Skip to main content

Retailers warn of food shortages from No-Deal Brexit

More concerns are being expressed about the impact of a no-deal Brexit.  
Top UK retailers are having urgent meetings with the government expressing their concern that a no-deal Brexit will lead to food shortages.   
Commenting on the newly released Yellowhammer documents, Helen Dickinson, Chief Executive of the British Retail Consortium, said:
“The Yellowhammer document confirms what retailers have been saying for the last three years – fresh food availability will decrease, consumer choice will decrease, and prices will rise. This isn’t good for the British public and this isn’t good for British retailers."

The retailers say a no-deal Brexit in November represents the worst possible timing for the retail industry and for consumers. 

They warn that warehousing availability will be limited as retailers prepare for Black Friday and Christmas, many fresh fruit and vegetables will be out of season in the UK, and imports will be hampered by disruption through the Channel Straits that could reduce flow by up to 60% for up to three months.

They also warn that while retailers are doing all they can to prepare for a no-deal Brexit, it is impossible to completely mitigate the negative impact it would have - something the Government itself has acknowledged. 

"The fact remains that a damaging,no-deal Brexit is in no one’s interests and it is vital that a solution is found, and fast, that ensures frictionless tariff-free trade with the EU after our departure.”
The hardest hit will be the poorest as they are the least able to buffer the impact on family finances.  The uncertainty is already affecting the poorest.  The Trussell Trust is expecting a surge in families needing help from food banks, yet food banks will also be adversely affected as a record 1.6m food bank parcels given to people in the past year.

Brexit is and remains a distraction from the real issues affecting the poorest.  Poverty wages and job insecurity, poor housing and a breakdown of essential services have pushed more families into poverty.  This is the direct result of UK government policies.

The slogan of the Leave campaign was "take back control", yet it is the government who introduced Universal Credit and slashed benefits for hard-working families and the disabled.   There was no lack of control when it came to cutting budgets to local authorities, pushing social care and children's services into crisis.

Brexit clouds all judgement, when concerns about leaving without a deal are expressed.   What the Retailers are saying isn't a figment of their imagination.  It is and will be the reality of No-Deal.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,