and, of course, presided over a successful economy.

      (My main concern though is that we’re going to lose many votes to the Liberal Democrats in particular from young voters who voted Remain).
      (And if the Tories want to do well in election, they need to distance themselves from Trump as much as possible whose been a disaster for Conservatism in general, although he has, thankfully, moved more to the centre right thanks to his daughter and son-in-law).

  4. formula57
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:08 am | Permalink

    “What matters – and what I was clearly talking about – was cars made in UK factories” – indeed so! I am reluctant to get anyone in to trouble, least of all cabinet ministers, but the record does show that it is now some weeks since I commented here that Daimler-Benz (or similar) should be encouraged now to set up a manufacturing plant in England or Wales. As yet of course there has not been any announcement, either from Daimler or the government. Perhaps it is being saved for during the election campaign?

    • Know-dice
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:45 am | Permalink

      Seems like Peugeot could be ahead of the curve there 🙂

    • Mockbeggar
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:26 am | Permalink

      What matters more, perhaps, than Daimler-Benz setting up a new plant would be to manufacture more of the parts for the cars assembled here at present.

      • Tony Sharp
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

        UK car plants export to EU parts of high value that are then re-imported back to us in complete cars. And vice-=versa. Daimler-Benz certainly has a major car plant here ‘by value’ – that of Rolls-Royce Motors. It is this practical trading and parts arrangement imp/exp that makes it likely that the simplest solution is a EU-UK FTA.

        • Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

          Wrong!……….Rolls Royce Motors is owned by BMW. As far as I’m aware D-Benz do no manufacturing at all in the U.K.

  5. Richard1
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:10 am | Permalink

    With the aggressive language coming out of the EU – such as from Mr Verholfstadt the other day – and demands such as the EU continuing to control social policies and even taxes in the UK as well as for the UK to pay £10bns in leaving fee, it is clear we need to think through carefully what no deal would mean. Do we for example go to the free trade model espoused by Prof Patrick Minford? There is no point bluffing, if Mrs May says she is prepared to walk away from the table she really needs to mean it.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

      I can’t remember my golf club ever having such a say in how I run my home and who is allowed to stay in my spare room.

      • Richard1
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

        Indeed.

        Comments today by senior officials from Canada and Australia suggesting the U.K. Simply joins NAFTA and the TPP deal in Asia. This seems a very good idea – these deals are off the shelf and don’t need years of negotiation. Unlike the EU’s single market and even customs union, they don’t make a whole lot of demands on pursuing particular domestic policies which sovereign democracies could not accept.

        There would be a huge boost to confidence to have such deals lined up for the day we leave the EU. People will be much more relaxed about walking away from a bad EU deal with these in our back pocket. I urge Conservative MPs to support this and encourage ministers to get this in motion.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted April 28, 2017 at 2:44 am | Permalink

      Do we for example go to the free trade model espoused by Prof Patrick Minford?

      Yes please as that would clearly work.

  6. Lifelogic
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:15 am | Permalink

    So Theresa Milliband now drops the election pledge to get out of the ECHR too. Why does she make such consistently misguided decisions?

    Workers on company boards by law, energy price controls and wage controls by government dictat, endless tax increases, attempted mugging the self employed through NI, increases to IPT, absurd stamp duty rates, mugging property owners, tenants and pensions pots endlessly, “building on EU workers rights” (thus killing job choice for them), enforced expensive gender pay reporting, compulsory pensions…….. How does she imagine that business owners and directors will have any time left to run their businesses after all this endless S*** she and Hammond/Osborne tip on to them every day?

    Still good news for all those essentially parasitic worker in the law, tax accounting, HR consultancy and the rest. But very bad indeed for the economy and productivity.

  7. Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:22 am | Permalink

    Tariffs are not the whole problem, Mr Redwood, are they.
    What matters much more is the flow of trade through standardised and computer controlled channels. If that stops, as it seems very likely to do on 29th March 2019, you can have all the customs union and all the tariff barriers removed that you like: we will lose hundreds of billions of pounds worth of trade.
    Mr Cameron is a charming old Etonian who can mix with anyone. Mr Osborne is used to moving in the sort of circles where trade and money are king. Neither of them got a smidgeon of help when they desperately asked for some back-up over the referendum. The EU simply does not work like that.
    As we are about to discover to our cost.

    • Bert Young
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

      Young boys are inadequate when attempting to run things like a country . They may have intelligence but they are seriously short on experience .

      • getahead
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

        Especially when they are in the employ of those who sponsor their parties.

