Dyson for Brexit! Cracking article....

[Spinflight]

www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/sir-james-dyson-so-if-we-leave-the-eu-no-one-will-trade-with-us/

Some excerpts...

"“When the Remain campaign tells us no one will trade with us if we leave the EU, sorry, it’s absolute cobblers. Our trade imbalance with Europe is running at nine billion a month and rising. If this trend continues, that is £100bn a year.”

Dyson exports far more to the rest of he world (81 per cent) than Europe (19 per cent). “We’re very pleased with the European market – we’re number one in Germany and France – but it’s small and the real growing and exciting markets are outside Europe.”

He produces another staggering fact. “Sixty per cent of engineering undergraduates at British universities are from outside the EU, and 90 per cent of people doing research in science and engineering at British universities are from outside the EU. And we chuck them out!” He gives a trodden-puppy yelp.

"“It’s just that on this issue I think they’re ( Cameron & Osbourne) fundamentally wrong. I don’t just mean from the business point of view, I mean from the point of view of sovereignty and our whole ability to govern ourselves. We will create more wealth and more jobs by being outside the EU than we will within it and we will be in control of our destiny. And control, I think, is the most important thing in life and business.”

He says what he fears is staying in. “There is no status quo. Europe’s going to change. We all take risks, but they’re very calculated risks. The last thing I would ever want to do is to put myself in somebody else’s hands. So for me the risk is in putting ourselves in the hands of Europe. Not just the other countries, but the Brussels bureaucrats. What I simply can’t understand is why anyone would want to put themselves under their control.”

The Brussels he describes sounds like Franz Kafka adapted by Monty Python. “Really, you wouldn’t believe it.”"

Wrong thread eyebrowse?

JJFW. Your sentence shold read like this: "Because they were offered knight hoods and honours by George Osborne, the overwhelming majority of large businesses and exporters signed a letter saying they are in favour of staying in the EU." This is a fact I'm afraid.

Knighthoods aside, do you think, toad, that in the event of Brexit, any of the people listed who represent overseas companies, will make different business decisions wrt to inward investment into the UK in future?

Or do you think all our manufacturing jobs will be safe and it'll be business as usual?

Knighthoods aside, do you think, toad, that in the event of Brexit, any of the people listed who represent overseas companies, will make different business decisions wrt to inward investment into the UK in future?

Or do you think all our manufacturing jobs will be safe and it'll be business as usual?

Business as usual - but better.

We have 2 choices - we can listen to the gloom-laden prophesies of the EU-funded and Government funded economists (some of whom would have had just as many correct prophesies by throwing chicken entrails) or we can listen to 2 of the the Uk's most successful businessmen who actively trade with the EU and beyond and who are telling us that it's safe to leave.

Then we have Dodgy Dave himself telling us that the UK would prosper outside the EU, Osborne agrees, but says it would be 'even better' if we staying in and Lord Rose, leader of the IN campaign said we probably wouldn't notice any change for a while, if at all. Even the OECD and Treasury admit that our economy would still grow outside the EU.

So, given all these assurances that we'd do just fine outside the EU why stay in and risk
bailing out the forthcoming Eurozone collapse
increase in EU migration as we continue to attract EU migrants with our increased minimum wage
an eventual EU Army
the problems that new member countries with different cultures may bring
the cost of E membership that could be better spent at home
the loss of our permanent United Nations Security Council seat (as we've already lost our World Trade Organistaion seat)
the diminution in influence within the EU as more countries join and we have to give up some of our own MEPs to these new countries.

No thanks. It's much less risky to leave.

engineersthumb What you refer to moronicaly as "RedTape" has actually improved our economy, environment and working conditions

I agree 100%. You make some really good points that you don't often see on Mumsnet. Of course the EU does somethings well.
But we can keep the good standardisation and regulation and I am sure we will.
I am quite old, so I know that we were quite good at that sort of thing even before we joined the EU.
I am also a small business owner and also have family ties to the EU. I am also not privately educated, a Tory or a Londoner.
Just shows how people can be similar but still vote differently.

To me the big problem with the EU is not what it does with technical regulations. It's the political stuff. I think the uncontrolled immigration is leading to the rise of the far right. I think the Euro has caused stagnation and bankruptcy and unemployment in Southern Europe. I just don't think the EU works anymore. Unfortunately the people at the top will not listen - because it is not democratic. We therefore cannot fix the issues from within.
I therefore think we need to Leave. I think we need to keep trading with Europe but trade much more with the world. (I am an exporter.)

threepineapples Knighthoods aside, do you think that in the event of Brexit, any of the people listed who represent overseas companies, will make different business decisions wrt to inward investment into the UK in future?*

Very good question!!

If they are manufacturing in the UK because most of their customers are in the EU then they will wait and see what happens. They will be worried about the EU imposing tariffs on their goods. But Germany sells more to us than we sell to them, so I think the tariffs will be 0 or low.

If they are manufacturing in the UK because of our excellent skilled workforce and knowledge base and can-do attitude (which we do have) then they may be pleased. Our own Govt can negotiate better deals with the USA etc than the EU does and can actually get tariffs down. Our Govt can also help companies build good relationships with the US, China etc. This is what I am hoping for.

The EU is a bit rubbish at world trade for all sorts of reasons. Mainly because it is protectionist and sticks massive tariffs or even bans on imports. So our exports get massive tariffs or bans stuck on them.

By the way, anyone who doubts the UK's ability to stand on its own two feet should visit Cambridge. Bursting with scientists and engineers from Britain, China, India, the world. Also bursting with world-leading tech, bio and pharma companies. Many of them quite small at the moment but with a really commited Govt helping them export and no EU tariff wall blocking them off from the world we will see astonishing things.

BTW, Toad's knighthood crack is absolutely true I'm afraid. I have a school friend who is now the chairman of a financial services company. He was offered an honour by Osborne if he signed the infamous letter and threatened with FSA scrutiny if he did not.

Sorry for long boring post.

He was offered an honour by Osborne if he signed the infamous letter and threatened with FSA scrutiny if he did not.

I used to be quite ambivalent about the Honours system, but I probably undervalued the effect of personal vanity. It is a corrupt system and should be abolished.

P.S. Final post wine rant of the day.

I know Farage is despised on Mumsnet. But the fact is he is clever and he really does understand world trade. So does Andrea Leadsom. And Boris would make an awesome salesman for British businesses on the world stage.

I had a very loong conversation with a very irate woman today.

Her basic premise was that MEPs were jut free-;oaders who didn;t fulfill the duties for which they were elected. She thought they should be actively reforming the EU.

I then had to explain to her that MEPs could not initiate law nor could they repeal it. That they had zero chance of ever being able to reform the EU from within
a) because many of them thought the EU performed quite happily (for them)
and b) because it was impossible for the MEPs to call for reform.
She thought that if they felt strongly that reform was needed, they should resign. I said that would only lead to bye=elections to replace them with other willing stooges.
It was obvious that she was conflating the EP and their limited powers with the type of democratically elected MP that we have in the UK.

I then had to explain the role of the EU Commissioners to her and who ours was, and who had appointed him and how we couldn't dismiss him.

After about 20 minutes I think she began to understand the democratic deficit that exists within the EU.

It's rather shameful that we allow ourselves to be ruled by this system when most of the population have absolutely no idea of how they are being governed or by whom.

I am an engineer, an ex serviceman, previously a small business owner and have family ties to other EU countries and I consider the likley effects of an exit to be disastrous.

As it happens I'm an engineer too & I agree.

The UK has the 2nd least-regulated product markets among industrial countries (OECD) & the least-regulated labour markets in the EU.
Regulation has benefits. Co-ordination (for example, common safety standards for electrical products) is a necessary part of a single market, making it easier to trade. It also provides consumer protection, e.g. cheaper air fares, lower roaming charges, cleaner beaches
.
What many regard as the most burdensome regulations are self-inflicted.

