inspire


BUSINESS WEST – CONNECTING BUSINESSES COMMENT & OPINION Keeping you up-to-date with the latest political policies and decisions that affect South West businesses


College’s success will be good for all


By Ian Larrard, Director, Swindon & Wiltshire Initiative


In light of the announcement that Swindon College is on the Government’s Institute of Technology shortlist, I’m delighted at how the bid is shaping up. First announced in 2016, the Government has made £170m available to existing education providers such as FE colleges to establish new Institutes of Technology (IoT) across England. Due to open their doors in 2020, Government’s thinking is to develop a distinct, technical educational offering at further and higher levels (levels 4-7), as part of a broader STEM skills agenda. In addition to specialist technical skills


and training, Institutes will offer management training such as project management. The Swindon IoT has submitted a bid based on three specialisms – advanced engineering & manufacturing, digital and life sciences. Despite tough competition, Swindon


College is one of 16 established further education providers out of 35 nationwide to be progressed to stage two of the bidding process. This was after approximately 100 expressions of interest were originally submitted. I am hopeful that Swindon stands in good


stead in terms of achieving Institute of Technology status, judging by the Government’s eligibility criteria. As mentioned, IoT’s will need to be established education providers with the managerial and administrative influence to successfully deliver such an ambitious project. Furthermore, successful IoT’s need


‘anchor employers’ who will need to commit to providing input and support to the development of the necessary courses especially in STEM related subjects that clearly match business needs. This is an exciting development for the


town, which given youth unemployment rates is desperately needed. Not only will an IoT help bridge skills gaps for employers, it will boost the confidence of our young people – improving awareness of STEM career pathways in Swindon and creating parity of aspiration between academic and technical education.


20 insight JULY/AUGUST 2018


Brexit will be logistical nightmare for trading across the Channel


By Rohan Roy Policy Assistant, Business West


Three of the UK’s largest Chambers of Commerce – London Chamber of Commerce Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce and Business West – converged on Folkestone recently, to meet with Eurotunnel public affairs chief John Keefe to gain clarity on the logistical issues posed by Brexit. As the main trade artery between the UK and continental Europe, Eurotunnel accounts for around 25% of all trade goods, and is worth around €115bn to the UK economy. The 150km stretch of tunnel sees eight freight trains depart each and every hour, with each crossing taking 35 minutes. Such frequency makes Eurotunnel practically the only transit route for time bound and high value goods from the UK – its scale is mindboggling. After talking us through some


of the vital statistics, John took us to see the tunnel in action. From the control centre we got an aerial view of the operation functioning like a well-oiled machine. A continuous supply of trucks came off the M20, processing their loads in 15 seconds and proceeding to drive on to the enormous carriages that ship the trucks across the Channel. The process was seamless, but as John noted, fragile. The system is so finely tuned that it is highly


Republic of Ireland, the UK also shares a land border with France, with each country having a border on both sides of the Eurotunnel crossing. Although Government has stated in the past


that it will not put up checks between Britain and the EU, it only has power to do this for imports. If the UK were to leave the Customs Union, it would be incumbent upon France to carry out customs checks on its border at the mouth of the Eurotunnel in Kent. This would extend the current processing time from 15 seconds to a best-case-scenario of a minute and a half. Besides the fact that this would damage trade, there is simply not enough physical space on the UK side to handle such volumes. Finishing the talk, John went through the


‘Eurotunnel accounts for around 25 per cent of all trade goods’


options that he feels the Brexit negotiators face. According to John, both options being discussed by the British government, a ‘customs partnership’ and ‘maximum facilitation’ would raise the processing time of goods to intolerable levels. In his words, a customs partnership would be ‘incredibly complicated’, particularly when considering SMEs and sub-contractors due to the added layers of bureaucracy and complexity. As for maximum facilitation or ‘max-fac’ as it is known,


sensitive to disruption at any level. This was shown in summer 2015, when the migrant crisis and strikes in Calais led to a slowdown in processing time, creating long queues backing onto the M20. Since then Government has invested hundreds of millions of pounds in security infrastructure to prevent a repeat. However, it is unlikely that this will help mitigate problems the UK’s departure from the EU might create. Contrary to the oft-repeated assertion that the UK’s only land border with the EU is the


this will simply not be ready in time. Max-fac will require Customs Declaration Service (CDS) technology, which is nowhere near ready. Needless to say, both options require huge investments in technological and physical infrastructure from the British government. So far these have not been made, significantly increasing the danger to the economy of UK withdrawal from the Customs Union. It is imperative that Government responds to


these urgent concerns. It is high time that exporters and companies involved in complex supply-chains receive some certainty; its lack is damaging the economy and the reputation of the UK.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36