    • JimS
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:43 am | Permalink

      I expect £290 billion of their exports sitting at ‘Calais’ might have some impact on their thinking.

    • Deborah Clark
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:31 am | Permalink

      “Neither of them got a smidgeon of help”.
      You are kidding? Lagarde, Obama, every EU spokesman, the majority of multinational CEOs the FT………Project Fear had the back-up of the entire Western Elite.

    • alan jutson
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:52 am | Permalink

      Mike

      I agree Cameron looked the part and perhaps had all of social graces, but I see it is reported in todays Press that he believes we should pay up what the EU demand before we negotiate any trade deal with them.
      Thus the man has proved he has absolutely Zero negotiating skills.

      No wonder he got diddly squat from the EU with his begging stance.

      Afraid many people who have never had to earn a real living in the real World of commerce talk a lot, but deliver little of any substance when confronted with the realities of negotiating with hard nosed business people.

    • David Price
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

      Why would the UK CHIEF and NES systems not be used, as they are today, for non-EU trade? Why would the existing EU systems for non-EU import/export management not be used for our trade with them?

      Why would the EU damage it’s own trade?

      • Know-dice
        Posted April 28, 2017 at 7:50 am | Permalink

        What are you saying David…

        That systems that allow the UK to trade with every other country on this planet could be used to trade with the EU.

        Well who would have thought that…. 🙂

      • Peter Davies
        Posted April 28, 2017 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

        So change management needs to be taking place now to identify any system changes which need to occur to take account of the UK changing to men third party status.

        Mike is right, tariffs should be sorted out easily, it’s the non tarrif stuff which needs the attention, all the drivers/operator permits etc.

        I reckon we’ll still be in some sort of transitional arrangement with the eu for years to come (if it doesn’t implode)

        • David Price
          Posted April 29, 2017 at 7:46 am | Permalink

          I agree such planning and preparations need to happen and hope have been happening over the 9+ months since the referendum. But Mike & co are misguided to demand the UK does all the changing, that EEA/EFTA are the only possible route and we must be the supplicant.

          If we become a “third country” to the EU so do those in the EU become “third countries” exporting to us.

    • getahead
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

      You need to read
      Myth and Paradox of the Single Market
      How the trade benefits of EU membership have been mis-sold

      http://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/mythandparadox.pdf

  8. Javelin
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:22 am | Permalink

    The Guardian pays its journalists a lot of money to erect smoke and mirrors around socialism.

  9. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:41 am | Permalink

    We can indeed reduce tariffs to zero from all other countries. The duty take for all imports to this country is £3 billion, easily recouped in tariffs on EU goods which will then be less competitive in the marketplace.

    Additionally any duty levied on EU imports above £3 billion can be offered as tax credits for exporters to the EU to offset any duty charged on their goods thus keeping those goods competitive if sterling strengthens.

    Win win as with most supposed issues when exiting the EU.

    • John B
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:42 am | Permalink

      What?

      British consumers pay import duty.

      So you suggest money be taken from British consumers and give it to exporters?

      Why? Why are exporting companies worthy of tax credits and domestic producers not, or for that matter importers who employ many more people than exporters.

      By not charging that £3 billion means that British consumers have an extra £3 billion to spend which makes them wealthier and increases economic activity in the British economy which will support/create jobs.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

        Competition.

        We can import more cheaply from elsewhere at zero tariffs so British consumers can choose whether or not to pay duty.

        There are none so blind as they that will not see.

    • John Finn
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:48 am | Permalink

      I’m not sure we can offer free trade to the rest of the world (without a trade deal) but not to the EU. In fact I’m sure we can’t.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

        We can have a registered FTA with any country we like. If the EU does not want one the WTO will not interfere.

    • Peter Davies
      Posted April 28, 2017 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

      I read somewhere that the duty take for imports is around £ 11 billion of which 80% is given directly to the eu by H M R C making our total NET contribution around £15 bn PA.

  10. sm
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:52 am | Permalink

    Entirely agree with the basic concept of ‘trade not aid’.

    Also not sure why The Guardian would have the cheek to comment on any aspect of commercial production, given that they are reduced to begging for aid to continue publication of their own newspaper!

  11. Ian Wragg
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:59 am | Permalink

    You have never understood why the EU imposes high tarrifs on agricultural products…….
    A little disingenuous when the whole CAP is designed to protect inefficient French and German farmers.
    I like your article in todays Telegraph but your ex boss disagrees as he says we should pay up before negotiations.

    • bigneil
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:40 am | Permalink

      He wants to pay up before negotiations . . . AND would carry on throwing them cash after as well.

