Canyon, the direct-to-consumer bike brand based in Germany, has paused shipments to customers in Great Britain and has stopped accepting orders entirely from those in Northern Ireland, citing uncertainty caused by Brexit. The company, headquartered in Koblenz, says that the move is a temporary one and insists that it has been taken “to avoid delays to your orders,” although in practice it seems that is exactly what will happen.
Since the southeast of England entered Tier 4 measures on Sunday morning, both print and broadcast media have shown huge queues of lorries building up in Kent after France closed its borders to traffic from the UK.
While that is primarily affecting goods leaving these shores, it does provide an indication of the potential delays to inward goods come the New Year, especially in the event of a no deal Brexit and the associated checks and paperwork involved.
Canyon, which has prepared an FAQ on its website for customers, said: “The UK’s Brexit transition period ends on 31st December, so we’ve put extra processes in place to ensure your bike can be ordered and shipped without any issues.
“Due to the uncertainty and potential bottlenecks at the border, we are temporarily halting shipment of all bikes from 19th December until at least 11th January. We want your order to be tracked accurately and any hold-up at the border will challenge our ability to do this.”
However, notwithstanding the pause in shipping bikes to customers in the UK, people here can still shop through the brand’s website.
Canyon said: “Despite stopping shipment, we will be taking orders throughout the transitional period. Once you have placed your order, you will receive confirmation by email.
“As soon as we’re able to ship your order, we will again notify you by email along with payment details. Bikes that have a dispatch date beyond 11th January will be unaffected by the temporary pause on shipments.”
It also reassured customers that they would not incur surprise additional costs, saying: “All duties and tariffs are included in the price of your bike which means you’ll never have to pay any hidden fees when your bike arrives on British soil.
“Canyon will handle all customs and import documentation further easing the process for you and getting you riding as soon as possible.”
It cautioned, however, that “E-Bikes are affected due to the battery’s classification of dangerous goods as well as the heavier weight and increased dimensions of the box.
“It may take us beyond the 11th January to work through the additional process for these bikes and we apologise for the extended lead time to your order. We will keep you updated on the progress in our FAQs.”
Canyon continued: “As we make these adjustments, we regret that orders and shipments from our valued customers in Northern Ireland cannot be placed at this time. We are working hard to implement processes that will enable you to order your new bike as soon as possible. Updates about this can be found in our FAQs and in the meantime, deliveries to Ireland and Great Britain are still possible.”
Canyon added: “Our dedicated UK customer service team are on standby to take your questions throughout this transitional period, so please feel free to reach out using our live chat feature or browse our FAQs. The team will also be taking care of all aftersales care including guarantee and warranty related queries as well as crash replacement and servicing. We continually strive to offer the best service levels in-house within the UK and we look forward to seeing you out on your new bike as soon as possible.”
Aaron Budd, UK head of sales and marketing at Canyon, explained in an email to road.cc the background to the decision to pause shipments from last Saturday until 11 January, saying that it was “to safeguard our customers from any ambiguity or doubt on the shipping process and ensure we could still get their bikes to them with confidence. A small window of disruption is necessary to make sure we can make some changes at our end to any open orders and we are all set to get this actioned very quickly in the New Year.
“For any customers who have an order in that was expected to ship before the 11th of January we are working to process these as a priority to minimise the lead time for their order, and our dedicated UK customer service team are on hand to answer any more queries in detail, should the customers need it,” he added.
“We have an excellent well-planned strategy in place and we’re extremely confident that as the situation becomes clearer we’ll be able to service the UK consumer better than ever.”
Rose Bikes puts complete stop on orders from UK and cancels existing ones
Meanwhile, another German brand, Rose Bikes, has said that it can no longer accept any orders at all from customers in the UK, and will cancel existing orders that had not been shipped prior to last Sunday.
It said: “Due to the Brexit and the withdrawal from the EU domestic market without a Free Trade Agreement from the 01.01.2021, we can no longer fulfil any orders from the UK. Already ordered goods, that can be shipped until 20.12.2020 will be send out. Orders that cannot be shipped until this date will be cancelled.
“If your goods can not be shipped, our customer support will contact you via e-mail. Unfortunately we feel compelled to not fulfil UK orders currently, we hope to be able to ship to our UK customers soon again. Thank you very much for understanding and for your loyalty and support.”
The company had said in September that it would only sell parts and accessories, rather than complete bikes, to customers here, although at that point it blamed the fact that “In the UK, bicycles are constructed differently than in the rest of Europe: The market standards and laws in Great Britain, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland clearly convey that the front brake lever must be mounted on the right-hand side of the handlebar and the rear brake lever on the left-hand side. For the rest of Europe, it is the exact opposite.”
> Rose Bikes publish statement explaining why they have stopped selling to the UK
At the time, it added: “With the technical complexity of our bikes increasing, we are facing the ever-growing challenge of being able to offer affordable Rose bikes with a high level of quality and safety. And because we want to shorten our delivery times for our customers, this summer we decided to gradually shut down the configuration of bikes, so that we are able to maintain our usual standards. Installing the brake cables and brake levers on the opposite side would require the type of special solution for the UK that we simply can’t realise right now.”
As we reported earlier this month, the uncertainty surrounding the UK’s future relationship with the EU, as well as global logistics issues resulting from the coronavirus pandemic, is already causing concern within the UK cycling industry, with Brompton warning that it may have to temporarily halt production at its West London factory due to parts being held up in the supply chain.
> UK port delays hit Brompton production as parts for its bikes get held up or cancelled






















122 thoughts on “Canyon pauses shipments to UK customers, blaming Brexit uncertainty”
Shouldn’t be too much of a
Shouldn’t be too much of a disruption. They’ve never got anything in stock anyway…
Canyon say they are still
Canyon say they are still accepting orders, but won’t be able to give an estimated delivery date. Who in their right mind would place an order, knowing that they will have no idea when or if it will be fulfilled??
From the main cycling brands,
From the main cycling brands, can you name a company that could give you a firm delivery date if you placed an order today, given the current situation? No, I thought not!
Well, this is Canyon after
Well, this is Canyon after all – shipping delays have been part and parcel of buying anything from them in the past few years.
And I see that Canyon £GB
And I see that Canyon £GB prices have gone up again. Welcome to the sunlit uplands
.
Aye, saw that. I contacted
Aye, saw that. I contacted Canyon about it as the difference between the UK and Irish website was approx £400-800ish for the Aeroad. All down to new customs/duties fees etc. Seemed a bit high?
Could be possible 17% duty +
Could be possible 17% duty + clearance fee + extra freight cost if significant border delay + adverse currency hedge when the arse falls out of the pound.
Good times
Good times
Drinfinity wrote:
Yes, they’re anticipating that some or all of those will happen.
If you ran a business in Germany why would you try shipping some of your limited stocks to the UK when you have customers in the EU states and others with which you can trade easily?
Food retail mag The Grocer (here) reports that hauliers are starting to refuse to ship to/from UK due to the hassle – many are paid per-mile (or km) and they don’t get paid for sitting in a queue for days on end. Even worse if you’re transporting liquid milk or fresh fruit and veg.
But apparently 800 of the drivers stuck in Kent will at least get a free meal thanks to some local Sikh volunteers:
https://www.kentonline.co.uk/news/national/sikh-volunteers-and-local-football-club-deliver-meals-to-stranded-lorry-drivers-19768/
The Guardian reports that a Stena ferry serving Belfast is being switched to run between Cherbourg and Rosslare. Perhaps try to get your Canyon despatched to the Republic of Ireland. 😉
There’s some optimism
There’s some optimism reported on Sky News about an EU trade deal. Let’s hope. I won’t be cancelling my Rejoin campaign materials quite yet.
As an EU citizen you are able
As an EU citizen you are able to buy from any website trading in the EU at the same price across the EU. This provides transparency as well as common consumer protection rights. Once outside the free market there is no transparency, overinflated pricing plus import duties, extra costs and rights? well, that depends.
It’s called taking the p@ss.
It’s called taking the p@ss. There are currently no customs fees or duties. Same thing happened all over Europe when the Euro was introduced, but of course the wonderful EU was, and is, in no way responsible!!
Mattleng1 wrote:
wait until th trade deal is done, the pound will stabilise and the prices will come back into line. At the moment they are including for import duties which may or may not be payable.
If there is no deal we will see the price of everything increasing and canyon will look cheap again.
Sterling has recovered a bit
Sterling has recovered a bit this afternoon on the news of a trade deal….1.6% or so -with a similar rise in the FTSE 250. That’s great for those who don’t lose their jobs through tier 4 shutdown which may limit any substantial Sterling gains….
Ta, thought that might also
Ta, thought that might also be the case. Will wait a bit now the deal has been agreed.
I spoke to Canyon again,
I spoke to Canyon again, following the UK-EU agreement on a trade deal. They said they were reviewing their prices again, as the price hike (in part) was to mitigate against a non-negotiated outcome. Watch this space I guess.
There are two Canyons for
There are two Canyons for sale at Cycle Exchange….if they are your size buy second hand! Good for the environment and your pocket! There’s also a Factor 02 that I could vouch for. Great bike.
https://www.cycleexchange.co.uk/collections/road-bikes?page=1&rb_snize_facet1=58cm%7C60cm%7C61cm%7Clarge
A friend told me last week
A friend told me last week that his company (import building materials) have already increased their quotes to domestic customers by 10% to cover the added paperwork due to Brexit. With ‘no deal’ he doesn’t know yet. Mind you there is still a whole week to sort that out.
Left hand: Canyon pauses
Left hand: Canyon pauses shipments to UK customers, blaming Brexit uncertainty
Right hand: Canyon refines Commuter range for 2021 with seven new models
Well, alrighty then…
This is going brilliantly.
This is going brilliantly. Now I just need to get some coupons and ask Corporal Jones if he’s got any brawn.
HarrogateSpa wrote:
Don’t panic!!
Their new city range looks
Their new city range looks great. The £1499 model is perfect aside from the fact the rear wheel can’t even be secured with an anti theft wheel skewer.
Whats the problem it’s what
Whats the problem it’s what we voted for……. oh wait.
They will sort it out but as others have said prices are already increased over other markets and it’s only going to get more expensive.
I’m in Spain and see the
I’m in Spain and see the other side of the story. One of my bicycle parts orders from the UK was just cancelled because of the mess at the border.
This was from a small shop, but I’ll probably wait until “Brexit is done” before I order anything from Wiggle again.
No?. More?. Red?. Tape?.
No?. More?. Red?. Tape?.
There’s some optimism
There’s some optimism reported on Sky News about an EU trade deal. Let’s hope. I won’t be cancelling my Rejoin campaign materials quite yet.
don’t they ship striaght from
don’t they ship straight from China? what does brexit have to do with goods coming from Asia? The same factory also produce Trek bikes, does brexit also affect Trek?
No. They come from Germany.
No. They come from Germany. Pretty much everything you own will come via an EU port. In this instance the bikes are built in Germany buy a German company
A few years ago a biking
A few years ago a biking Youtube channel did a bit on Canyon. As with lots of places they ship the frames and whatever else in from elsewhere, and then build the bikes in the German Factory so it can be labelled “made in the EU”. It also explained the non stock and long waits because they work more on a JIT system so will order the more popular frames and builds in and devote the manufacture to those for a month or so, then change to a different bike set for the next month.
Seems to be a similar trends
Seems to be a similar trends with other online retailers. If you try to order anything from Bike24, while there’s nothing official on their website all stock that I cared to check is currently being shown as not deliverable to the UK. As someone said, sunlit uplands indeed.
Couriers have stopped
Couriers have stopped accepting deliveries to the U.K. and returning those currently in transit as they can’t store the items while the border is closed to freight. That’s a seperate issue to the one Canyon cite in the article
I agree there are two
I agree there are two seperate reason for these delays/cancellations, but both stem from the same thing- piss poor leadership in general.
I got lucky with mine. It
I got lucky with mine. It shipped last Friday, got delayed, but last night showed as being in Tamworth. I suspect therefore it got stuck on a plane (a mate’s Canyon went to Tilbury via UPS so that seems to have been overland).
Mine is now due tomorrow. It may not arrive but at least it’s in country. It’s also £200 more on the website now.
How long do we have to wait
How long do we have to wait before we can have another referendum, on rejoining the EU?
(After all, the Scots seem to have a ‘once in a generation’ referendum on independence every couple of years).
I don’t think they woud have
I don’t think they woud have us back. Not with the current shower in charge.
