EU Referendum


Brexit: an absence of understanding


22/06/2021




On 1 February 2017, I wrote this on the problems facing the horseracing industry after Brexit. At the time I knew precious little about the industry, and cared less. To my recollection, I've only ever been to a horse race once in my life, and never felt the need to repeat the experience.

Nonetheless, I managed to get on top of the issue, reviewing the EU legislation involved and correctly predicting that the Tripartite Agreement between France, Ireland and the UK (implemented by an EU Directive) was at risk, and that its loss would create considerable difficulties.

As he so often did, Booker followed up a few days later in his own columns, which I then reviewed on the Sunday of publication.

The archived piece seems to have been truncated somewhat but, about 18 months later, Booker referred to it in another piece, which carried a more explicit headline, with the text warning of the lapse of the tripartite agreement.

This piece was couched in terms of a no-deal Brexit, but in the meantime I had been doing multiple follow-up pieces of my own, including this one, which made it pretty clear that the industry was going to have a hard time with Brexit, deal or no deal.

There were other few voices warning of problems to come, most of which I think I picked up, such as this, which had John Melville, superintending veterinary inspector at the Irish Department of Agriculture warning that Brexit presented "an absolute nightmare scenario".

At that time, I took the warning further, remarking that this "nightmare scenario" was not only about to hit the sport horse and racing industries, but also agriculture and food processing. And even if it started now, I stated, and could afford the enormous costs and turmoil that the changes will bring, there is no time to put the infrastructure in place, or to recruit and train the specialist staff.

But what struck me at the time was the almost complete absence of any discourse within the industry, which seemed oblivious to the coming threat – or perhaps fostering the unrealistic expectation that everything would be alright on the night.

As we know, though, it wasn't alright on the night and, to give it its due, the BBC was relatively quick off the mark, with a piece in January of this year retailing the effects of Brexit on a stable owner in East Yorkshire.

Although it was a pretty tepid piece, I reviewed it a few days after publication, noting that the complaints from stable owner, Rachael Williams, were all to predictable and, in fact, had been predicted on my blog.

I also wrote this piece a few days later, commenting that there were "strong indications" that there had been significant "head-in-the-sand" behaviour exhibited by some business leaders and their trade bodies, with entirely unrealistic expectations of the post-Brexit/transition period.

That was certainly the case with the equine sports sector and I had to acknowledge being perplexed by the extraordinarily limited coverage on the problems, most of which had centred around the impact on the Irish end of the business.

But now, six months into the year, with the TCA fully in force, we have a "no shit Sherlock!" moment brought to us bt the BBC, with a web headline: "Brexit: Horse racing hit by rules over exports".

The text appears to indicate that "industry figures" have at last woken up to the scale of the problem, with the British Horseracing Authority finding that, from January-February 2021, compared to January-February 2020, British-trained runners in races in the EU fell by 67 percent, compared to a 23 percent reduction in races across the rest of the world.

EU-trained runners in GB races have fallen by 92 percent, with a 93 reduction reduction in runners from Ireland and 89 percent from Northern Ireland. Thoroughbred Export Certificates for permanent export have fallen by 30 percent, with a larger decrease in February, and thoroughbred BCNs (Breeding Clearance Notifications for temporary exports) have fallen by 61 percent.

Some of the problems have been obscured by Covid but the record is pretty clear. Movement of racehorses has been badly affected by the onset of Brexit – exactly as I suggested it might be more than four years ago.

In typical style, the BBC then goes to a "victim" to add human interest to the tale – the "horse's mouth", so to speak. Their chosen one is Tom Blain, managing director at Barton Stud of Great Barton, near Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk.

He alludes to the tripartite agreement, although readers are not troubled with its name. And now the UK had left the EU, Blain says, the process has changed - and not for the better.

"It's considerably harder and more complicated to get mares to France or Ireland; that, in turn, means less horses have gone," he informs us, adding that things had improved since the beginning of the year and you only have "real problems" if all the paperwork is not in order.

However, it seems that Ross Hamilton, of the British Horseracing Authority, is not quite so sanguine. "In terms of quantification of the impacts we have seen, overall", he says, "British runners in EU countries are down 51 percent for the first four months of this year, compared with the equivalent period in 2019, and runners from the EU in Great Britain are down around 40 percent".

He acknowledges that Covid pandemic had "clearly played a part", but there had also been an increase in the paperwork and administration required to move thoroughbreds. The paperwork for just one horse to travel overseas requires at least 26 stamps, each needing a vet's signature, but it could be many more.

But what really takes the biscuit is James Crowhurst, a consultant vet at Newmarket Equine Hospital. He says, "We knew we would be a third country, subject to new import rules, but we didn't think they would be so time-consuming and labour-intensive". He could have known, of course, as all the information was there and all you have to do was piece it together. But then, being a vet, sorting out his coloured crayons would probably have been as much of a challenge as he could cope with.

As always, though, the real BS comes from Defra, its spokesman saying: "To ensure movements to EU countries can continue as smoothly as possible, we have implemented a range of initiatives to increase the number of certifiers to meet demand for export health certification".

In the dead tones of the bureaucrat, he adds: "We continue to meet regularly with key industry stakeholders, and authorities in France and Ireland, to understand difficulties associated with the movement of equines as they arise".

But, for an industry that is now worth £4.1 billion annually to the UK economy, supporting tens of thousands of jobs, something a little more than understanding is needed. With smaller operators in the industry particularly hard hit, the British Horseracing Authority want "red tape" to be cut.

If it had been on the ball, and banging on the door of government from the get-go, this trouble could have been headed off at the pass. What the industry really needs is for the tripartite agreement to be reactivated.

It started off life as an intergovernmental agreement and was subsumed into EU law. A new version could exist in similar form, compatible with but outside EU law. But to get that underway would require real understanding – something none of the parties involved have displayed.

Also published on Turbulent Times.