    • Roger Parkin
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:09 am | Permalink

      I too enjoyed the excellent article in today’s Telegraph. However I am absolutely convinced that the PM will unnecessarily hand over a large amount of our cash as a sweetener during negotiations.

      • Nig l
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

        At the moment most people I know think the same. Early days but the EU is very clever at keeping negotiations going until everyone is worn out and then sign, just to ‘get some sleep’

        For the last umpteen years British PMs have been assuring us that our rights will be respected only to enjoy all the trappings of power in the Elysee Palace or wherever and immediately ‘crumbling’. Theresa May stated quite clearly a year ago that we were safer, security wise, in the EU presumably based on her briefings as Home Secretary. A year on those facts will not have changed, only the politics, that is why I do not trust her.

    • rose
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

      “A little disingenuous when the whole CAP is designed to protect inefficient French and German farmers.”

      We always understood that we and the Germans had to pay through the nose to stop the French farmers going communist. (Nothing to do with keeping the post war peace, as the remainiacs make out – that was safeguarded by NATO.)

  12. Jerry
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    I wasn’t going to comment, as I said, but this repeated ignorance has to be corrected!

    @JR; “the Uk does already make 1.7m cars a year in this country”

    But with no parts to build those cars here in the UK will there be any jobs in those UK car factories?…

    Sorry John but it is you who is getting muddled, what do you not understand about the fact that of those cars assembled here in the UK many, if not most, rely on parts coming from the EU27. Meaning that if tariffs are applied the supply of parts for those 1.7m cars would either cease or become uneconomic. Yes some manufactures such as JLR might further source from outside of the EU27 or invest in tooling to produce the parts here in the UK but what about the (majority owned) EU27 owned mass market manufactures. What is more this scenario will be repeated in many manufacturing sectors.

    That doesn’t mean Brexit will be fail, but it does mean that governments will need to be prepared to be far more interventionist, at least in the short term, than has been the case since the 1970s if not 1950s with tax breaks or subsidies, perhaps even with curtailed planning laws to.

    As for agricultural, Brexit will also mean that the government can support Farmers & Growers (not to mention research) as they did in the past without having to worry about CAP & EU subsidy rules etc.

    Reply The 10% tariff only applies to the final product, the completed vehicle.I don’t expect Germany to want that imposed anyway.

    • Len Grinds
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:36 am | Permalink

      It is not Germany’s decision. You misunderstand the very basics of the EU’s trade policy with third countries (which is what, as Ms Merkel has today made clear, the UK is to become). The EU acts as a bloc. Plenty of its members have no incentive at all to do a deal with the UK

      • Know-dice
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

        “Plenty of its members have no incentive at all to do a deal with the UK”

        True, but the main “wheelers and dealers” in the EU that do trade with us namely Germany, France, Italy, Spain will be interested in a continuing trade relationship with the UK.

        These countries are also the ones that will lose out most in the way of unemployment if trade stops, so probably have an incentive to ensure a fair deal.

      • Peter Davies
        Posted April 28, 2017 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

        The eu block is a cover for what germany tells them, the whole project was setup for german industry and french farmers.

        • Jerry
          Posted April 28, 2017 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

          @Peter Davies; So were do the other four founding members fit in, what was in it for them, and if the ECSC/EEC was just a stitch-up between Germany and France why did they invite the UK to be the 7th founding member (which we declined, because in the 1950s we still had the best part of our empire to ‘sell’ our products to)?

          When the ECSC was created Germany was in no position to dictate terms.

    • libertarian
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 11:07 am | Permalink

      Jerry

      Hmm its you who are muddled. In manufacturing tariffs are only applied to the finished product NOT to the component parts !

      • Jerry
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

        @libertarian; See my reply to our host (once/if published). It is not as simplistic as you think. A ‘finished’ motor vehicle, for example, is a sum of many hundreds of ‘finished’ components that when imported could either become component parts on the production line or find their way into the dealer spare parts network – what is more even those items sent to the line could then be removed from the line to fulfil an urgent VOR order.

    • Jerry
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

      @JR reply; Defining what a “final product” is will be a business/legal minefield. The average car (and just about anything) is made up of complete finished parts, that container full of widgets sitting on the dockside could be used to make larger ‘unfinished’ sub-assembly and thus attract no tariffs, on the other hand they could be sold as ‘finished’ spare parts, which should have tariff applied – and where/when should such tariffs be applied. Would EU27 manufactures bother jumping through such hoops, or would they simply move production of the final assembly to the EU27?

