Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

L1011 · 28-05-2020 11:40pm

"building" Renaults in Sunderland to avoid tarrifs would be as pathetic as our motor "industry" was. Disassembled cars put back together with some parts notionally from Irish vendors, who were just reselling the same stuff.

reslfj · 28-05-2020 11:54pm

Renault and Nissan were about to merge. This merger has been called off for now. They will however continue to work together.

You can't - IMHO - in any reasonable way judge their future plans from the closure of a single factory.

There is plenty of unused auto-factory capacity in Europe. You need to have a very detailed knowledge of every factory of every auto grouping to understand why they move production, expand or close factories.

The market is moving to electric cars and Nissan/Renault may well use its UK factory for fossil-fuel cars for some years? Getting a larger sum from the UK government may well justify building in the UK for a period.

The real game is where the electric cars and batteries will be built when volume production of electric cars takes off.

Lars

PS! The physical assembly of any modern car is very efficient and done right not too expensive. Good robots and good logistic for JIT are core to this. Getting the design right, tested in the labs, approved, marketed and liked by customers is infinitely more important than actually making the car on the assembly line.

This is not new, but 'importance' has shifted more away from blue-collar jobs and to an approved and certified product into the hands of the buyer.

Peregrinus · 29-05-2020 1:14am

RobMc59 wrote: »

I wasn't implying anything,I have no problem with countries attracting investment by offering incentives,I posted because someone implied the UK had a secret deal.
It's possible the Nissan UK facility is more competitive than the Spanish plant which could be the reason for their decision.

Nissan has been offered state aid to cope with Brexit; this isn't a new revelation. It's likely that this would have been a factor in their choice over which plant to close.

It's not really a "vote of confidence in Brexit", though. Nissan has already signalled that, in a no-deal Brexit, its European business is not viable, precisely because it is so UK-focussed.

Essentially, Nissan is signalling that, if it retains a commitment to the European market, that will be based on its manufacturing capacity in the UK. But whether it retains a commitment to the European market will depend on the Brexit terms. So the fact that they have closed the Barcelona plant doesn not mean that they won't also close Sunderland, or signficantly scale it down, if the UK fails to make a deal with the EU under which the Sunderland plant can serve the EEA market.

RobMc59 · 29-05-2020 1:17am

reslfj wrote: »

Renault and Nissan were about to merge. This merger has been called off for now. They will however continue to work together.

You can't - IMHO - in any reasonable way judge their future plans from the closure of a single factory.

There is plenty of unused auto-factory capacity in Europe. You need to have a very detailed knowledge of every factory of every auto grouping to understand why they move production, expand or close factories.

The market is moving to electric cars and Nissan/Renault may well use its UK factory for fossil-fuel cars for some years? Getting a larger sum from the UK government may well justify building in the UK for a period.

The real game is where the electric cars and batteries will be built when volume production of electric cars takes off.

Lars

PS! The physical assembly of any modern car is very efficient and done right not too expensive. Good robots and good logistic for JIT are core to this. Getting the design right, tested in the labs, approved, marketed and liked by customers is infinitely more important than actually making the car on the assembly line.

This is not new, but 'importance' has shifted more away from blue-collar jobs and to an approved and certified product into the hands of the buyer.

I saw the Spanish workers outside the Nissan plant when the announcement was made it was shutting and my heart went out to them.I doubt they or businesses which rely on them would agree with your assertion blue collar jobs are less important .

reslfj · 29-05-2020 2:53am

RobMc59 wrote: »

... and my heart went out to them.

I doubt they or businesses which rely on them would agree with your assertion blue collar jobs are less important .

You can not in any meaningful or constructive way discuss industrial and economic policies with you heart.

My dad was manager in a small 50-75 people metal working factory (in the ~1950-1980.

As a kid I knew very many and was told the by blue collar workers, that they believed their quality work was the core of the business.

It was important, but already then my dad told me not to oppose, but also that the real core of the business and the larger costs were in the product design, effective and lasting tool design, and most of all the sales effort domestically and with foreign customers.

Buying raw steel and metal for production from the rights source with a good, stable quality, and a good acceptable price was far more important than any one skilled worker and even much more than non skilled workers.

Already then each blue collar workers could fairly easily be replaced. Outsourcing was not the term used then, but it was exactly what happened in this factory to many blue collar jobs in the later 1970's and into the 1980's (oil crisis I & II)

Look at the many auto assembly lines in CZ, SK, HU, PL and now in RO too.
The trick is in the design of the cars, in the robots and their programs and in 110% disciplined logistics for JIT.
Good blue collar workers are available and appreciated - good work, good salaries - but each easily replaceable.

These are the facts 50 years ago and even more today and it has nothing to do with the EU or FoM across national borders.

Lars

BonnieSituation · 29-05-2020 3:01am

reslfj wrote: »

Renault and Nissan were about to merge. This merger has been called off for now. They will however continue to work together.

You can't - IMHO - in any reasonable way judge their future plans from the closure of a single factory.

There is plenty of unused auto-factory capacity in Europe. You need to have a very detailed knowledge of every factory of every auto grouping to understand why they move production, expand or close factories.

The market is moving to electric cars and Nissan/Renault may well use its UK factory for fossil-fuel cars for some years? Getting a larger sum from the UK government may well justify building in the UK for a period.

The real game is where the electric cars and batteries will be built when volume production of electric cars takes off.

Lars

PS! The physical assembly of any modern car is very efficient and done right not too expensive. Good robots and good logistic for JIT are core to this. Getting the design right, tested in the labs, approved, marketed and liked by customers is infinitely more important than actually making the car on the assembly line.

This is not new, but 'importance' has shifted more away from blue-collar jobs and to an approved and certified product into the hands of the buyer.

Ish.

You can't rely on the qashqai and leaf forever.

The Ghosn saga is what's done Nissan and Renault in. Covid has just kicked them when they were down.

Flickerfusion · 29-05-2020 3:40am

I could see this going down badly in French politics and the French government is 10% owner of Renault and is being expected to bail it out. Moving Renault production outside the EU doesn’t bode well for the company’s relations with the French government.

RobMc59 · 29-05-2020 6:13am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Nissan has been offered state aid to cope with Brexit; this isn't a new revelation. It's likely that this would have been a factor in their choice over which plant to close.

It's not really a "vote of confidence in Brexit", though. Nissan has already signalled that, in a no-deal Brexit, its European business is not viable, precisely because it is so UK-focussed.

Essentially, Nissan is signalling that, if it retains a commitment to the European market, that will be based on its manufacturing capacity in the UK. But whether it retains a commitment to the European market will depend on the Brexit terms. So the fact that they have closed the Barcelona plant doesn not mean that they won't also close Sunderland, or signficantly scale it down, if the UK fails to make a deal with the EU under which the Sunderland plant can serve the EEA market.

I'm pleased for the Sunderland workers but that's dampened by the thought of the Spanish workers losing jobs.
Perhaps this decision may show just how the UK market/workforce is viewed but the thought of Johnson and co making political gain from it is a downside.

Peregrinus · 29-05-2020 6:25am

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'm pleased for the Sunderland workers but that's dampened by the thought of the Spanish workers losing jobs.
Perhaps this decision may show just how the UK market/workforce is viewed but the thought of Johnson and co making political gain from it is a downside.

I don't think this is anything to do with "how the UK market/workforce is viewed"; Nissan is thinking of its European business and how that can be best operated. Their view seems to be that, because of the degree of investment already made in Sunderland and (possibly) because of state aid offered by the UK government, Sunderland offers the best prospects of serving the European market long-term. But there are still huge uncertainties associated with that; in particular the trading terms that apply as between the UK and the EEA from 1 January next, which are still unknown. That could easily put the kibosh on the viability of Sunderland; it is certainly not viable as a manufacturing plant serving the UK alone, unless possibly in a dramatically scaled-down version of its current self.

So I think the most we can say is that, while the axe has fallen on Barcelona, it hasn't fallen on Sunderland - yet. But it very much could do. If Johnson makes political gain from this, it can only be the result of wishful thinking, and it will evaporate pretty quickly. Real political gain depends on Johnson making the choices he needs to make to keep Sunderland viable.

Enzokk · 29-05-2020 7:20am

Just on the Nissan decision, I am not going to try and debate why it was taken and if it is an endorsement of Brexit, but I wonder whether this will harden the negotiation mandate that is given to Barnier from Spain though. EU countries will not want work to be moved from their countries and they will not want the UK to be seen to be the winner here.

Peregrinus · 29-05-2020 7:26am

Enzokk wrote: »

Just on the Nissan decision, I am not going to try and debate why it was taken and if it is an endorsement of Brexit, but I wonder whether this will harden the negotiation mandate that is given to Barnier from Spain though. EU countries will not want work to be moved from their countries and they will not want the UK to be seen to be the winner here.

