4 ms·

The Remainers are desperate to portray this as hypocrisy by Sir James Dyson. It is actually the opposite. He has been moving more and more of his business out o

The Remainers are desperate to portray this as hypocrisy by Sir James Dyson. It is actually the opposite. He has been moving more and more of his business out of the EU and UK to Singapore over the last 10-15 years and moving the headquarters is the final step. It is a ringing endorsement to what global free trade can do instead of protectionism, over-regulation and misplaced political projects such as the single currency. And Singapore was consistently held up as an example of what Brexit Britain could be like. Sir James Dyson has given up on Britain because, all things considered, he realises it will be many more years yet until a Clean Brexit is realised in the UK. And even then, it could be decades - judging by the displayed ineptitude of our political class - for the UK to catch up on the head start that Singapore has for high-tech.

jimnotgym 8y ago
He already was a hypocrite. His previous excuses for moving manufacturing to Singapore include Britain not joining the Euro (the European single currency). So the timeline 1) "I need to move to Singapore because Britain is not close enough to the EU" 2) "I want Britain to leave the EU" 3) "I am moving to Singapore anyway, so long suckers" https://www.theguardian.com/business/2000/nov/05/theobserver.observerbusiness4 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2000/nov/05/theobserver...
- nbevans 8y ago
  That was said by him in 2000 - the Lisbon treaty was 2009. In 2000 the only path possible for the UK and EU was "further integration". There was no ability to exit i.e. there was no Article 50. One can imagine if exiting the EU was possible in 2000 he would have worked that into his comments at the time. As far as he was concerned he had a problem exporting products from the UK because of the strong sterling, most particularly in comparison to the Euro. He needed a solution. Joining the Euro was a possible solution at the time. The EU also had no trade agreements with countries like Singapore or Japan in 2000 either - or even 2009 for that matter - further reducing his strategic options.
7952 8y ago
I think it is unfair to expect a PR strategy to be intellectually consistent. And that is what Dyson is founded on. Dyson is a ringing endorsement of Britain as a marketing and PR powerhouse. They made people across the world believe a story that sold millions of mediocre vacuums. It is a huge success that we should be proud of. But it has little to do with the virtues that Dyson likes to project. In that sense it is a good parallel to brexit. A PR blitz designed to push bullshit.

jimnotgym 8y ago

He already was a hypocrite. His previous excuses for moving manufacturing to Singapore include Britain not joining the Euro (the European single currency). So the timeline 1) "I need to move to Singapore because Britain is not close enough to the EU" 2) "I want Britain to leave the EU" 3) "I am moving to Singapore anyway, so long suckers" https://www.theguardian.com/business/2000/nov/05/theobserver.observerbusiness4 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2000/nov/05/theobserver...

nbevans 8y ago
That was said by him in 2000 - the Lisbon treaty was 2009. In 2000 the only path possible for the UK and EU was "further integration". There was no ability to exit i.e. there was no Article 50. One can imagine if exiting the EU was possible in 2000 he would have worked that into his comments at the time. As far as he was concerned he had a problem exporting products from the UK because of the strong sterling, most particularly in comparison to the Euro. He needed a solution. Joining the Euro was a possible solution at the time. The EU also had no trade agreements with countries like Singapore or Japan in 2000 either - or even 2009 for that matter - further reducing his strategic options.

7952 8y ago

I think it is unfair to expect a PR strategy to be intellectually consistent. And that is what Dyson is founded on. Dyson is a ringing endorsement of Britain as a marketing and PR powerhouse. They made people across the world believe a story that sold millions of mediocre vacuums. It is a huge success that we should be proud of. But it has little to do with the virtues that Dyson likes to project. In that sense it is a good parallel to brexit. A PR blitz designed to push bullshit.