      As for Germany, I suspect you are correct but it will not be up to them, all EU27 member countries need to agree and if they do not then the UK will leave on WTO rules what ever we or Germany want.

    • Edward2
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

      The UK also makes many components which go on vehicles assembled in the EU
      So there is a pretty balance dependency.

      • Jerry
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

        @Edward2; “So there is a pretty balance dependency.”

        Dream on!

    • Jagman84
      Posted April 28, 2017 at 11:31 pm | Permalink

      More flak from Jerry and, as per usual, well off target. FYI, many suppliers of component parts in the motor industry relocate near to the the large assembly plants, in order to reduce delivery & inventory costs with a just-in-time supply system. Your ” we don’t make anything anymore” jibes are utter bull****.

      • Jerry
        Posted April 29, 2017 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

        Jagman84; “Your ” we don’t make anything anymore” jibes are utter bull****.”

        That would be why the average UK manufactured content of a motor vehicle assembled in the UK is a mere 40%…

        Yes, of course supplier warehousing will be sited close to were assembly takes place, but the issue is were the manufacturing takes place.

        Before WW2, in the 1950s, ’60s and indeed ’70s most cars bought in the UK were manufactured in the UK from raw materials, with most of those raw materials being sourced from within the UK, thus 100% of the components were manufactured here in the UK meaning that the cars were manufactures here in the UK, not just having their final assembly here. The situation we have now in the UK is not far short of a type of CKD/SKD, ‘kits’ with most parts being export to the UK for assembly.

  13. alan jutson
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:10 am | Permalink

    The sooner we leave the EU the better, as its past its sell by date and unfit for purpose.

  14. Bob
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:20 am | Permalink

    “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods.”

    This would be a better angle for the Guardian and the BBC to explore, but as we all know, they cannot criticise the EU, in the eyes of the BBC the EU is perfect.

  15. Anonymous
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    There will never be always be demand here for British grown food if the EU doesn’t want it.

  16. David
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:38 am | Permalink

    @”I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods”
    I think there are lot more jobs in Brussels this way.

  17. David
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    @Rob
    “This would be a better angle for the Guardian and the BBC to explore, but as we all know, they cannot criticise the EU, in the eyes of the BBC the EU is perfect.”
    I voted leave but if people had criticised the EU in the past and it had listened and changed I might have voted remain – a bit of an own goal for the Europhiles here I think.

  18. Anonymous
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    Off topic – Gina Miller says “Stop *extreme* Brexit.” Like soft/hard Brexit these are terms we did not hear in the referendum. The phrases were concocted after Remain lost.

    There is only Brexit. Miller/Branson see the merit in electing a house of Eurosceptic Tory MPs. In the EU referendum result Mrs May already had the biggest mandate for Brexit she was going to get, I fear. She’s stalled. She’s opened it up to debate again.

    The elections need to be more nuanced – with primaries to select Europile/Eurosceptic candidates. Miller would then be unable to say “Yes. But what did the people mean ?” As it is we could end up with more Europhiles in Parliament than ever.

    • Jerry
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

      @Anonymous; “There is only Brexit.”

      Rubbish, otherwise why did even UKIP accept that A50 negotiations would take time. Brexit is not binary, only our wish to leave.

    • Know-dice
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

      I tend to think of “Good Brexit” i.e. the one we can achieve by all pulling together in the same direction.

      And “Bad Brexit” that seems to be what the Lib Dems, SNP etc. want… (and may be Labour) – but they don’t seem sure of anything at the moment, well at least until the “magic money tree” is in full bloom…

  19. Ed Mahony
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

    I agree with the gist of what you say.
    I do think, however, that the ‘oldies’, the ones who voted for Brexit and have the money and time to spend on it, should focus on this kind of thing.
    Not the young. The young are too busy, struggling to pay bills, buy a house, change nappies etc to bother about working out whether to buy a car made in the UK or an audi or some other German car. Plus buying what you want is part of the reward of living in an capitalist system that can often be a rat race and that can get in the way of feeling patriotic about things such as national sovereignty (plus the young are more concerned about the economy – jobs and standard of living – and a safe and secure Europe for their children to grow up in).

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:10 am | Permalink

      Sorry, didn’t mean ‘oldies’ that sounds unintentionally disrespectful. Meant older generation.

      I also think the Tories seriously need to consider the younger generation (18 to 45+) in the general election as I fear many who once voted Tory will now vote Liberal Democrat as the younger generation are really struggling (relatively more than the older generation) and a higher percentage voted Remain than the older generation.

    • Know-dice
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

      Hi Ed,

      ” plus the young are more concerned about the economy – jobs and standard of living – and a safe and secure Europe for their children to grow up in.”

      I’m pretty sure those are the same concerns that I had in my early work life, I just got my head down and made sure that I had a career that sustained these things, rather than waiting for somebody else to give me a hand out or up…

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

      There are PLENTY in their fifties still paying for their kids and unable to pick and choose cars, therefore.

      Have you not seen the adverts directed at middle-aged parents offering to get themselves in hock to help with their kid’s house deposits. Then there are those of us helping their offspring through university at great cost.

      Life doesn’t stop at 50 and those who voted Brexit in their 70s may well have 30 years of life ahead of them and will struggle all the way.

  20. Bert Young
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    We have always been world traders and we should continue in the same way . The EU represents many different types of markets whom we buy from and sell to ; each country stands as a different entity – some are agricultural , some industrial and some havens of sunshine . The EU cannot wave a flag over these countries and treat them all the same .

    Turning things around each of the EU countries has a form of economy that relies on its own background . France does not want us to buy our wines from Chile , South Africa or Australia . Slovakia – with the largest paper factory in Europe , does not want us to buy our wrapping products from Brazil . Greece would prefer that we holiday with them rather than relax in Florida . Ad infinitum .

    Freedom to pick and choose according to ones own needs is a basic feature of survival .

  21. A.Sedgwick
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    Which country started the industrial revolution?

    Which country started world trade?

    We may have a tricky few years resourcing and reorganising our economy, but we can become more self reliant again.

    The pathetic element displayed by many of the EU principal players is the UK must be punished for daring to Leave. When a business loses a customer or contract the attitude is sorry to lose this time, but we are keen to trade again so keep us in mind.

    My concern remains that our exit team will be too accommodating, hard ball exit should be the plan, we hold the aces.

    • Ed Mahony
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

      ‘Which country started the industrial revolution?
      Which country started world trade?’

      – And the Italians gave us the Renaissance and modern capitalism. The Spanish had a glorious empire with gold galore. And similar things can be said about other great European countries.

      History isn’t going to get us out of our present woes, in particular 1) a massive national debt 2) automation putting people out of work 3) we’re not as hungry for success as new nations such as China 4) 40% of our trade is with the EU 5) We’ll always need close trading relations with the Europe because certain businesses will always find it easier and cheaper to trade with countries on your doorstep as opposed to on the other side of the world where people don’t speak very good English and come from a completely different culture.

      • Ed Mahony
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

        (world where people don’t speak very good English and come from a completely different culture)

        – plus it’s much cheaper to travel to and ship to Europe than say Japan, China, India or South America. It’s much easier to set up business in the EU than say Japan. The Japanese have quite a different work culture. And then the problems of language etc ..
        Yes, the strongest companies will do well anywhere in the world. But business and capitalism is Darwinian. The weakest need help – adding distance and completely different culture only makes the weaker companies even more vulnerable.

    • Jason wells
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

      To A.Sedgwick…wish it were so.. but cannot agree.. am afraid that the EU hold all of the aces.. attempting to play hardball or anything like it with them now will see us crashing out and ending up in a bad place – guaranteed

      • ian wragg
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

        What a stupid comment, we are the second highest contributor to the EU the 5th largest economy and have a £80 billion annual deficit with them in their favour.
        We have the largest military and GCHQ.
        You talk absolute garbage. Man up.

      • Enock
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

        Nonsense.

  22. Juliet
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:23 am | Permalink

    The problem with EU they have too many organisations set-up as think-tanks tell other countries what to do. The paris-based a group of rich countries: OECD thinks the UK government should stop giving pensions to the rich. People are entitled to there pension if they have contributed. Perhaps the issue could be resolved at source. EU citizens can only move permanently to other EU countries if they have a job, pay higher taxes, contribute to state pension

    • Enock
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

      Let’s hope we negotiate an end to the EU’s annual subsidies of many £millions to the BBC after Brexit. Gina Miller’s campaign may also be receiving EU money.

  23. Juliet
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    EU impose high tariffs to compensate inefficiencies across the EU agricultural landscape. Consequences of telling farmers they can only farm 3 crops or breed 3 animals, they have created a dependency on farmer handouts from EU countries that contribute membership fees

  24. Prigger
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    The Guardian has an important part to play. It is a daily visual comforter and anchor for certain kinds of people. It tells them that despite their most bizarre, anti-British and gormy outlook, Britain still loves them, kind of.
    Also it has hundreds of adverts for Local Authority jobs where their intellects will never be taxed and investigated.