The negotiation mandate is a done deal. It has already been set. While it can be reopened, and the UK [pretends that it] wants it to be reopened, it's not likely to happen. And if were to happen it would not be to the advantage of the UK, which I why I think the UK's hints that it should happen are not to be taken as representing a real ambition.

Hypothetically, if it were to be reopened, I don't think it's very likely that Spain would be pressing for anything to be included to try to save the Nissan plant in Barcelona. It's too late for that; the closure decision has been made. Even if Sunderland closes Barcelona will not reopen.

Dyr · 29-05-2020 7:56am

Enzokk wrote: »

Just on the Nissan decision, I am not going to try and debate why it was taken and if it is an endorsement of Brexit, but I wonder whether this will harden the negotiation mandate that is given to Barnier from Spain though. EU countries will not want work to be moved from their countries and they will not want the UK to be seen to be the winner here.

I think we can safely say if Nissan picked Barcelona over Sunderland it would be taken as a clear indictment of Brexit around these parts.

Peregrinus · 29-05-2020 8:02am

Bambi wrote: »

I think we can safely say if Nissan picked Barcelona over Sunderland it would be taken as a clear indictment of Brexit around these parts.

Not by Brexiters! They'd blame it on fuel prices or on the CV19 pandemic.

I mean, when Nissan put out its statement that Sunderland wasn't viable in a no-deal Brexit they spun that as an endorsement of Brexit.

Sam Russell · 29-05-2020 10:26am

Surely the EU/Japan deal would be the root of the Barcelona plant closure. The tariff free import of Japanese built cars gives complete control to Japanese companies to repatriate car production.

The Sunderland closure is still possible, particularly with a No Deal Brexit possibly occurring in January. State aid could change the sums for a while, but 'you cannot buck the markets' as someone once said.

Nissan and Renault already build very similar cars, and it would not be difficult to see the VAG* style range choices, where Renault and Nissan build cars on the same platform from the same parts bin with similar market segments.

Electric plug in battery cars are the future, and Renault and Nissan car range needs to reflect that, with the Leaf and Twingo already in that sphere.

VAG are going full tilt at that market, and could well licence their platform, as they have already done with Ford who will be making a Transit based on it. Maybe Nissan/Renault could cross licence, perhaps joining with PSA, to build commercial vehicles (small vans).

*VAG make an Audi, VW, SEAT and Skoda version of each type of car.

listermint · 29-05-2020 10:57am

Sam Russell wrote: »

Surely the EU/Japan deal would be the root of the Barcelona plant closure. The tariff free import of Japanese built cars gives complete control to Japanese companies to repatriate car production.

The Sunderland closure is still possible, particularly with a No Deal Brexit possibly occurring in January. State aid could change the sums for a while, but 'you cannot buck the markets' as someone once said.

Nissan and Renault already build very similar cars, and it would not be difficult to see the VAG* style range choices, where Renault and Nissan build cars on the same platform from the same parts bin with similar market segments.

Electric plug in battery cars are the future, and Renault and Nissan car range needs to reflect that, with the Leaf and Twingo already in that sphere.

VAG are going full tilt at that market, and could well licence their platform, as they have already done with Ford who will be making a Transit based on it. Maybe Nissan/Renault could cross licence, perhaps joining with PSA, to build commercial vehicles (small vans).

*VAG make an Audi, VW, SEAT and Skoda version of each type of car.

I dont think Nisssan even mentioned Sunderland in their statement, which is significant because Sunderland will be shelved immediately if the UK government ruin negotiations. Unless of course the incentives they offer out weight tariffs. i.e a huge government subsidy (massive)

Akrasia · 29-05-2020 11:03am

McGiver wrote: »

EU, several member states and sone carmakers are already working on battery R&D and especially manufacturing in Europe. This is long recognised issue and it's being worked on.

It's better to pump money into electric car industry even when the battery supply is still Asian than to pump money to largely obsolete polluting fossil fuel car industry which is dependent on oil from despotic, unstable and toxic countries.

Plus, with solid state batteries on the horizon, investing in this technology now would give them a big advantage over manufacturers who have their plant tooled to manufacture Lithium Ion batteries

First Up · 29-05-2020 11:14am

I don't know enough about the situation to comment but I do know that the auto industry is in upheaval due to the move away from fossil fuels. There is major consolidation and change across the industry and Covid is an added complication.

However the industry has always involved a lot of interdependence and complex supply chains and Brexit won't help that, with or without electric cars or Covid.

Sam Russell · 29-05-2020 1:41pm

First Up wrote: »

I don't know enough about the situation to comment but I do know that the auto industry is in upheaval due to the move away from fossil fuels. There is major consolidation and change across the industry and Covid is an added complication.

However the industry has always involved a lot of interdependence and complex supply chains and Brexit won't help that, with or without electric cars or Covid.

In fact interdependence is increasing as the cost of developing a new model climbs with the increased safety and environmental issues take significant money to reach. Ford have a deal with VW to produce their version of the Sharon, while Fiat produce a Mazda MX5 called the Spider, Toyota produce the Aygo along with European auto companies who have their own version. Nissan, Opel and Renault produce a van in Luton that is now part of PSA.

I think the battery is an interim solution while the hydrogen fuel cell is developed through to mass market. That is where this is going, at a a faster rate. Batteries have a very limited life of between 5 and 10 years - which limits their application.

29-05-2020 1:58pm

The current generation of EV batteries are expected to outlast the vehicles, so they're either producing crap cars or good long lived batteries.
regardless there's less space for multiple car manufacturers so Nissan may just have only one plant in Europe, but not necessarily in the EU.

ancapailldorcha · 29-05-2020 2:16pm

Post with insults deleted.

fash · 30-05-2020 11:11am

The UK agreed to keep EU protections for delicacies like champagne and Parma ham in place and in perpetuity in negotiations over the Withdrawal Agreement - but failed to secure the same guarantees for British products in the EU.
The European Union will reject British demands for stronger legal protection for UK regional products such as Stilton cheese and Scottish whisky after the end of the Brexit transition period in trade negotiations next week [without including these in an FTA - if such occurs].

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/29/exclusive-stilton-whisky-pork-pies-become-next-brexit-battleground/

Sounds like very sloppy WA drafting by the UK.

Akrasia · 30-05-2020 11:31am

fash wrote: »

The UK agreed to keep EU protections for delicacies like champagne and Parma ham in place and in perpetuity in negotiations over the Withdrawal Agreement - but failed to secure the same guarantees for British products in the EU.
The European Union will reject British demands for stronger legal protection for UK regional products such as Stilton cheese and Scottish whisky after the end of the Brexit transition period in trade negotiations next week [without including these in an FTA - if such occurs].

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/29/exclusive-stilton-whisky-pork-pies-become-next-brexit-battleground/

Sounds like very sloppy WA drafting by the UK.

It would be absolutely hilarious if post Brexit the Irish Whiskey distilleries can all launch their own Scotch brands and muscle in on the Whisky market which is many times larger than the Irish Whiskey market globally

Professor Moriarty · 30-05-2020 11:34am

Akrasia wrote: »

It would be absolutely hilarious if post Brexit the Irish Whiskey distilleries can all launch their own Scotch brands and muscle in on the Whisky market which is many times larger than the Irish Whiskey market globally

Would be much cheaper in many countries for a start.

fash · 30-05-2020 11:56am

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Would be much cheaper in many countries for a start.

What's funny is just how sloppy the UK was on this - and the EU was obviously aware of how sloppy they were, drafted a one sided provision and "forgot" to make it mutual.
Had the UK spotted it, there could have been zero opposition from EU to making it mutual.
Seriously a lot of people in the UK should be fired for this - and a lot of others aghast.

30-05-2020 11:57am

Akrasia wrote: »

It would be absolutely hilarious if post Brexit the Irish Whiskey distilleries can all launch their own Scotch brands and muscle in on the Whisky market which is many times larger than the Irish Whiskey market globally

That would be called counterfeiting.

fash · 30-05-2020 11:59am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That would be called counterfeiting.

It's only counterfeiting if you call it "coca cola" etc. It's not counterfeiting if you use GIs - hence the EU's protection of such.

Enzokk · 30-05-2020 12:10pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That would be called counterfeiting.

If Jameson releases a special batch of "Jameson Scotch Whisky" what would they be counterfeiting? Now had they launched a "Johnnie Walker Scotch Whisky", that would be counterfeiting.

Professor Moriarty · 30-05-2020 12:33pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That would be called counterfeiting.

I'd be ramping up production of whiskies called Joannie Walkers, Infamous Grouse, Grunts etc. Same colouring on labels, same shape bottle...

30-05-2020 12:53pm

Who the hell would be buying fake Scotch, from Ireland when they could distil their own?

Enzokk · 30-05-2020 1:06pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Who the hell would be buying fake Scotch, from Ireland when they could distil their own?