Eh? When was there one before
Eh? When was there one before 2014?
We left. Get over it and get
We left. Get over it and get on with it!
we did. But tell me why we
we did. But tell me why we did it, what you see as being better in our lives next year – and I’ll consider your suggestions.
Tenuous link back to cycling: I was going to ask for some GP 5000s for my birthday next year – what are my chances?
Hello David. I know you will
Hello David. I know you will think this is a ‘get-out’, but I promise it is not. I hope you would agree that this means (discussion board) of attempting to have a sensible conversation about something so complex is not really practicable. I have my reasons for wanting the U.K. out of the E.U. I have reasons for wanting the E.U. disbanded completely, but this is not the place to try to explain. It really gets me sometimes that so many people (on both sides of the argument) will accept no other opinion than their own. It is done and we must move on and make the best of it. It is very odd to encounter so many people who wish for the U.K. to fail simply to be able to say, ‘I told you so’. This is a really strange attitude. By the way, in answer to one of your questions, I don’t see much being better in our lives next year (with regard to Brexit), but in the longer term there is absolutely no reason whatsoeverr why everything can’t be. Much of the World trades quite happily without being part of the E.U. Happy Christmas.
njblackadder wrote:
My big problem with the whole argument for and against Brexit is that the arguments for Brexit didn’t seem to make any sense due to lots of misinformation going round about the issue.
Purely out of interest, could you detail some of the more reputable reasons for wanting the UK out of the EU?
Sorry, but no. As I said,
Sorry, but no. As I said, this is not the place and I am not putting myself in the firing line (no further any way!!) because it is far too complicated a subject to be reduced to simplistic one-liners and sound bites. This is not an attack, but you have fallen in to the trap yourself by your statement on mis-information on the Pro-Brexit side. These people (all of them, U.K., E.U. the lot) are politicians, they lie for a living and mis-information was piled high on both sides throughout the whole thing and still is.
How about a couple of links
How about a couple of links to a more complicated, non-soundbite reasons for leaving the EU? I’m looking for information rather than an argument with you.
(Also not an attack, but you’re re-inforcing my observation that no-one knows decent arguments)
https://www.soilassociation
https://www.soilassociation.org/causes-campaigns/green-brexit/
https://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/183/22/675.2
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/03/uk-to-become-first-country-in-europe-to-ban-live-animal-exports
Rich_cb wrote:
Thanks.
Scrapping the Common Agricultural Policy makes sense to me (1st link).
I’m conflicted on whether the EU forces us to export live animals though. I can see how live produce is a clear indicator of freshness and there’s certainly lots of shenanigans that happens with meat products (e.g. stick it on a boat, irradiate it and bring it back into port with a nice new sell-by date). Personally, I’d be happier with much less meat production but then I don’t eat meat (excepting fish).
I think (not sure) the angle
I think (not sure) the angle here is that the UK probably couldn’t ban live exports as farmers here could complain to the EU.
I can see why the EU needs to allow the trade for smaller states with land borders. My suggestion would be to deal with the specifics: it’s the animal suffering we want to stop. The method of transportation isn’t relevant though the length of the journey and the conditions during it are.
I’d argue that these things can be fixed from the inside, and I think rich_cb is wrong about this, but I respect the thinking he brings. I just think that we’ll get told what we have to do if we want to sell into the EU, and go from small influence to none. Size matters in trade deals.
This debate was so polarising that theorising is no longer possible. We will only know with empirical hindsight who was right. So njblackadder, perhaps that’s where some of the comments come from.
Personally, I think it’s one of the bigger mistakes the UK has made, BSA bolt-action pointed directly at foot with live round in the chamber and an itchy forefinger at the ready. I blame the Conservative Party for being unable to debate this properly internally, and doing the whole thing as a self-preservation exercise. I regret that some of the politicians I least respect queued up to advocate for it without mentioning their own self interest, and I think truth was the first casualty. I’m not so blinkered that I can’t see that both sides weren’t exactly clean.
I also regret that this may cause the fracture of the UK, with significant risk of future decline for the northern part of it that I emigrated to 30 years ago.
But we have to make the best of what we have.
My understanding is that it
My understanding is that it wasn’t possible under EU law to ban live exports unilaterally.
It would require a decision at EU level.
I’ve been opposed to live exports for decades so the fact that we are bringing in a ban as soon as we are able to massively vindicated the vote to leave.
The UK has generally had higher animal welfare standards than the rest of the EU, hopefully we can now push those standards even higher.
CAP and CFP replacements can also hopefully concentrate on animal welfare and environmental improvement.
That sounds like good news to
That sounds like good news to me.
Interview with Boris Johnson
Interview with Boris Johnson in The Telegraph today.
He claims (pinch/bucket of salt alert) that the level playing field clauses will allow the UK to impose tariffs on the EU if our own animal welfare standards exceed theirs (as they already do).
This should allow the UK to strongly influence animal welfare in countries like Denmark and The Netherlands which have a large trade surplus with us in food and also have relatively poor animal welfare standards.
This is exactly the sort of benefit that I hoped Brexit would bring. Good news.
Rich_cb wrote:
This should allow the UK to strongly influence animal welfare in countries like Denmark and The Netherlands which have a large trade surplus with us in food and also have relatively poor animal welfare standards. This is exactly the sort of benefit that I hoped Brexit would bring. Good news.— Rich_cbIt won’t be a quick win, if it is a win at all.
Firstly, while British farmers and producers will claim they want high standards they also don’t want the ‘red tape’ (i.e. regulations, checks) that come with it. Politicians talk of red tape as if it’s some kind of hindrance but it’s what protects consumers and workers and prevents food poisoning and large scale fraud.
It seems a little strange that this drive for higher food standards comes so soon after 330 Tory MPs voted against a Lords amendment to the Agriculture Bill in October protecting food standards. Just 16 of them voted in favour.
And would you really believe Boris – a proven liar – on food standards after the last 12 months? Or the last 10 years of Conservatives being in power, with cuts to red tape and council services including Environmental Health and Trading Standards departments, the Environment Agency and NRW. Look at what’s happened with cycling since the pandemic – even with his cheerful bluster and Grant Shapps’ statements, many councils have ignored and in some cases actively worked against his ‘drive’ to get more people cycling as a result of the pandemic.
