LEAVING the EU was not a “one-off shock” that businesses will be able to adjust to and the effects of "Brexit 2.0" are now being felt, according to a finance journalist and author.
Peter Foster said Brexit had created a “permanent state of uncertainty” and was making it "incrementally harder" for companies in the single market to trade with the UK.
Speaking at an online talk hosted by campaign group Glasgow Loves EU on Monday, the public policy editor at the Financial Times and author of What Went Wrong with Brexit, said leaving the EU was not like other major events such as 9/11 or the financial crisis of 2008.
“You had one-off big shocks which hammered business but then they were able to adjust to the new reality,” he said.
“Brexit creates a permanent state of uncertainty and that leads to what I call in the book ... 'Brexit 2.0’ issues.
READ MORE: Half of people think leaving EU made Union weaker, report finds
“We are seeing them all the time now – they don’t make great headlines as they are quite technical and difficult.”
Foster said one example was a deforestation directive of the EU which states that products which use palm oil and soya, for example, need to have come from a sustainable way of farming and producers able to demonstrate that “the forests weren’t burned down, the orangutans weren’t killed” in order to make them.
He went on: “The UK has started to have similar rules, but it hasn’t tabled secondary legislation needed in order to enact those rules, to make it a legal requirement.
“Therefore British companies are struggling on two fronts – they are struggling to get their suppliers in the rest of the world to provide the legal attestations to show they comply with these deforestation rules.
“And then when they export to the EU, they are in danger of not having the bits of paper they need in order to satisfy EU regulation. So you have double barriers there.”
READ MORE: Brexit must be 'front and centre' of SNP independence case, says ex-MP
He added: “The food industry might sound peripheral, but actually it is one of our biggest manufacturing industries – we are very good at processed food manufacturing.
"That is just one example.”
Foster said there were many other examples, relating to issues such as plastic packaging directives and supply chain due diligence.
“It just makes it incrementally harder for companies in the single market to trade with the UK,” he added.
“To put it in very simple terms, if I am sat in Paris, is it easier to buy from Pedro in Barcelona or Peter in Brighton? And the answer is Pedro in Barcelona.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel