Brexit Consequences

[sTeamTraen]

20 reasons why there is a shortage of drivers in the UK.

Recommended - a good mixture of the Brexit, UK-structural, and industry-structural arguments. (The bit about Calais was an eye-opener; there again the UK government's "hardline", "zero=tolerance" policies are just causing people to walk away rather than put up with the grief.)

Also, for shiggles only given that this is second-level social media stuff, some comments allegedly from EU truckers here and here.

[TopBadger]

We haven't lost 100k workers in the last few months...

Losing 100k workers and being down 100k HGV drivers aren't the same thing. You have have the latter without the former.

Some HGV drivers retired, others quit the profession, others decided to drive elsewhere (back in the EU).

I understand a significant part of the drop in HGV drivers is down to lower imports and exports... the non-resident EU drivers were importing goods to be dropped off at, say, Daventry before going on to pick up goods to export back to the EU two days later in, say, Glasgow simply aren't here to take up internal haulage jobs that they used to do to avoid making journeys without loads.

Another Brexit dividend.

[sheldrake]

We haven't lost 100k workers in the last few months...

Losing 100k workers and being down 100k HGV drivers aren't the same thing. You have have the latter without the former.

Some HGV drivers retired, others quit the profession, others decided to drive elsewhere (back in the EU).

I'm aware of that, it's just that none of this loss happened all of a sudden precipitating a mad scramble for petrol over the course of a few days, so it won't require all of them back in order to get it moving again.

[sheldrake]

well, that's good, because this is nothing like the same level of crisis. but you're right, thank god ending free movement of labour is allowing us to act to introduce free movement again. That'll teach the ultra capitalist running dogs who loudly sponsored and cheerleaded Brexit a thing or two about sticking one to the proud workers.

eta struck out. I should know better than to engage in this drivel.

Ultracapitalists who sponsored brexit? who? JCB? Dyson? Roger Daltry? almost all the big corporations and banks were against brexit. The Tory government of the day used public funds to campaign for us to stay in. Billionaires literally funded a prolonged legal campaign to try and overturn a referendum result. The pro-Brexit campaign was based on a pub bore who used to work in the city and a small collection of celebrities over the age of 45 who happened to be in tune with loads of smaller businesses and ordinary members of the public.

Immigration has increased since 2016. This idea that skilled workers can't come to the UK, or even that less of them are coming, is not based in reality. EU freedom of movement is a different thing. We don't have 'freedom of movement' with the US, Canada or Australia either, but it's not like people from those countries don't come and work in the UK or brits go there. There is a specific issue with badly paid jobs with poor conditions.

[plodder]

Steve Baker and many of his fellow ERG members are ultra-capitalist libertarians of the Austrian School as you well know. Banks and financial services are incumbents of the status quo who are perfectly happy with their quasi-monopoly state-supported anti-competitive kleptocratic status. They are certainly not "ultra free market capitalists" and they would instinctively resist any changes, seeings as things are nicely set up for them as they are.

[sheldrake]

Steve Baker and many of his fellow ERG members are ultra-capitalist libertarians of the Austrian School as you well know.

Their collective wealth is also somewhere below that of the people who sell cars to the people who funded Gina Miller. The ERG may be mostly libertarians, but they are also really not part of some plutocratic club. I wouldn't expect you to feel in sympathy with their worldview, but those people are definitely outsiders as much as we are.

Banks and financial services are incumbents of the status quo who are perfectly happy with their quasi-monopoly state-supported anti-competitive kleptocratic status. They are certainly not "ultra free market capitalists" and they would instinctively resist any changes, seeings as things are nicely set up for them as they are.

I accept this point. That's also true of most of the other large corporations... but that's what the plutocracy really mostly looks like, at least in Europe.

[plodder]

So now all you need to do is concede that the libertarians don't really give a toss about the workers so much as subverting the plutocrats (because they see an opportunity) and you've neatly done a U-turn on your latest bought of whatever the hell you call it.