  25. Original Richard
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods.”

    To protect their own farmers who have considerable political clout, particularly in France.

  26. acorn
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    As the UK steals emerging markets doctors and nurses for its NHS, we may as well steal there food as well. Why should the bandits who run these little countries, grow food for their own starving masses, when they can grow cash crops and sell them to the UK?

    Most of the fruit and veg the Brits like to eat are grown in Europe. Europe as a continent, has the greatest percentage of its land area producing food, on the planet.

    The UK does not “make” cars, it “assembles” them using 60% imported components. It exports them mainly to Europe and exports the profits to other currency areas.

    • Jerry
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

      @acorn; Indeed. The UK is not now called, by our competitors, a “warehouse” for no reason. 🙁

      Funny old world, those who wanted Brexit were many of those who wanted the changes in our economy over the last 40 years, now they have Brexit we might have to undo the very economic changes they wanted originally – four lost decades…

  27. zorro
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    I admit that I did chuckle at the Twitter comments against your article and the blessed “Grauniad’ is never slow in deliberately misunderstanding (or misspelling) an argument. The ‘car production’ argument was non-sensical and seemed to herald back to UK owned car manufacturing, when what really matters is where it is produced and who it employs. There was also another argument about component parts from the EU not being available to manufacturers in a rather bizarre act of self destruction….

    A little bit akin to this bizarre Armageddon scenario on 29/03/19 which will mean the end of trade as we know it (apparently)….. Why would you want to belong to such an organisation if they were seriously threatening this course of action.

    As for cheese, wine, flowers, specialist meats and any other products, my understanding is that these are also made or produced outside of the EU so perhaps as we could consider buying more from them. I really think that we do need to move on and finally debunk these arguments once and for all.

    zorro

  28. Antisthenes
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    The great fallacy that tariff free unrestricted trade and currant account deficits are very very bad not only afflicts us ordinary citizens but the bulk of our leaders as well. Trump is the latest to espouse the creation of scarcity and scarcityism or better known as protectionism. What is it about the EU and others that they so want to punish consumers which is all of their citizens by denying them the right to chose to buy their goods and services from wherever they find the best price an quality.

    Also to punish the poorest in the world by denying them access to markets in which to sell their goods. Despite perceptions to the contrary protecting producers and so encouraging crony capitalism and higher cost goods and services benefits a few at the expense of the very many of the rest of us.

  29. Mitchel
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on food produced by developing countries and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation”

    I can – dependency!

    Writing “Imperialism – the highest form of Capitalism” on the eve of WWI,when the world,like today,was divided into a small number of imperial trading blocs,Lenin pointed out the pernicious effect of transnational “finance capitalism” on national sovereignty.

  30. Original Richard
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:33 am | Permalink

    The UK needs to realise that we are now at economic war with the EU (aka Germany and France).

    The EU will wish to delay our exit as long as possible, not only to be able to extract a much money as they can from us, but also to give themselves time to weaken us in the meantime through the use of obstructions, cancellations, adverse trading, EU regulations, ECJ judgements etc..

    As a result, there will be no settled deal within the 2 year period after the triggering of article 50, and certainly not one to which the UK can agree, judging by the threats that emanate daily from the EU.

    It will become necessary for us to declare UDI to obtain our independence from the EU.

    • A.Sedgwick
      Posted April 28, 2017 at 8:19 am | Permalink

      I agree, the lesson of Cameron hitting the Merkel brick wall should be well noted by May and Hammond. He was a very easy putdown for the EU principals and the rubbish he came back with was very quickly confined to the political bin.

      Why do we want a deal at all? Just as Kenneth Clarke described the Treaty of Lisbon as a “tidying up” exercise our exit should be simply that.

  31. John B
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:35 am | Permalink

    “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods.”

    I can answer that.

    French farmers vote in French elections, farmers in developing Countries do not; French taxpayers do not notice the relatively small amounts they lose to give to foreign farmers but in any case it is worth it pour aider nos producteurs Chez-nous.

    Of course for ‘French’ you may substitute Italian, Spanish, German, etc.

  32. jack snell
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    We have to consider the implications to the population that importing so much food from countries far away is going to have including the additional costs of transportation/shipping warehousing and refrigeration and that’s not to mention the question of food coming from countries with already doubtful food production standards and then there’s always the additional chance of some perishability setting in- are we seriously saying that this is the way we want to go?

    • Peter Whale
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

      You are obviously not old enough to remember UK pre EU. The Commonwealth provided huge amounts of food and since then transport has become much easier and at the moment shipping costs are really low.Where can I go and buy a lb of Cape grapes?Only two years to go.