They will also have to convince consumers that the higher standards are worth paying for. UK supermarkets, which have the bulk of sales, has so far become something of a ‘race to the bottom’ with price competition, frequent deals and 2-for-1 type offers, most of which are paid for partly or wholly by the supplier.
Then we have the additional cost of customs checks from 1 January (a huge headache for anyone importing or exporting) that will be paid for in some way by everyone in the chain.
And those exporters may find that the higher standards are not worth anything in many of the countries they supply as they are in the EU and do not want to pay more for our ‘gold plating’.
As someone who works in this area, higher food standards, including animal welfare, farming practices and production/processing methods would be fantastic, but I’m sorry to say that I’m not optimistic. I wouldn’t get your hopes up.
The UK already has higher
The UK already has higher food standards than mandated by the EU. There is no need to hope for this, it’s a fact.
Whilst in the EU our farmers had to compete with EU farmers who could produce food more cheaply due to those lower standards.
Now we have a legal mechanism to prompt our neighbours to start doing things a bit better.
Lords Amendments etc are mostly just political theatre, designed so that people can say ‘you voted against X’. The proof will be in the actual legislation that the government introduces.
Basic comparison of standards here:
https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/sourcing/how-do-uk-food-standards-differ-from-the-rest-of-the-world/645635.article
Rich_cb wrote:
Most of those comparisons are with the USA, Australia or NZ while UK and EU are broadly very similar. Also, it only lists very specific chemicals and practices. There is a lot more to agriculture than those few items!
The UK’s organic standards for food are based on the EU standards, partly so that products can be traded across member states without additional certification processes each time it crosses a border. This may change for us after Brexit and depends very much on ministerial decisions. There is already much speculation about what will replace CAP for farm subsidies. I’d be very surprised if the UK government raised its general farming and food standards for no obvious benefit, particularly in the livestock sector, which has for a long time struggled to compete with imports, notably from South America and NZ.
If our standards are already so much higher then why is there so much imported meat in the shops? Why do so few UK customers insist on Red Tractor or grass-fed beef but are happy to buy cheap pork, mince or burgers regardless of country of origin?
Historically, buyers/legislators in a strong bargaining position will persuade others to reduce their own standards if supplying that market rather than increase their own standards to match, just as the big supermarkets do with their suppliers.
We will have to disagree on the value of the recent amendment voted down by the Conservatives. Many Tory MPs will vote for lower standards, some even encourage it as a competitive advantage and simplyfing business operations and ‘cutting red tape’. This of course has nothing to do with the big food companies and agribusinesses who pay some MPs large amounts of money – considerably more than their salary – as consultants.
There is a lot of imported
There is a lot of imported meat because the lower standards of the producers translate to lower prices.
Higher animal welfare practices will lead to more expensive meat, that’s fairly inevitable, we now have a legal mechanism to encourage our less conscientious competitors to improve their welfare standards benefiting British producers, and the animals of course.
Look at the welfare standards for pigs in Denmark compared to the UK.
Then ask yourself why that Danish bacon is cheaper.
Rich_cb wrote:
Then ask yourself why that Danish bacon is cheaper.— Rich_cbThat’s the wrong question. You should be asking:
Why should anyone spend more to buy British bacon instead of Danish?
Or: why haven’t the Danes improved their welfare standards when ours are higher (and our bacon therefore more expensive)?
Tightening your own standards in the expectation that another country will therefore raise its food standards voluntarily simply to get access to this market (which will be a fraction of that of its neighbours in the EU and those beyond) is, sadly, very likely to be wishful thinking.
It hasn’t worked until now so I cannot see how it will suddenly change when the price differential gets even wider. And Boris Johnson talking about it to The Telegraph on Boxing Day will mean absolutely nothing when everyone gets back to reality and getting with business.
As I clearly pointed out in
As I clearly pointed out in my previous posts we now have a legal mechanism to place tariffs on EU imports if they diverge from our welfare standards.
That ability will allow us to place pressure on countries to raise their welfare standards.
The UK receives 2 thirds of all Danish pork exports. Is that significant enough for you?
If 2 thirds of your product goes to just one country and that country starts asking you to change your practice or face tariffs what would you do?
The reason people should pay more for higher welfare meat is because it is higher welfare meat. It’s as simple as that.
Look at the transformation of the egg market. It wasn’t long ago that battery eggs were the standard but now it is free range.
It costs more but once people are aware of the differences they are willing to pay more.
The same can happen with pork and other meats.
Brexit gives us the opportunity to drive animal welfare standards higher across Europe.
Rich_cb wrote:
Wishful thinking, I suspect.
Maybe people are paying a few pence more than they were for 6 eggs (and isn’t that due to EU rules?) but in contrast there has been significant growth in intensive poultry farming for meat, with its poor welfare standards and significant environmental impact.
Just because the consumer should pay more for something doesn’t mean that they will; and you seem to have a unwavering faith in this government’s desire for higher food standards that appears to contradict their actions so far.
People have been campaigning for better welfare and production standards for decades yet progress has been painfully slow. We will have a big enough mountain to climb just getting through this pandemic and resuscitating the UK economy before we even consider a pointless ‘pork war’ with Denmark. In many ways Brexit is only going to make that harder, not easier.
The government have banned
The government have banned live exports as soon as they were legally able to do so upon leaving the EU transition period.
A change that was impossible to make whilst in the EU coming into force almost immediately after the transition period ends.
Reform of agriculture policy within the EU is an almost impossible task. Have a read of some of the comments made by negotiators around the latest CAP reform.
Outside the EU we can change regulations as we see fit and, crucially, pressurise other countries to follow suit using economic leverage. We were unable to apply that leverage whilst in the EU.
If you think improving animal welfare is “pointless” then clearly reforms aren’t going to appeal to you but just take a second and familiarise yourself with the conditions on Danish intensive pork farms. Then reconsider whether it’s “pointless” to try and improve those conditions.
As battery eggs are still freely available in supermarkets I’m not entirely sure how you think EU rules (which ones?) have any played a part in the public switching to free range?
Rich_cb wrote:
I didn’t say that and I don’t appreciate you trying to twist my words.
As I said before, we will have to disagree since we appear to be looking at it from different perspectives and have differing ideas of this government’s likely intentions. You also seem to be interested mainly in animal welfare but as I said before there is far more in food production than that.