Leaving the EU would not reduce regulation substantially. The issue is not regulation as a whole, but removing or revising the bad regulations that undoubtedly exist but not a reason for leaving.

Re regulations

I am not an engineer, however I also worked within a very regulated discipline.

I don't want every aspect of my life ordered by the EU. It's unnecessary.

Tebbit said one of the hardest things in his discussions with the EU was the cultural difference between the UK and mainland EU.

In the UK we have a an unwritten constitution whereby you are permitted to do anything you want, as long as you don't break the law.

Whereas, in mainland EU they have a culture of believing they are only permitted to do what is written down as permissible.

The UK stance leads to innovation, enterprise and challenge. The EU stance leads to servitude, compliance and control.

The EU is trying to extinguish that UK spirit of 'anything is possible until you tell me it isn'' with 'we will tell you what you can do.

It's time to bin the over-regulation of our every day lives and re-establish that basic fact that they work for us - we are not servants to them

I also agree we need to be able to hire non EU scientists/engineers more easily. We tried to hire a Japanese specialist and just couldn't do it in time for out needs. It's a genuine problem for British businesses atm.

See, I agree with this, but leaving the EU simply won't solve this problem. The EU does not dictate what our policy should be towards non-EU immigration. That's Theresa May's job. Our democratically elected government has chosen to make it extremely difficult for businesses to hire non-EU staff. It doesn't have to be that way.

hes not the only one in support of brexit, Lord bamford has also expressed his support for brexit to all his employees.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36485985

Spring
you keep referencing Tebit - this worm is an excellent example of the people that we need some level of protection from, in the 1980s this man threw people out of jobs and communities. The BSI maintains the BS/EN Series which is common to the IEC the issue is that they would diverge resulting in UK businesses having multiple regulatory frameworks to adhere to to gain market access. Honestly what do you think you will gain by leaving, apart from a low wage low skill tax haven with no employment protection for those lucky enough to have a job?

He is a hypocrite. Whilst he might be a billionaire these days and able to self fund, he still takes advantage of the massive EU R&D grants to fund his research at our universities.

Good discussion.

I really don't get the regulations / red tape argument, since product regulation is determined by where you are selling not where you are making. Plus you won't be selling much in a quality driven industry without relevant internationally recognised quality standards etc. In terms of labour regulation, global supply chains are now requiring mechanisms like supplier codes of conduct which cover ethical practices. Globally standards are getting higher so I think ignore them at your peril.

In terms of manufacturing, Milly I'd be interested to know where you buy your raw materials from and do you honestly not think that costs will rise if we leave, unless we join the EEA & retain free movement?

Even if import tariffs from EU are zero rated I can see additional cost creeping in - where currently goods are in free circulation in pan European supply chains, I don't believe "they need us more than we need them" is going to extend to things like customs clearance which is almost always down to the buyer not the seller.

The man who invented the ZX81 was a Yorkshireman, I remember my school making a big deal of it. Can't remember his name without googling!

Obviously to add someone other than an actor/sportsman into the mix .....

Oops, wrong thread!

Excellent informative post engineersthumb.

The bathing waters directive meant that our seas stopped being full of raw sewage (like when I was a little girl). If you think that a brexit government would replace this then remember that the UK Government campaigned hard to continue polluting with sewage. The cleaning up of our beaches has enabled UK tourism and it's associated economy to thrive.

Similarly EU Directives tackled the acid rain issue. If there hadnt been consistent air pollution quotas across Europe some countries would have been at an economic disadvantage. A race to the lowest common denominator while competing for profit. It's also if note that UK government fought this as well and we're currently being taken to EU court based on NO 2 emissions.

If you or a family member suffer with asthma then this is particularly significant.

Wildlife legislation is also mostly EU Directives derived because huge numbers of bird and marine species are migratory. So no point conserving them here fir them to be shot elsewhere (eg finches in Malta)

From an environmental perspective, which affects public health and economies the 'red tape' has been tremendous.

Who wants to go back to the days of spotting human feaces while padding in the sea?

Seems there are many instances of putting the cart before the horse being used as examples of EU benefits.

Most standards and regulatory bodies are international in nature rather than European.

Certainly the EU has representatives, but so does Norway for instance. Hence when it comes to moulding international standards the EU speaks for us, where a truly sovereign nation can speak for itself and therefore have more influence.

There are a multitude of these bodies, however given our historical position in terms of engineering, science, finance etc we are guaranteed a seat at the top table of these organisations and so can have more influence, not less.

The bathing waters directive meant that our seas stopped being full of raw sewage (like when I was a little girl).

Tell that to Surfers Against Sewage Your assigning credit to the EU for the Blue Flag scheme that was initiated by France (not the EU) and adopted by countries worldwide (not all in the EU).

If you think that a brexit government would replace this then remember that the UK Government campaigned hard to continue polluting with sewage.

Really?

The cleaning up of our beaches has enabled UK tourism and it's associated economy to thrive.

I think you'll find that UK tourism has actually declined since we joined the EU.

Similarly EU Directives tackled the acid rain issue.

Lol! Nonsense. Does acid rain stop falling at the borders of the EU? Has it tackled the huge problems of acid rain and air population worldwide? No, of course it hasn't.

If there hadnt been consistent air pollution quotas across Europe some countries would have been at an economic disadvantage. A race to the lowest common denominator while competing for profit.

We still have air pollution in the EU. Remember when the German car companies conspired to fraudulently make cars that appeared to (but did not actually) meet EU regulations.

It's also if note that UK government fought this as well and we're currently being taken to EU court based on NO 2 emissions.

Again, we get clobbered but if you're a fraudulent EU car manufacturers that's OK. You sound pleased that we are likely to be fined £millions. I think that would be better off used in the country. I have a huge problem with any undemocratic foreign court overruling our Supreme Court.

Wildlife legislation is also mostly EU Directives derived because huge numbers of bird and marine species are migratory. So no point conserving them here fir them to be shot elsewhere (eg finches in Malta)

Lol. So the World Wildlife Fund, the RSPB, Cites etc are all secondary to the wonderful EU? Utter tosh. And they are still shot down in Malta and Spain.

1. Your arguments for staying in the EU are exceptionally weak if you have to rely on inaccuracies such as these

2. You have a very poor view of the UK, which has had environmental protection legislation for centuries and who's Clean Air Act long pre-dated the EU

3. Your arguments are rather limited. In comparison to the loss of democracy and sovereignty they are completely insignificant

4. If the EU is so hot on environmental issues why is the co-founder of the Green Party in the UK, Baroness Jenny Jones, recommending and campaigning that the UK LEAVE the EU. She runs the GreenLeaves campaign.

I have no problem with people wanting to Remain in the UK but despair when i see people base their decision of EU propaganda, untruths and 6th form arguments.

"I know Farage is despised on Mumsnet. But the fact is he is clever and he really does understand world trade"

I don't know why NF understanding world trade would be touted around. It is a little like getting the name of an early riser and you can sleep till noon!

He was talking bo*ocks about world trade on Andrew Neil. Andrew Neil said how the 10 billion, estimated by Leave as EU membership, would be cancelled out in the cost of tariffs in the event of a Brexit. Farage went on to say very authoritatively, that what you could do was take off the tariffs on Japanese cars and vietnamese shoes. He gave percentages and all to lend credibility to his knowledge. He must have been saying this before as AN looked at the research sheet before him and said what NF was proposing could not be done under WTO rules. NF went onto something else without any look of embarrassment. Slyly misleading people by pretending he knows what he is talking about. I think he bullsts and lies far too easily. Apparently, he also keeps misquoting the Interpol guy, even though he has been told to stop. And these lies and empty rhetoric could influence people who take him at face value or if nobody with knowledge of the topic is there to correct what he is saying.

That cost in tariffs was from a WTO statement.

Gosh. In 2000, Dyson was proclaiming how it would be a disaster if we didn't join the Euro.