[sheldrake]

So now all you need to do is concede that the libertarians don't really give a toss about the workers so much as subverting the plutocrats (because they see an opportunity) and you've neatly done a U-turn on your latest bought of whatever the hell you call it.

The reason I don't agree here is that I understand the motives and theoretical background of some of those people and still share some of their opinions. Some of them, at least, come from working class backgrounds and sincerely believe they are helping ordinary people. Of course they might be wrong, but not wrong as part of a nefarious self-interested plot.

[Millennie Al]

Hello. Nazi Authoritarian Founder here.

The £700m a fortnight discussion has been held pretty much continuously by teams of argumentative overly online bored people for the last five and a half years. It's boring. I'm bored. Neither side is going to agree. It's time to move on to other topics.

Discussion on the matter will now cease. Any further posts on it will result in the discussion being hived off to The Pit and locked. If further discussion continues here in spite of that, this thread will be locked.

Cheers.

Why not just split it off into another topic, as happens with other discussions. Why does it make any difference to you what people say under a topic if you just don't read it?

[Millennie Al]

I'd like someone to show me where the figure of 100,000 comes from. I understand that 13,000 non-EU drivers are no longer working here, but I am willing to bet that there's plenty of flab* in the remaining 87,000 that are "needed".

*triple sausage and beans please mate etc

It seems to be from the Road Haulage Association: https://www.rha.uk.net/News/News-Blogs- ... v-drivers-
I note that the date on that article is 4th August, so this may have been simmering in the background for a while.

[Millennie Al]

All of this makes sense to me https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... conomic-uk

He illustrates a rather stupid position - that of voting for Brexit as a vote against the status quo. That would only have been sensible if membership of the EU was so appallingly bad that absolutely anything would be better, since the ballot contained no indication of what form Brexit would take.

I would likely not agree with Larry on lots of details about how high the new taxes should be etc.. but the broad shape, yes.

There is nothing in that article about raising taxes. There is only a passing mention of tax, saying the the government can vary it, which is not really saying anything.

[Millennie Al]

I'm aware of that, it's just that none of this loss happened all of a sudden precipitating a mad scramble for petrol over the course of a few days, so it won't require all of them back in order to get it moving again.

Sudden effects do not need sudden causes. There's even a branch of mathematics which deals with this (catastrophe theory). And the reversal of an effect does not necessarily happen when the cause is reversed - many situations have hysteresis.

[Martin_B]

The army is certainly capable of transporting fuel.

Not on the required scale it isn't. The army (and air force) have a small number of fixed tank fuel trucks, typically with capacities of less than 2500 gallons (11,000 litres). Even these require a HGV licence to drive, which these days most squaddies don't have (gone are the days when squaddies were routinely given driving lessons in everything from motorbikes to HGVs to tanks). They probably have enough drivers for this small fleet of fuel tankers, even assuming that the air force trucks (built for aviation fuel) can carry petrol/diesel - they are actually quite different liquids. But this number of small capacity tankers wouldn't make a dent in taking over from the common road tankers (20,000 - 45,000 litres).

Or do you think that the haulage companies will be told to let army drivers drive their expensive articulated trucks and they'll just hand over the keys? I have (well, had) an HGV licence and I wouldn't want to be given a 70 tonne monster and told to drive around towns, negotiating narrow lanes and queues of angry motorists. And remember, once you've made the 1st delivery and are driving to the 2nd, you are pulling a half-empty cylinder with liquid which sloshes from side to side as you go round corners. Driving these rigs is a very skilled job and giving the role to an untrained squaddie is a recipe for disaster. How long do you think it would be until there was a crash?

[sheldrake]

The army is certainly capable of transporting fuel.

Not on the required scale it isn't. The army (and air force) have a small number of fixed tank fuel trucks, typically with capacities of less than 2500 gallons (11,000 litres). Even these require a HGV licence to drive, which these days most squaddies don't have (gone are the days when squaddies were routinely given driving lessons in everything from motorbikes to HGVs to tanks). They probably have enough drivers for this small fleet of fuel tankers, even assuming that the air force trucks (built for aviation fuel) can carry petrol/diesel - they are actually quite different liquids. But this number of small capacity tankers wouldn't make a dent in taking over from the common road tankers (20,000 - 45,000 litres).