      • Hosta
        Posted April 27, 2017 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

        Your local supermarket, I should think. Mine (one of those mini-Sainsburys) often stocks grapes from South Africa, Chile, and other non-EU countries. In fact, eating grapes seem more often than not to come from outside the EU.

        • A.Sedgwick
          Posted April 28, 2017 at 8:23 am | Permalink

          I eat lots of grapes, all from Chile and S.A.

          I am not a wine drinker, my wife is and she only likes non European varieties.

  33. Gareth Jones
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation.”

    Sure you do, John. It’s to protect French farmers whilst adding to the tax burden of German and British taxpayers.

  34. norman
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    Off topic, but vitally important: ‘Very difficult to say ‘no’ to the Americans if they ask us to carry out a joint attack on Syria’ – Boris. It should not be a question of not wanting to say ‘no’. Is there a case for doing so, or not? I rather doubt it! What about Yemen, and Saudi actions there, leading to starving children? My own hard-working Conservative MP, according to Wikipedia, is ‘a vociferous supporter of the Saudi Arabian government… proud… of the military cooperation between the two countries… writing “the most pro-Saudi book ever written by a British politician” … “battling against extraordinary ignorance and prejudice against Saudi Arabia for many years”. We are being drawn into a proxy war. This, among other reasons, is why I shall be unable to vote for him. I may not be alone, even across the country. A sad reflection on our folly – do we never learn?

  35. Len Grinds
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    Some 50 of the globe’s least developed countries have long enjoyed full tariff-free and quota-free access to the EU market for agricultural products.
    If you are going complain about being misrepresented Mr Redwood, you could usefully stop misrepresenting.

  36. The PrangWizard
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    I had hoped from the heading that there might be some encouragement and preference for items grown here or manufactured here by home owned businesses but, fat chance, as they say.

    Mr Redwood and his government has no interest in developing home businesses in preference to foreign ones – it seems almost exactly the reverse in fact – and what evidence is there that profits made by foreign companies stay here? What is the definition of profit in the context. Where do the dividends go? Where does surplus cash go? Is a false impression being given that it all stays here?

    Have we lost all pride and self-respect? Why are other countries proud to develop big brands and keep them; our leadership seemingly couldn’t care less about that here. Look around, who owns all the brands we see and use every day and which fill our houses?

    Any company that does make here it is put up for sale at the earliest opportunity. Much is made about political sovereignty, but what about economic sovereignty? Just how much pressure is brought by foreign companies on our political leadership. How much secret appeasement of them goes on?

    And as for food, does anyone believe that only the foods we can’t grow here will be imported? I daresay we could grow more than we do if our people were encouraged, in the national interest, but not with this government.

  37. Richard Butler
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    REDUCING TAX / ENERGY TAXES ON UK MARKET GARDENING SECTOR.

    This is another way in which we could encourage home sourcing should the need arise, by cutting taxes on this sector it would be more competitive to grow peppers and other tender fruit n veg under glass and thus reduce need for imports from Spain for example.

    Both the Dutch and Spanish marketing gardening sectors have raised concerns the UK could resort to this if pushed.

    I hope our people are mentioning such possibilities to our continental friends in order to ensure all parties understand the best way forward is for an unhampered trading landscape.

    • Know-dice
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

      May be the Government should invest in greenhouses (or should I say glasshouses) in the UK rather than HS2

  38. Tony Hart
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods.”

    If we had a referendum on foreign aid, then surely there would be no doubt as to the result!! Foreign Aid would disappear. All those people who want to donate monies to foreign countries would be able to do so through charities.

  39. Sue Doughty
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 11:16 am | Permalink

    The EU says this brexit is a divorce. We think of it as an amicable split but since they said divorce we have already sent in auditors to do full valuations of all assets to be divided. As the second biggest contributor to the EU we own around 39% of all those assets and we will be expecting recompense for them. The EU will be a smaller household so selling off a lot of buildings and other assets is to be done anyway.
    Apart from that life goes on for the actual people of both Britain and the EU and as you say we can grow better than they are allowed to – and that is partly why the second most heard language in London is now French!
    They want to play the divorce game, we have a thriving divorce industry already in place.

    • Enock
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

      The analogy is wrong. The UK has been in an abusive relationship for too long and needs to cut all ties with their former partner and start a new life without any financial ties.

  40. Tony Sharp
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    Perhaps I am missing something? The Guardian and other Remain EU Fanatics claim that if we Leave without any agreement at all (or even one which these people do not approve of) why does it affect our Import costs from the EU at all? Surely we can elect to waive duties on their products, especially over-priced agricultural items. Then we let the UK market choice operate to substitute goods from wherever.
    Frankly, many consumers would prefer French wine at a premium, which is entirely up to them. Myself, I’ll go for the cheapest bottle of pop available in Tesco’s!

  41. E.S Tablishment
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

    Massive tariffs attached to our import and export of cars would do the biggest favour to the UK. No political party here has got the electoral power to reduce car usage. Yet it is absolutely necessary on a sane island.

  42. Eh?
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

    Anything, aboslutely anything imposed by the EU negotiation which promotes large-scale leasing and renting of cars in the UK instead of private ownership will send our economy into a boom period.
    No more nod nod wink wink from car maintenance centres who over-maintain and over- replace car parts and repairs. Everything subject to systemmatic repair and almost instant reusage of temporary road and car driveway parked cars.
    Facilities so you can drive to work in one car and drive home to a car rental centre in another!. Actually making our British machines ( cars ) productive 24 hours per day instead of what we have now Silly Street.

  43. Posted April 27, 2017 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

    I am getting very concerned about the shape of any deal that is possible given the attitude on display from the EU side.

    I fear that *free trade” will come with many strings attached : ECJ supervision, huge penalty payments and other restrictions. I feel that we might as well walk away on WTO terms. I hope that David Davies will publish his research on leaving without a deal so we all know the consequences. I suspect they will not be anywhere near as onerous that predicted by leading Remoaners.

    As for the continuing attempts by the likes of Soubry ( has she been deselected yet ? ) to suggest it will be difficult for us to enjoy freedom to travel to and within the EU after a no-deal Brexit, I was fortunate enough to travel extensively round Europe before we joined the EU.

    It was never any more difficult than it is to get into France today, sometimes it was even easier as there were occasions when there were no officers around to even make passport checks. Obviously that is no longer the case at any of our points of entry but once in the Schengen area ( if it continues to exist ), we will have the same freedom to move around as any EU citizen.

  44. M. W. Browne
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    “What matters – and what I was clearly talking about – was cars made in UK factories. If the factory is here so are the jobs, the sales, the profits and the investments.”
    This was the line pushed by Thatcher, and was wrong then.
    The jobs are here until the foreign owner devides that it would be better if they were moved somewhere else. Latest example is with Nestlé deciding to move some production to Poland.
    This does not mean that I am anti BREXIT, far from it, but it needs to be understood that we have lost a large amount of industry to foreign owners. Some of that though is run far better than it was by incompetent British managment. Nissan for example, makes cars using British workers, but without the incompetent mangement that was typified by those at Briish Leyland.

    Reply Yes, we lost all that under EU control

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 27, 2017 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

      My clever brother-in-law said we should stay in the EU to keep jobs here – then I pointed out that he’d already shipped his factory to Poland ! (Conversation before the referendum.)

  45. Terry
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

    John you declare, “I have never understood why the EU wants to impose such high tariffs on foods from developing countries, and then pays them aid money as inadequate compensation. It would be better for them if we imported more of their goods”.

    I say the same because it is completely unfair and totally illogical but that is the true Nature of the beast that is the EU. Just one of hundreds of good reasons for leaving the decrepit oligarchy.

  46. Embarristering
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    We have been hearing about judges and Courts to drowning point in regard to Brexit, PMs power, Human Rights, and PURDAH.

    A new Tory Government should have a Number One Priority of clipping the wings and then pulling them out by the roots Court powers to disrupt the normal running of Government. They pose a severe and increasing cheeky threat to democracy and the Will of the People.

  47. fedupsoutherner
    Posted April 27, 2017 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

    Who wants to read the Guardian anyway? Load of old environmental tosh which means nothing. All the green crap they advocate is doing more harm than good so I wouldn’t take anything they print seriously.

    Personally I think it is about time we gave the African countries a fair crack of the whip. I am proud to drive a car that has been made in the UK giving work to our countrymen.

    By the way, what a load of fuss over comments made by Boris about Corbyn. His remarks just about sum Corbyn up. What he said about the USA and Syria though concerns me more.

  48. Posted April 27, 2017 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    I remember a few years ago that I was told by an American businessman that he was all in favour of the EU. The reason – apparently due to all the EU rules and regulations their costs have risen far faster than those in the US and his company is now doing business in parts of the world that were once largely the preserve of European countries. If we can ditch many of the EU rules once we are out (and our civil service doesn’t find reasons for keeping them) maybe our costs will fall, or at least not rise as fast.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page