How do you know it is fake when it says Scotch on the label?

30-05-2020 1:12pm

Enzokk wrote: »

How do you know it is fake when it says Scotch on the label?

When the label on the back says distilled in Berlin!

RobMc59 · 30-05-2020 1:26pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'd be ramping up production of whiskies called Joannie Walkers, Infamous Grouse, Grunts etc. Same colouring on labels, same shape bottle...

Don't they already do that in lidl and aldi.

Leroy42 · 30-05-2020 1:55pm

So we are fast approaching yet another deadline. Seems the UK are going to use the plan of doing very little with the idea that the deadline will force concessions from the EU.

Hasn't worked so far, but it only needs to work once I suppose.

Barnier seems to be becoming increasingly frustrated. I guess that he feels he has explained his side so many times why do the UK keep coming back with the same plans.

Will we see a last minute meeting of senior politicians, Johnson and Macron or Merkel, so try to avoid a no deal? Sort of like how the unions and government 'work' deep into the night before emerging, bleary eyed and exhausted, with a hitherto unexpected deal?

Or will the June deadline be allowed to pass on the basis that work is moving forward and both sides agree to work hard up to 31 December?

IMO that is what is going to happen. A fudge on the deadline.

reslfj · 30-05-2020 3:35pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'd be ramping up production of whiskies called Joannie Walkers, Infamous Grouse, Grunts etc. Same colouring on labels, same shape bottle...

Don't they already do that in lidl and aldi.

Often such names will be too close to existing brand names and can be forced out by a court case. GI is very different outside the EU's sphere of rule making.

Let's, however, talk about something more important than GI, like the incompetence of UK negotiators and the inability of UK ministers and politicians to read the treaties they put forward and vote for.

Or is the asymmetry a UK demand for easier negotiating with the US ?

Treaties and other contracts are very boring to read, but it is absolutely necessary to do so - and not just signing to 'get it done'.

Lars

Leroy42 · 30-05-2020 3:37pm

The evidence, as the point above and the seeming misunderstanding of what the NI border agreement actually means, would certainly suggest that the treaty was not really read through.

And certainly the Tory government never wanted it read, and in fact did everything they could to reduce any oversight or proper review by the HoC.

30-05-2020 3:38pm

Deleted User wrote: »

When the label on the back says distilled in Berlin!

But it wouldn't be fake, the protection it has/had would be gone.

Making a whiskey in Romania and calling it Glengoolie Blue Scotch and selling it across the EU would be fine.

Making a whiskey in Romania and calling it Irish would not be legal.

Akrasia · 30-05-2020 4:23pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That would be called counterfeiting.

No it wouldn’t
If scotch is no longer a protected term than anyone can make it. It’s not like the Irish Distilaries would steal the branding of existing products

Professor Moriarty · 30-05-2020 4:25pm

reslfj wrote: »

Often such names will be too close to existing brand names and can be forced out by a court case. GI is very different outside the EU's sphere of rule making.

Let's, however, talk about something more important than GI, like the incompetence of UK negotiators and the inability of UK ministers and politicians to read the treaties they put forward and vote for.

Or is the asymmetry a UK demand for easier negotiating with the US ?

Treaties and other contracts are very boring to read, but it is absolutely necessary to do so - and not just signing to 'get it done'.

Lars

I'm absolutely fine with that if it's to the EU's advantage. Let them skim over the finer details.

Sam Russell · 30-05-2020 4:54pm

Deleted User wrote: »

But it wouldn't be fake, the protection it has/had would be gone.

Making a whiskey in Romania and calling it Glengoolie Blue Scotch and selling it across the EU would be fine.

Making a whiskey in Romania and calling it Irish would not be legal.

Well, how about English muffins or Scotch eggs, or Cornish pasties. I think the last one might be protected.

English breakfast tea is genetic, since there is no real tea production in England. And Cheddar cheese.

Enzokk · 30-05-2020 5:23pm

Deleted User wrote: »

When the label on the back says distilled in Berlin!

Yes, assuming everyone looks for the country of origin when it seemingly spelled out on the front.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, how about English muffins or Scotch eggs, or Cornish pasties. I think the last one might be protected.

English breakfast tea is genetic, since there is no real tea production in England. And Cheddar cheese.

Here is the list of items that is protected,

List of United Kingdom food and drink products with protected status

No to the English Breakfast Tea, cheddar cheese is not protected either. But you do have West Country Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese that is protected.