They don't need to 'take over' from them, they only need to supplement them in combination with £30 rationing to restore the appearance of normality so that mad people don't continue to attempt to panic buy. The appropriately qualified soldiers can also act as HGV trainers.

[lpm]

Most of the fuel stuff for the military was privatised years ago. It's not RAF personnel delivering fuel on airbases. The armed forces, rightly, are a small force of experts in the use of arms.

[sheldrake]

Most of the fuel stuff for the military was privatised years ago. It's not RAF personnel delivering fuel on airbases. The armed forces, rightly, are a small force of experts in the use of arms.

Most armed forces personnel are not front-line combatants. The Logistics Corps is the largest Corps of the Army.

[lpm]

Yeah, and they've got 80 tanker drivers.

[sheldrake]

That's enough to help. Most of the problem here is panic buying triggered by the media anyway. £30 rationing will make a big difference.

[plodder]

It’s all a bit Operation Yellowhammer to be honest, which means there is a well thought through civil contingencies plan that is ready to be rolled out any day now.

[lpm]

That's enough to help.

You know the 80 army tanker drivers don't trundle from Stanlow to Aldershot delivering fuel, right? They're out on Salisbury Plain, trying to meet up with a bunch of tanks while helicopters threaten from above, enemy artillery has closed a crossroads and the tanks have raced 20km from the planned rendezvous position.

Sure, they can probably make it to your local Tesco petrol station OK. But the logistics you're thinking of, fueling all those army trucks, is privatised and is done by the exact same drivers that do all the petrol stations. The whole "Boris calls in the army" silliness is just tabloid sh.t that shows what a pathetic failure of a country we have become. Even gullible Mail readers aren't falling for it any more, so you certainly shouldn't.

£30 rationing will make a big difference.

£30 minimum or £30 maximum?

[sheldrake]

That's enough to help.

You know the 80 army tanker drivers don't trundle from Stanlow to Aldershot delivering fuel, right? They're out on Salisbury Plain, trying to meet up with a bunch of tanks while helicopters threaten from above, enemy artillery has closed a crossroads and the tanks have raced 20km from the planned rendezvous position.

Sure, they can probably make it to your local Tesco petrol station OK. But the logistics you're thinking of, fueling all those army trucks, is privatised and is done by the exact same drivers that do all the petrol stations. The whole "Boris calls in the army" silliness is just tabloid sh.t that shows what a pathetic failure of a country we have become. Even gullible Mail readers aren't falling for it any more, so you certainly shouldn't.

£30 rationing will make a big difference.

£30 minimum or £30 maximum?

£30 maximum. Already seen it enforced. This is a problem caused by distorted perception and panic, it doesn't actually need a massive injection of new lorries to pull out of that state back to where we were 2 weeks ago.

[Woodchopper]

I wouldn't over-invest in the ranting of a union rep who doesn't live in the UK. They almost certainly have their own strong political opinions.

Certainly, but it's echoing comments made many times before by British and EU HGV drivers. Just wanted to remind people that throwing money at the problem might not be enough, if conditions are also offputting.

Given the widespread shortages you've highlighted, HGV drivers can easily pick and choose where they work - why pick the UK with its border hassle and insecure contracts?

Drivers from the EU may well not see three months in the UK as an attractive proposition, especially if they have to give up a steady job.

But there are drivers in the rest of the world who would see the wages offered in the UK for a few months as a huge financial opportunity, for example people from Ukraine, Belarus or Russia.

[plodder]

Yes. As long as they’re white it shouldn’t be a problem to recruit people from abroad.

[sheldrake]

Yes. As long as they’re white it shouldn’t be a problem to recruit people from abroad.

I'm not sure where that came from.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-to-work

As you know, immigration to the UK is up. You'll also see that immigration from India, Nigeria and the Phillipines is up.

[plodder]

I’m not sure that’s what people are expecting though. Might need a little bit of explaining. Might land a little badly.