Perhaps I’ll be proved wrong (and will be glad if that’s the case) but only time will tell…
I stated that we could use
I stated that we could use our new legal powers to pressurise Denmark into raising their welfare standards, this was your response:
If you didn’t want it to seem that you considered raising animal welfare standards to be pointless then perhaps you should have chosen your words more carefully.
The government have banned live exports at the first legal opportunity and animal welfare has been included in the ‘level playing field’ clauses at our insistence. This is good evidence that the government will prioritise animal welfare.
We are now in a far stronger position to raise animal welfare standards across the continent than we were whilst part of the EU. Hopefully this government and subsequent governments can help improve the conditions for animals across the continent.
Rich_cb wrote:
Sorry, but your posts just read like a Tory party press release.
In reality we have withdrawn ourselves from the influential position we had in Europe are likely to be in a weaker position regarding laws made on the continent than since the 1970s. And when we have a government that is not particularly interested in raising food standards I can’t see why they would put energy into it.
If you’re really so bothered about animal welfare then don’t eat them.
Have we now banned live
Have we now banned live animal exports?
Could we do that in the EU?
Can we now impose tariffs on countries with lower animal welfare standards?
Could we do that within the EU?
Tell me again about all this influence we gained from being a member…
Rich_cb wrote:
If you have to ask then you’ve obviously been asleep for the last 40 years. Though it looks like you’re just trolling now. Zzzzzz…..
Gets corrected multiple times
Gets corrected multiple times and then starts the ad hominems.
Well played…
Hello Rich. The type of
Hello Rich. The type of response you are recieving and the tone being used is exactly why I didn’t bother attempting to put my case to all those ‘demanding’ that I provide reasons to them for my position – it is utterly pointless. I accepted long ago that I am inferior intellectually and morally to these kind of people, who obviously are always correct in their assumptions and opinions.
I’m nothing if not stubborn
I’m nothing if not stubborn so I quite enjoy educating the average ‘well informed’ Remain voter.
Rich_cb wrote:
I think it’s the word ‘educating’ that should be in quotes, since you’ve failed so far.
There is plenty of room for educating people on both sides of the Brexit divide but I’m sure your arrogant stance means that you won’t want to admit that.
Did you not learn that, in
Did you not learn that, in fact, some EU countries are heavily dependent on the UK for their meat exports?
Did you not learn that, in fact, the UK has higher animal welfare standards than the EU?
Consider yourself educated.
You’re welcome.
Good luck with your continued
Good luck with your continued battle Rich. I’ve given up responding.
Rich_cb wrote:
We had a legal mechanism before Brexit – via EU committees, like this one, currently looking at live export welfare:
https://emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/emeeting/committee/en/agenda/202010/ANIT?meeting=ANIT-2020-1029_1&session=10-29-14-00
Whilst there’s a slim chance a tariff on bacon might encourage higher standards for pigs – I’m not sure we’re going to be able to do much about mink fur farms with that approach.
There was a mechanism but,
There was a mechanism but, let’s be honest, it didn’t work.
Any agricultural reform inside the EU is incredibly difficult. Have a look at the history of CAP reform. It’s not been a smooth process.
As the largest market for certain products (eg Danish pork) we now have far more influence on the conditions that those products are produced in than we would ever have had within the EU.
Mink farms are banned in the UK but not in the EU so our influence on that trade is likely to the same whether in or out of the EU.
Rich_cb wrote:
Well, it kind of did work – albeit slowly, as is the process of any large committee. There are numerous examples of where higher standards have been fought for and implemented under EU law. In fact, much of the leave argument is precisely because they don’t like the EU telling them what to do. It can’t work and not work at the same time.
But hey-ho, maybe things will get better – I guess we’ll find out in time. Now – back to bikes!
Fair point, but this works
Fair point, but this works both ways. I don’t hear much to actually inform me of what is so good about the E.U. and never have in my entire adult life (all 38 years of it). I don’t have any links. I don’t feel the need to justify my thoughts and feelings to anyone else. I do not say this with any animosity at all, it’s just the way it is. If we met in person, then perhaps I would be happy to discuss my thoughts on the matter, but not here. I’m a bit tired of the whole thing now, but (unfortunately) do allow myself to get wound up sometimes by the insults directed at Pro Brexit folks by those who (on the face of it) seem so full of themselves and their ‘right on’ views that they come across as just arrogant and naive fools (this is not directed at you, by the way). My problems with the E.U. are probably more to do with the organisation itself rather than anything else. I am a great believer in free trade and friendly cooperation wherever possible, but do not seee the need for a huge political body to ‘look after’ this. More politicians = more lies and corruption; they are simply not needed. Have a happy Christmas and healthy and prosperous New Year.
The simplest pro-EU argument
The simplest pro-EU argument is to keep frictionless trade with our nearest neighbours which is not really an endorsement of the EU per se (I have mixed feelings about the EU as an organisation).
My simplistic way of looking at it was that we faced a choice between “keep things as they are” and “change things” and the public reasons behind wanting to “change things” seemed to be hidden or based on made up facts designed to ellicit an emotional response (e.g. giving money to the NHS) though I’m not going to sing the praises of the pro-EU campaign either. I (naively) would expect that a campaign to change things would have clear, measurable outcomes so that people could discuss the advantages.
Also:
Also:
1. Having a human rights framework that even the UK government couldn’t ignore, thus giving us more rights than we’d likely have had without.
2. Funding and EU wide cooperation on scientific and medical research (declaration of interest: I used to work on some of it).
3. The opportunity to travel and work throughout the EU, with reciprocal rights on benefits and healthcare, without having to arrange visas etc.
4. An invisible-enough border that was a huge help in the peace deal in Northern Ireland.
There are counter-arguments,
There are counter-arguments, of course:
1. Whilst the human rights framework is broadly positive, it was designed for and has been more useful to citizens of former European dictatorships rather than the UK whose criminal laws evolved from the principle of habaeus corpus long before many of Europe’s current nation states took on their current guises. Within my political lifetime these countries have included Spain, Portugal, Greece, the Visegrad states, and then the Baltic States…
2. UK R&D through it’s network of world-class universities* has always been strong, and I’d argue that we gave at least as much as we benefitted from. I doubt that t his will stop. It will be done outside the framework of the EU. BTW, I don’t see too many EU universities in the global top 100 – and less in the top 50 (*one of the few things in the UK which are genuinely world class);
3. Agreed. I’m all for the free movement of labour, but since Lisbon and the aborted European Constitution this has been the free movement of people and Britain and latterly and to a lesser extent Germany became the safety valve for rampant, Euro inflicted unemployment in the EU’s peripheries. Of course, the UK benefits from this and many of the brightest and best head this way for work, but successive UK governments have not created the housing, school-places, built enough hospitals and increased the capacity of our infrastructure to house 3-400,000 extra citizens every year for the past decade of so. That’s a city the size of Newcastle every year – and in this respect those Governments must take their share of the responsibility for the outcome of the 2016 referendum;
4. Agree on the Irish border too. But it was only Theresa May’s agreement to sequencing; i.e. signing a withdrawal agreement before a trade deal that out this border in any doubt. This was foreseen at the time and May ignored it. If the two had been negotiated in parallel, this would could have been avoided.
Wow…politics, cycling and a few post ride and dinner beers don’t mix – and I don’t entirely disagree with you….it’s a shame it had to come to this. I studied history and latterly political science and learned from the mid-1990s referendums held throughout Europe that referendums don’t solve anything: they divide societies more or less down the middle on issues where there is no common ground – opening what political scientists call cleavages. Some of these cleavages lie atop other cleavages and run very deep and take a long time to heal.
Right…where are the mince pies…
hawkinspeter wrote:
Also a strong EU is a worthwhile counterbalance to significant less benign superpowers in the world.
You can certainly make enviromental arguments against global business and the endless transporting of stuff and arguably even against persuing economic growth as this is generally supported by ever increasing consumerism, which is not environmentally sustainable. It’s amazing that the economy was always more important than the certain effects of climate change which will have a substantial impact on their entire population, but that a disease which kills approximately 1% of the population, and those mainly in the old is enough to stop the economy everywhere.
Against this I would say there are a number of multinational corporations strong enough to ignore most individual countires but the strength of the EU is sufficient to take action against them. Weaker international cooperation by governments gives greater power to these businesses which care primarily about their shareholders.
However environmental concerns as raised above and relating to ever expanding consumerism were not the central pillar of the leave campagin, instead it was soveriegnty (the UK being on the winning side in somewhere around 90% of EU votes), freedom of movement and fish.
I’m not sure that the
I’m not sure that the preservation of our environment requires the federal, political, and fiscal union of Europe’s nation states to achieve it.
Okay – Europe speaking as one would give it greater volume on the world stage, but it rarely speaks as one and when it does it is in the language of lowest common denominator platitudes. And this is because Europe’s member states do not agree with each other on key issues such as power supply, with certain countries eschewing lower carbon forms of energy such as nuclear (controvertial, I admit) in favour of coal-and-gas-fired power: nothwithstanding that the gas is supplied by a beligerent Russia.
The UK has been at the forefront of on environmental issues – both globally and within Europe. It has adopted solar and offshore wind enthusiastically and with great effect – backed by – indeed financed by it’s world-leading finance sector. I do not see this changing because we’re losing our yellow star on a blue flag.
….Lastly, when it comes to multinationals – the EU would need increased political and fiscal integration to present a more united front against multinationals. At the moment multinationals treaty shop between EU member states to ensure their goods and services have low fiscal friction – Ireland, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands being favoured destinations. It goes without saying that a common rate of corporation and other taxes throws these states under the bus – not that I care about that and nor should you. The German constitutional courts are the major brake on monetary and fiscal union – ironically.
Interestingly, one of the biggest environmental scandals of late involving a multinational was over VWAG vehicle emissions – and I can’t recall any significant sanction from the EU – yet. They have, of course, bolted the door a little belatedly by introducing emissions criteria with fines for non-compliance starting in 2021-2, I think – but the most vociferous response to VWAG’s cheating came from the US – it’s government hammered VWAG and its consumers have responded with class actions: good old Anglo-Saxon law!
Why don’t you just list your
Why don’t you just list your top ten reasons for leaving the EU – and the benefits. There must be some?
Why don’t you try addressing
Why don’t you try addressing people in a civil manner and stop assuming your opinions are correct. That is all they are after all, opinions. I do not have to justify anything to you, or anyone else. Moreover, I couldn’t give a monkey’s whether you agree or not. My opinions are based on research and hard won experience , hopefully the same applies to yours.
njblackadder wrote:
Have you genuinely encountered anyone like this? I’ve only ever heard it from brexit voters accusingly to anyone expressing that they are worried about the consequences of Brexit.
David9694 wrote:
Sunlit upland
Taking back control
Fed up of experts
Sovrinty
Blue pass ports
Vacuum cleaners
NHS
Aren’t you feeling the benefits yet?…..
njblackadder wrote:
Nearly four years on it still confounds me why Brexiteers still think this is in any way a valid argument. When we joined (with a far higher pro vote), did they say, “we’ve joined, we’ll get over it and get on with it?” No, they whined about it for over forty years and turned it into a fatal distraction for several governments. I’ve yet to find the section in my “How Democracy Works” handbook where it says that after a single non-bindng narrow vote one has to accept the outcome as set in stone for eternity.
We did not join with a vote,
We did not join with a vote, but were taken in illegally by Edward Heath. The vote occurred afterwards. I am sure you will have an answer that disagrees though. Please look up the English (latterly UK) Bill of Rights of 1689 and how it relates to Britain’s initial entry into the Common Market. I suggest you study your handbooks a little more closely and get your facts right before criticizing others.
njblackadder wrote:
Silly man, you know nothing of the law of the UK. There is a convention that a constitutional change should be ratified by referendum or election, but there is no law, as we do not have a written constitution, and therefore it was not illegal. A lot of very stupid people have tried to claim it was illegal, but the Eurpoean Communities Act 1972 was passed by both houses of Parliament and given Royal Assent by Her Majesty on October 17th 1972. That’s not illegal, sorry.
This is exactly what I was
This is exactly what I was referring to with my earlier posts. The arrogance is breath-taking. You have now stooped to personal insults because you believe you know it all. I can assure you that I am not a ‘silly man’, nor am I stupid. At no point did I say joining was illegal because of the lack of a precursor vote. I pointed out that the vote you quoted as taking us into the Common Market was actually held after we had joined and was not held to ask whether the UK should join. I did ask you to look at the Bill of Rights, which you don’t appear to have done. If you do examine the Bill of Rights you will find that joining the Common Market contravenes it. There is also the matter of the ‘bribe’ paid to Edward Heath. I don’t suppose you have the decency to apologise for insulting me. I am now finished with this sorry ‘debate’. You have simply confirmed what I described earlier. Bye, bye.
njblackadder wrote:
I certainly will not apologise for insulting you, you deserve all the insults coming your way. You claimed that the decision to join the Common Market was illegal, I have shown you that it was entirely legal under the law of the UK, i.e. it was ratified by both Houses of Parliament and given Royal Assent, and yet you persist in claiming that it contravenes UK law. It didn’t, and doesn’t. If it’s ratified by both houses and Her Majesty, it cannot be. Do you actually ride a bike by the way, or are you just an insane person who spews drivel over any site that dares disagree with your ill-informed and entirely erroneous opinion? You are a silly man and very stupid. Hope you stick to your promise to stay away now, it would be much appreciated.
I will make just a couple
I will make just a couple more comments, then uphold my promise to say no more. As you would appreciate me staying away, it seems only right to not do so immediately. Please do not take my next remark as a threat – it is not. I would be willing to bet a substantial sum that you would not speak to me (or probably anyone else) in the manner you have here in ‘real life’. You seem to be represenative of the intolerant, self-obsessed and self-appointed ‘intelligent elite’ and obviously the crticism you make of me for ‘spewing drivel’ over anyone who disagrees with me is quite acceptable as a trait in yourself. It is not possible to have an ‘erroneous opinion’ – BY THE WAY.
The Bill of Rights – you still have no idea what it says have you?
njblackadder wrote:
I knew you wouldn’t keep your promise, your sort never can. Just for your information, yes I have read the 1689 Bill of Rights and its primary requirement is that laws may not be enacted without the consent of the people through their duly elected Parliament. It’s not difficult to understand if you engage whatever brain you may have. Now please do “uphold your promise to say no more”, there’s a good chap.
You don’t have to accept it
You don’t have to accept it for eternity but you do have to accept it initially.
Loser’s consent is an integral part of a functioning democracy.
Rich_cb wrote:
“There could be unstoppable demand for a re-run of the EU referendum if Remain wins by a narrow margin on 23 June, UKIP leader Nigel Farage has said. ‘In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.'” – BBC News, May 17th, 2016
So your side wouldn’t have accepted a 52-48 loss against them, but as you won by 52-48, the losers must consent? Jesus, do you people actually listen to yourselves?
Firstly, please don’t assume
Firstly, please don’t assume Nigel Farage speaks for all Leave voters.
We have no idea how the Leave campaign would have responded to losing by a mere 1 million votes as it didn’t happen.
We know exactly how the Remain campaign reacted, there was a concerted effort to stop Brexit ever happening. That was most certainly not an example of Loser’s Consent.
Loser’s Consent is an integral part of a functioning democracy. Without it democracy simply does not function. If you want to live in a democracy then Loser’s Consent is part of the bargain.
Rich_cb wrote:
You keep saying “losers’ consent” as if this has some legal or philosophical standing, it does not. It implies that after a vote those who were on the losing side should stop campaigning for their beliefs. Can you not see how that would throttle the entire democratic process? In a democracy, those who are outvoted have every right to continue to campaign to reverse whatever vote they lost – just as those who lost a democratic vote in 1975 did for forty tiresome years.
Loser’s Consent is a well
Loser’s Consent is a well established democratic principle.
A quick Google should be enough to familiarise yourself with the concept.
It does not imply that you should stop campaigning.
It does require the losing side to accept the result and to allow the result of the vote to take place.
Rich_cb wrote:
It just isn’t a “well established democratic principle” and a quick Google yourself would show you it’s something that wasn’t even mentioned, in thousands of years of democratic philosophy, before the Bush/Gore election in 2000. Do prove me wrong if you can.
I do enjoy conversing with
I do enjoy conversing with the ‘well informed’ Remain voters.
You’re wrong.
Here’s an article from 1993 which itself references the principle in articles from the 1960s.
Accepting the Election Outcome: The Effect of Participation on Losers’ Consent
Richard Nadeau and Andre Blais
British Journal of Political Science
Vol. 23, No. 4 (Oct., 1993), pp. 553-563 (11 pages)
Published By: Cambridge University Press
https://www.jstor.org/stable/194217
References:
‘Benjamin Ginsberg and Robert Weissberg. ‘Elections and the Mobilization of Group Support’, American Journal of Political Science, 22 (1978), 31-55. p. 34.
For similar statements, see E. E. Schattschneider, The Semi Sovereign People: A Realistic’s View of Democracy in America (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1960); David Easton, A System Aalysis of Political Life (New York: Wiley, 1965); Jack Dennis, ‘Support for the Institution of Elections in the Mass Public’, American Political Science Review, 64 (1970), 819-36; Allan J. Cigler and Russell Getter, ‘Confict Reduction in the Post-Election Period: A Test of the Depolarization Thesis, Western Political Quarterly, 30 (1977), 363-76: Steven E. Finkel, “Reciprocal Effects of Participation and Political Eficacy: A Panel Analysis”, American Journal of Political Science
Rich_cb wrote:
You appear to be confusing “a well established principle” with “something someone once said.” They’re not quite the same thing.
You seem to be backtracking
You seem to be backtracking somewhat from your claim that it was never mentioned before the year 2000?
Anyway here is a discussion of the principle of loser’s consent in the Federalist Papers.
https://cses.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/LoewenBlais2006.pdf
If the principle has been discussed for over 250 years then I think it can be safely described as ‘well established’.
Consider yourself proven wrong.
Rich_cb wrote:
No, I absolutely concede you are right, it has been discussed prior to 2000, I was wrong. However, the evidence you provide does not show that it has been discussed for 250 years, it shows that some people have applied it to events of 250 years ago. Again, not the same thing. In any event, the fact that some people have said something for any amount of time does not make it a “well established principle.” Many Greco-Roman philosophers defended the principles of slavery, does the fact that people have been talking about something for 2000 years mean that we must accept said principles now? I’m afraid you simply cannot support your argument, and it’s not one that even the sillest of Brexiteers have raised, as far as I’m aware. But congratulations on being really, really desperate to be right, everyone likes a trier. However, enough time wasted on your nonsense. Cheerio!
