- £24 million border post may be demolished due to policy changes
- Portsmouth port facility underused, causing financial strain
- Government and ports struggle with post-Brexit inspection protocols
It can conduct inspections on eighty vehicle loads of produce per day. Daily processing is now anticipated to be at most four or five.
It may be necessary to demolish a £24 million border control post because repetitive modifications to post-Brexit border arrangements have rendered it commercially unviable.
Physical inspections of EU food and plant imports were scheduled to commence at the Portsmouth International Port facility by the end of next month. However, due to modifications in border protocols that have occurred since its construction, approximately half of the structure will be used.
Constructed using funds from Portsmouth City Council, the port’s owner, and a £17 million central government grant, the facility can inspect up to eighty lorry loads of produce daily. The port now anticipates only four or five daily transactions.
Consequently, half of the fourteen loading ports will remain unused, and the fees levied on importers for conducting inspections will fail to cover the yearly operating expenses amounting to £800,000.
Portsmouth is not an isolated instance; nationwide ports need clarification about how they can recoup the costs of government-commissioned, vast, and detailed structures with significantly reduced foot traffic.
Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs estimates that it partially funded the construction of new facilities at 41 terminals to accommodate post-Brexit border controls for £200 million. The document recognizes the reduced need for inspections and permits terminals to utilize surplus capacity at their discretion.
In Portsmouth, the issue is that the facility, which was constructed in a secure area for a particular purpose, has no apparent commercial utility; therefore, the port is contemplating the construction of a new, more compact facility and the decommissioning or even demolition of the current structure to make way for a commercially viable endeavor.
“This was constructed by a Defra [Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs] specification when the border operating model was announced, and it has been shelved for two years due to the delay in inspections,” said Mike Sellers, chairman of the British Ports Association and director of Portsmouth International Port.
“Since the border will operate with significantly fewer inspections, it will be difficult to cover the approximately £800,000 in annual operating expenses.”
“Therefore, we must consider the future and determine the most effective strategic course of action to mitigate the effects on the port and the council.”
It may sound paradoxical, but that could involve constructing another border control post considerably smaller than this one, seeking commercial revenue streams through this facility, or demolishing it and repurposing the operational land.
“Absolute and complete chaos”
In the interim, the port proprietor, Portsmouth City Council, demands reimbursement from the government for its £7 million contribution to the £24 million construction cost.
“The council invested £7 million in the construction of this facility, and we are currently on our fifth change of heart regarding the extent of the inspections that will occur.” “Half of this structure will remain vacant, idle, and unused, yet it is costing the Portsmouth council taxpayers an enormous amount of money,” said transport lead councilor Gerald Vernon-Jones.
The security of food imports into the United Kingdom could be compromised if the Portsmouth facility were to close, given that it is the primary alternative route to Dover and provides much-needed resilience to a supply chain heavily dependent on the Short Straits route.
“Everything is a complete and utter shambles; we are dealing with a monstrous white elephant,” stated Mr. Vernon-Jones.
“Even if we cannot afford to station port health personnel here throughout the day, every day, to conduct those examinations, then everything will have to pass through Dover, which is a hazardous situation for this nation.” “If Dover is closed for any reason—industrial action or otherwise—the entire nation’s food supply is in jeopardy.”
In the interim, the British Ports Association has expressed apprehensions to ministers regarding the readiness of the recently established border control posts (BCPs) for the inspection regime, which is scheduled to go into effect in under six weeks.
According to the trade organization, ports have yet to be informed of the hours during which BCPs must be operational or the number of personnel from two state inspection agencies that must be present.
Significantly, the cost at which importers can pay for inspections remains uncertain, as the government has yet to disclose the rate it will impose at the state-owned and operated BCP located at Sevington, Kent, which is 20 miles inland from Dover.
Dover’s hegemony over food imports into the United Kingdom means that the so-called common user charge will determine the market price; however, other ports still need to decide where to establish their fees.
Following consultation, Defra plans to provide the industry with an update on the fees it has determined shortly.
The imminent obsolescence of the Portsmouth facility serves as a metaphor for the protracted uncertainty and limbo surrounding import controls after implementing the Brexit agreement in January 2021.
Since January 1, 2021, border and customs controls have been imposed on UK exports to the EU. However, in contrast, the UK government has implemented five delays and modifications to the control regime for EU imports.
The initial July 2021 deadline for physical inspections of plant and animal products was extended due to the unavailability of BCPs. Subsequent delays ensued, with the government attributing them to the cost of living crisis and the repercussions on the food supply chain.
“Take a step towards financial freedom – claim your free Webull shares now!”
The government declared a comprehensive reassessment of its border strategies in April 2022, implementing a novel risk-based methodology that restricts inspections to specific categories of high and medium-risk plants and foods.
Subsequently, this was postponed again, but a phased introduction ultimately commenced in January, mandating health certificates signed by veterinarians or plant health inspectors for medium-risk food and plant imports, followed by physical inspections beginning on April 30.
Despite potential reductions in import inspections, the government’s internal analysis indicates that border controls will increase food inflation and add £330 million annually to the cost of trading with the continent.
A Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs spokesperson stated, “Our border control posts have adequate capacity and capability to handle the volume and nature of expected inspections, including temperature-controlled shipments. The authorities will work to minimize disruptions as these inspections are implemented.”