As you say only Cornish pasties are on the list and not Scotch eggs or English muffin as their origin seems unclear.

RobMc59 · 30-05-2020 8:28pm

Akrasia wrote: »

No it wouldn’t
If scotch is no longer a protected term than anyone can make it. It’s not like the Irish Distilaries would steal the branding of existing products

The thing with this is it would only fool the occasional purchaser,there are numerous copies of well known products but most of them are pale imitations.I no longer drink but did like Guinness, an imitation,even if it said 'Irish recipe stout'just wouldn't cut it.And why Irish whisky makers would want to pretend to be Scotch is strange as Irish whisky is a pretty good stand alone product.

Enzokk · 30-05-2020 9:04pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

The thing with this is it would only fool the occasional purchaser,there are numerous copies of well known products but most of them are pale imitations.I no longer drink but did like Guinness, an imitation,even if it said 'Irish recipe stout'just wouldn't cut it.And why Irish whisky makers would want to pretend to be Scotch is strange as Irish whisky is a pretty good stand alone product.

I don't know why we are talking about specific cases, but it was used as an example if GI wasn't recognised any longer. It was to show as an example, if Scotch whisky had no geographical protection that an Irish company could sell their product as Scotch whisky.

The claim was made it would be counterfeit and this was disputed. I am not disagreeing with your point as to why an Irish whiskey maker would pretend to be a Scotch when it has a protected GI as well, but another countries whiskey makers would possibly see the gap to sell a few bottles that usually wouldn't if they could use the name and there was no restriction on it.

This is true of all other GI's out there. I am sure a lot of sparkling wine makers would love to be able to sell their fare as Champagne, but they are restricted in doing this.

fash · 31-05-2020 2:35am

There is a reason GI if a thing-: and a European thing in particular. It's European because Europe has a long cultural and culinary history which other places do not have. By protecting GIs, the EU makes adds significant value to local food products - one immediately knows that Parmesan is parmesan.
If a product has that name it is not just a generic and not just watery copy of a great product.
An already well established brand has its own reputation to protect it to an extent, smaller and developing producers will be badly affected however.

Tropheus · 31-05-2020 10:14am

If you're ever wondering why Brexit continues to be widely supported in the UK, you only have to look at rags like the Express.

I'm sure there are many people out there who only read headlines. If you're brave enough to go into the articles, there is little substance and lots of "ifs".

Sam Russell · 31-05-2020 11:00am

Enzokk wrote: »

I don't know why we are talking about specific cases, but it was used as an example if GI wasn't recognised any longer. It was to show as an example, if Scotch whisky had no geographical protection that an Irish company could sell their product as Scotch whisky.

The claim was made it would be counterfeit and this was disputed. I am not disagreeing with your point as to why an Irish whiskey maker would pretend to be a Scotch when it has a protected GI as well, but another countries whiskey makers would possibly see the gap to sell a few bottles that usually wouldn't if they could use the name and there was no restriction on it.

This is true of all other GI's out there. I am sure a lot of sparkling wine makers would love to be able to sell their fare as Champagne, but they are restricted in doing this.

But it will not be an Irish company trying to sell non-Scottish Scotch whiskey. It will be Highland Scotch Whiskey (guaranteed 3 years old) from India or Belarus that can be sold within the EU (but not UK). t must comply with food standards and labelling, but nor GI.

Charles Babbage · 31-05-2020 6:29pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

But it will not be an Irish company trying to sell non-Scottish Scotch whiskey. It will be Highland Scotch Whiskey (guaranteed 3 years old) from India or Belarus that can be sold within the EU (but not UK). t must comply with food standards and labelling, but nor GI.

Could we not have Ulster-Scots whiskey?

Seth Brundle · 31-05-2020 6:30pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Could we not have Ulster-Scots whiskey?

I think the point is that you can have any kind of Scotch whisky, not just Scottish Scotch!

RobMc59 · 31-05-2020 6:38pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Could we not have Ulster-Scots whiskey?

Rumour has it Bushmills is a protestant whisky.

Seth Brundle · 31-05-2020 6:49pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

Rumour has it Bushmills is a protestant whisky.

Having done some work within the distillery in the past, I can say that it used to be a predominantly protestant workforce but that has thankfully changed.
Whiskey (note the 'e') does not have a religion however.

Sam Russell · 31-05-2020 8:14pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Could we not have Ulster-Scots whiskey?

You mean Bushmills?

[Edit: Beaten to it.]

Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments