PAUL Sheerin declares in his first foreword to Scottish Engineering’s quarterly review that he does not want to start by discussing Brexit.
Nevertheless, that is exactly what the industry body’s new chief executive does. And he does not hold back, with his stated reluctance to begin with a discussion of “the B word” certainly not diluting his forthrightness.
His criticism of the UK’s Brexit “folly” is utterly scathing. One particularly eye-catching sentence from Mr Sheerin reads thus: “Shambles isn’t quite strong enough to describe this, as the connotation for me of that word could at least include well intentioned, and I struggle to see good intentions in Brexit.”
Read More: Brexit ‘folly’ warning from engineering industry body
Mr Sheerin laments the seemingly rising cost of Brexit.
And he declares clarity for exporters “seems no closer”.
Some people declare they are sick and tired of hearing about Brexit.
However, just because some people do not want to hear about, or face up to, the realities of leaving the European Union, this does not mean these actualities have disappeared, or diminished.
Mr Sheerin is absolutely right to address Brexit in his first foreword, while celebrating the sector’s growth in spite of the challenges faced.
And his observation about the complete lack of progress in alleviating Brexit uncertainty for exporters is utterly correct.
Read More: Ian McConnell: Antidotes to corrosive corporate cost-cutting frenzy bring some relief
In fact, it is difficult to identify any progress made by the UK Government in its Brexit negotiations, other than perhaps its negotiation of a transition agreement to put back the day when the true horrors of leaving the EU manifest themselves.
Read More: Ian McConnell: Talk of Brexit ‘betrayal’ is cause for fear among firms
If there is to be any hope of the UK Government starting to do the sensible things regarding Brexit, as opposed to damaging actions such as ruling out continuing single-market membership, it is crucial people like Mr Sheerin speak up.
Mr Sheerin uses the words “this folly” to refer to Brexit. This is a very good description of a supremely bad idea.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here