Connect with us

Published

on

A new £24m border control post may have to be demolished because repeated changes to post-Brexit border arrangements have left it commercially unviable.

The facility at Portsmouth International Port is due to begin physical checks on food and plant imports from the EU at the end of next month, but changes to border protocols since it was built mean half of the building will never be used.

Built with a £17m central government grant and £7m from Portsmouth City Council, which owns the port, it is designed to carry out checks on up to 80 truck loads of produce a day. The port now expects to process only four or five daily.

As a consequence, half of the 14 loading bays will never be used, and annual running costs of £800,000 a year will not be covered by the fees charged to importers for carrying out checks.

Portsmouth is not alone, with ports across the country puzzling over how to make the over-sized, over-specified buildings commissioned by the government pay for themselves with far less traffic.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs says it spent £200m part-funding new facilities to cope with post-Brexit border controls at 41 ports. It acknowledges that fewer checks will now be required and says ports are free to use spare capacity as they wish.

The problem in Portsmouth is that the facility, built for a very specific purpose inside a secure area, has no obvious commercial use, so the port is considering building a new, smaller facility, and decommissioning or even demolishing the existing building to make space for a commercially viable project.

A brand new £24m border control post in Portsmouth may have to be demolished because repeated changes to post-Brexit border arrangements have left it commercially unviable.
Image:
The new border control post in Portsmouth

A brand new £24m border control post in Portsmouth may have to be demolished because repeated changes to post-Brexit border arrangements have left it commercially unviable.

“This was built to a Defra [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] specification when the border operating model was announced and it’s been mothballed for two years while the checks were delayed,” Mike Sellers, director of Portsmouth International Port and chairman of the British Ports Association, told Sky News.

“Now the border will be operating with far fewer checks, we are going to struggle to cover the running costs of around £800,000 a year.

“So we have to look to the future and work out what strategically is the best way to minimise the impact to the port and to the council.

“I know it sounds ironic, but that could be building another border control post much smaller than this facility, and looking to find commercial ways to get income either through this facility or to demolish it and use the operational land for something else.”

Electoral Dysfunction
Electoral Dysfunction

Listen to Beth Rigby, Jess Phillips and Ruth Davidson as they unravel the spin in a new weekly podcast from Sky News

Tap here to follow

‘Total and absolute mess’

Port owner Portsmouth City Council meanwhile wants its £7m share of the £24m build cost reimbursed by the government.

“We as a council had to find £7m to help build this facility and now we’re on the fifth change of mind about how much inspection there will be. Half of this building is going to be left empty, idle, unused, and yet it’s costing council taxpayers of Portsmouth a great deal of money,” said councillor Gerald Vernon-Jones, transport lead for the council.

Were the Portsmouth facility to close it could impact the security of UK food imports, as the port is the main alternative route to Dover, providing much-needed resilience to a supply chain heavily reliant on the Short Straits route.

“It’s a total and absolute mess, we have an enormous white elephant here,” Mr Vernon-Jones said.

“If we can’t afford to keep port health people here all day, every day, to do those examinations then everything will have to come through Dover, and that’s enormously risky for this country. If Dover is closed for some reason, industrial action or whatever, then the whole country’s food is at ransom.”

Undated handout photo issued by Portsmouth City Council of the Spinnaker Tower from above. Issue date: Monday August 2, 2021.
Image:
Portsmouth is the UK’s second busiest cross-Channel port

The British Ports Association meanwhile has raised concerns with ministers about the preparedness of the new inspection regime at new border control posts (BCPs), due to be enforced in less than six weeks.

The trade body says ports have still not been told what hours BCPs will be required to open, or how many staff from two state inspection agencies will be required on site.

Crucially, they also do not know how much they will be able to charge importers for inspections because the government has not revealed what price it will levy at the wholly state-owned and run BCP at Sevington in Kent, 20 miles inland from Dover.

Given the dominance of Dover in UK food imports, the so-called common user charge will set the price for the rest of the market, but other ports still have no idea where to set fees.

Defra says it will inform the industry shortly of the fees it has determined following consultation.

The fate of the Portsmouth facility, obsolete before it has even opened, symbolises the delay and indecision around import controls since the Brexit deal came into force in January 2021.

While UK exports to the EU have faced border and customs controls since 1 January 2021, the UK government has delayed similar checks on EU imports five times and changed the control regime.

Read more:
UK ports threaten legal action after spending millions on border control posts
New post-Brexit border controls to cost businesses £330m a year
Post-Brexit checks on goods from EU into UK announced after delay

A brand new £24m border control post in Portsmouth may have to be demolished because repeated changes to post-Brexit border arrangements have left it commercially unviable.

The original July 2021 deadline for physical checks of plant and animal produce was postponed because the BCPs were not ready, and further delays followed, with the government citing the impact on the food supply chain and the cost of living crisis.

In April 2022 the government announced a wholesale revision of its plans for the border, introducing a new risk-based approach that limits checks to certain high and medium-risk food and plant categories.

This was then delayed again, with a staged introduction finally beginning in January, with medium-risk food and plant imports requiring health certificates signed off by vets or plant health inspectors, followed by physical checks from 30 April.

Even with reduced checks on importsm the government’s own analysis suggests border controls will add £330m a year to the cost of trading with the continent and increase food inflation.

A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “Our border control posts have sufficient capacity and capability, including for temperature controlled consignments, to handle the volume and type of expected checks and the authorities will be working to minimise disruption as these checks are introduced.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Russia mulls relaxing crypto rules to blunt impact of Western sanctions

Published

on

By

Russia mulls relaxing crypto rules to blunt impact of Western sanctions

An official from the Bank of Russia suggested easing restrictions on cryptocurrencies in response to the sweeping sanctions imposed on the country.

According to a Monday report by local news outlet Kommersant, Bank of Russia First Deputy Governor Vladimir Chistyukhin said the regulator is discussing easing regulations for cryptocurrencies. He explicitly linked the rationale for this effort to the sanctions imposed on Russia by Western countries following its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Chistyukhin said that easing the crypto rules is particularly relevant when Russia and Russians are subject to restrictions “on the use of normal currencies for making payments abroad.”

Russia banned the use of cryptocurrencies for payments in the summer of 2020.

Chistyukhin said he expects Russia’s central bank to reach an agreement with the Ministry of Finance on this issue by the end of this month. The central issue being discussed is the removal of the requirement to meet the “super-qualified investor” criteria for buying and selling crypto with actual delivery. The requirement was introduced in late April when Russia’s finance ministry and central bank were launching a crypto exchange.

The Bank of Russia, Moscow. Source: Wikimedia

Related: UK sanctions Kyrgyz banks, $9.3B crypto network tied to Russia

What is a super-qualified investor?

The super-qualified investor classification, created earlier this year, is defined by wealth and income thresholds of over 100 million rubles ($1.3 million) or an annual income of at least 50 million rubles.

This limits access to cryptocurrencies for transactions or investment to only the wealthiest few in Russian society. “We are discussing the feasibility of using ‘superquals’ in the new regulation of crypto assets,” Chistyukhin said, in an apparent shifting approach to the restrictive regulation.

Related: How a Russian national allegedly laundered $530M in crypto via Tether

Russia’s fight against sanctions

Russia has been hit with sweeping Western sanctions for years, and regulators in the United States and Europe have increasingly targeted crypto-based efforts to evade those measures.

In late October, the European Union adopted its 19th sanctions package against Russia, including restrictions on cryptocurrency platforms. This also included sanctions against the A7A5 ruble-backed stablecoin, which EU authorities described as “a prominent tool for financing activities supporting the war of aggression.”

Earlier in October, reports indicated that A7A5 — backed by the Russian ruble but issued in Kyrgyzstan — had become the world’s largest non-US-dollar stablecoin. In August, the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control also redesignated cryptocurrency exchange Garantex Europe to its list of sanctioned entities for a second time.

Magazine: When privacy and AML laws conflict: Crypto projects’ impossible choice