The Federalist Papers are a
The Federalist Papers are a seminal work, they’ve been continuously discussed since they were published.
They contain the principle of loser’s consent so it’s entirely safe to assume that principle has been discussed regularly for the last quarter of a century.
Amusingly you seem to have taken being proved wrong quite badly.
Quite fitting really.
“For sure we were on the
“For sure we were on the losing side; not so sure it was the wrong side” – Mal Reynolds (paraphrased)
Time to end this arrogance
Time to end this arrogance towards customers. If Canyon do not wish to sell their bikes in the UK then buy from someone else.
The good value price angle of Canyon is being erroded.
This is EU strong arm rubbish, similar to the full blockage of UK flights because we have a fantastic bio science industry here which recognised the new strain and informed everyone who didnt know about it. All the countries who blocked our flights will also have the new strain, they just dont know it yet!
All rather suggests Brexit
All rather suggests Brexit (100% our thing, remember) isn’t benefiting anyone right now. What retailer wants all the “where’s my order?” hassle?
Apart from Brompton, is there any at-scale bike manufacturing in this country?
Very true, we are definiately
Very true, we are definiately at the “pain” stage of the transition.
Alternatively we need to buy from other markets, such as Japan who have a formal agreement with us. Fuji bike anyone?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Japanese_bicycle_brands_and_manufacturers
996ducati wrote:
(I) great, let’s have more container ships crossing the whole of the globe;
(ii) there are other stages? Oh, you mean like “more pain”, “I’m fed up with this”… “why are we doing this?”, “whose idea was this?”
Because Canyon bikes aren’t
Because Canyon bikes aren’t shipped from the Far East at any point…
I think Canyon do wish to
I think Canyon do wish to sell their bikes here but a bunch of knuckledraggers and flagshaggers decided to vote for something other than Britain’s Got Talent for the first time in their lives. They got all whipped up by some blokes trying to short the £. Facebook helped out and then one gammon got so foamy he assassinated an MP. A functional government would have stopped the referendum at that point seeing as one side had gone full terrorist, but no they let it go ahead. MPs living in fear of getting murdered by another pensioner with a pair of wraparounds and a polo shirt acquiesced and humoured said knuckledraggers and flag shaggers.
TLDR it’s not the EUs fault, it’s the gammon
David9694 wrote:
Is there much bike manufacturing at-scale in the EU? Take Canyon for example, frames and just about everything else manufactured in the Far East. Assembled in Germany.
Look bikes is probably the
Look bikes is probably the closest although I believe the frames are created in Algiers or similar North Africa state. And the Italian brands maybe although most are probably the same as Canyon with key components sourced from the far east.
I think the largest brand
I think the largest brand actually making frames in the EU is Kross.
https://kross.eu/en/
You do remember a month or
You do remember a month or two ago when we blocked the Danes from coming into this country because they had detected the disease in their Minks and it hadn’t even been proven to move to humans but we blocked them to be safe.
Then our government release data which shows a variant which is apparently more spreadable and THEY decide to move to an unheard of tier 4 in less then 24 hours, but you expect the other countries in the world to just go, “oh well, no problems here, come in, all our welcome”.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
if only we’d done that ourselves back in February. Still, easy to say now.
The EU is a union of
The EU is a union of democratic nations that trade together under a framework of law and regulations. The EU has always been very clear on this. There is no ‘strong arm rubbish’. The EU applies the law. In fact this was one of the main issues brexthickers had – EU law. So now that the EU is applying and abiding by its laws and regulation on trade and is protecting its own borders (borders being another brexthick unicorn) the UK shouldn’t be complaining. Especially as the UK no longer has any say in the matter. Unfortunately, whinging, complaining and blaming the EU seems to be ingrained in the UK psyche.
You should take a long, hard
You should take a long, hard look at yourself. Why do you think it is acceptable to throw insults at me without knowing the first thing about me? Without ever having discussed anything, let alone Brexit, with me? It seems to be the way of those who are in favour of the E.U. that they are too arrogant to believe that any other way or opinion is possible and that anyone who believes that it is, must be stupid, racist, or both. Happy Christmas.
The english psyche you mean ?
The english psyche you mean ?
I have two Canyons, love them
I have two Canyons, love them both, and for a couple of years now I have been worried on a “what would I replace them with if I had to” basis as they no longer sell what i want. The spec level was awesome for the price and this is nowhere near the case any more.
Fuck brexit.
Fuck brexit and everyone who promoted it and voted for it. Fuck them all.
Merry Christmas to you too!
Merry Christmas to you too!
Pretty much have to ban live
Pretty much have to ban live animal exports from the UK with the time it’s taking to get through the ports now.
Much of the arguments for leaving the EU from the leave side are non-specific ‘we could do things differently’ type arguments.
However, I would question the overall benefits of doing something differently in isolation, rather than instigating wider change through membership of a union.
It would be interesting to find out how many times the UK tabled a motion at the EU parliament to ban live animal exports.
Rose might resume once
Rose might resume once details of how the last minute deal is going to work are sorted, but smaller suppliers will have difficulties.
https://www.dutchbikebits.com/shipping
“Unfortunately, we will not be able to send parcels to the UK from mid December 2020 onward. Quite apart from uncertainty surrounding the shipping cost, taxation etc. after that time, there is also a problem caused by the British government deciding to impose a unique taxation regime which will require every company in the world in every country in the world outside the UK which exports to the UK to apply and collect British taxes on behalf of the British government. For providing this service they intend to charge a fee […] Therefore from mid December 2020 onward we ship to every country in the world… except the UK.”
Not that I have any skin in
Not that I have any skin in this game, I don’t own a Canyon and am not contemplating buying one, but it seems strange that they have stopped all shipments to NI. As far as I understood NI is still in the Single Market. Perhaps the details of the ‘deal’ have not reached the good burgers of Koblenz?
It’s quite possible that
It’s quite possible that their shipping route to NI involved transit through the rest of the UK, and they can’t easily switch to route around it, though.
mdavidford wrote:
any trouble getting canyons to Ireland? I doubt they are flown into Dublin
Fair point…and I’d agree
Fair point…and I’d agree with you if they were doing it by themselves, but if they are using DHL/FedEx or any other international freight company then this would be sorted out for them, surely? And then it depends whether the good is being delivered by truck (with multiple stop-offs in the UK en route – hence the delay) or by plane.