Brexit Watch

Anything that jeopardises The Good Friday Agreement is unforgiveable.

Sluffy wrote:

what's your answer to solve all this then - you know - before it is too late...???

I'm sure we are all wanting to know.

Go on then, the floor is yours.

OK then..

I agree that we can't close Pandora's box now that it's been opened but as all forecasts suggest the full impact of Brexit has not yet been felt, we have to do something to ameliorate the damage.
However, nothing major will get done until it's demonstrably the "will of the British people" so unfortunately we'll have to wait until the electorate have had enough before any serious steps can be taken.
That said the Tories have already started to make token gestures in this direction with a series of u-turns on their policies but they are far short of what is required.

I would probably do the following for starters:

* remove all barriers relating to visas for european workers in all sectors based on the proviso that they have a bona fide job offer from a British employer prior to entry - and at the same time making all such employers fully responsible for their foreign workers - a responsibility that will only end when the worker has either left the country or transferred to an alternative employer who will then become responsible. European employees will not be entitled to use our welfare state to a greater extent than their prior contribution to the state and will have to evidence no criminal record, identify their accommodation (perhaps provided by the employer) and sufficient income (their contract) Issue them with "guest worker" DNA ID cards if required.
(By putting the responsibility and additional cost on to employers they would naturally seek to get a British resident for the job where possible but would be able to employ a guest worker where there was no British equivalent available so in effect market forces would mean that only essential workers were brought in - either because of their skill set or the absence of a resident alternative.)
* expand the ongoing foreign and security bilateral talks with France to include the whole of the EU. Given the UK's investment in intelligence and the military we are in a good position to negotiate a Europe-wide agreement that will spread the load and increase the force if e.g. issues with Russia escalate  - and the bonus is that we may be able to use that to gain concessions elsewhere e.g. on trade.
*reboot the scientific co-operation programme even if it means we have to fund our end of it ourselves. It's no good offering the British scientific community money to replace the lost EU funding if they now have to work in isolation and not be involved in the major projects underway - at best they'd be replicating work undertaken elsewhere and wouldn't get to share and build on advancements. Our scientists could be free to join in where they want to and be free to do their own thing as required - if the offer is pitched right.
*make a concerted effort to recoup the tax gap which is estimated in excess of £40 billion per annum nowadays - lost through the hidden economy, criminal activity, evasion and avoidance etc. However I believe the current government is complicit in facilitating some of these losses and the proposed activity would include addressing the scurrilous financial activities of some of the super rich. I am undecided about the strategy of retaining the low corporate tax rate as there is no conclusive evidence it works in terms of foreign investment given that the government do "special deals/tax breaks" anyway.
* drop the unrealistic demands re the NI border and start focusing on practical solutions. Not a single business has reported a problem with ECJ oversight but the Tories are trying to make it into a political issue and it's damaging both trade and our prospects of an acceptable deal with America.
* substantially beef up the law governing political ethics covering both behaviour and the requirement to justify the veracity of statements made in a political/electioneering environment especially as regards "fake news". Provide better clarity and guidance and give the power to severely punish those who don't follow the guidelines. At the same time provide powers to sanction and prosecute abusers of personal data for political purposes, especially foreign owned companies operating in the UK.
* pressurise social media platforms to police themselves to the standards they claim to have or risk losing their market and to pay taxes commensurate to the income they derive from advertising etc to our market (see earlier point) [url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50011441#:~:text=Facebook%27s UK arm paid %C2%A328.5m in tax in,to %C2%A330.4m%2C but was reduced due to adjustments.]Facebook[/url]  Google  - and close the stock option loophole for tax deferral in UK law.

That should keep you busy for a while

Lusty, you still completely ignore the reasons we left the EU. We don’t want to import cheap labour, that’s one of the things that got us into this mess in the first place. British jobs for British workers is the aim and if that means short term problems, that’s a price we have to pay. Sadly your recommendations for rules around foreign workers is totally unmanageable and would cost a fortune to implement.

As far as security is concerned, without the information supplied by the UK counter terrorism organisations and MI5 and MI6, it’s the EU who would be the losers but we know that they are perfectly happy to cut their nose off to spite their face where the UK are concerned. Of course we want to be involved, it’s in everybody’s interests but again, it is the EU who are prevaricating.

Again on science and technology, it would be natural for the UK to continue to be involved but once again the EU are blocking us, despite the fact that much of the tech comes from UK companies and universities. Personally I’m less bothered about this area as we’re more than capable of creating our own technology without the red tape and bureaucracy applied by the EU. As I’ve already pointed out to you before, despite all the money already thrown at technology, not one serious European company has evolved from it. You might as well just church the money down the drain, or stay out and invest in UK companies who can succeed and indeed are succeeding already. Asks the yanks, they’ve already bought several of them like ARM and Autonomy. Hopefully through the governments actions now were out of the EU, our own companies can stay here and grow to maturity?

Our demands on the NI border are not unrealistic if we are to be a completely sovereign country again outside of the EU. No sovereign country can be ruled by outside courts as the EU are trying to do. The UK has suggested numerous ways to resolve the Irish border situation, all completely rejected by the EU due to their intent all along to weaponise the issue and punish the UK at every opportunity.

Look Lusty, I fully respect the fact that you think leaving was a mistake and I also totally accept that things aren’t going well at the moment but I totally reject your constant complaints that everything wrong is by the UK and everything right is the EU. You seem to have a complete blind spot about anything remotely positive from our leaving. We haven’t left Europe, we have left the EU. We want to remain friends and partners whilst accepting we cannot just continue as before but it is the EU who are putting up the barriers not the UK. Until you see that you will continue with your twisted view of events. We are out Lusty and we’re never going back. Both major parties have told you that so why don’t you just accept it, look for positives instead of your constant negatives and help make your “beloved country” great again despite our being a “tiny island?”

Whitesince63 wrote:Lusty, you still completely ignore the reasons we left the EU. We don’t want to import cheap labour, that’s one of the things that got us into this mess in the first place. British jobs for British workers is the aim and if that means short term problems, that’s a price we have to pay. Sadly your recommendations for rules around foreign workers is totally unmanageable and would cost a fortune to implement.

As far as security is concerned, without the information supplied by the UK counter terrorism organisations and MI5 and MI6, it’s the EU who would be the losers but we know that they are perfectly happy to cut their nose off to spite their face where the UK are concerned. Of course we want to be involved, it’s in everybody’s interests but again, it is the EU who are prevaricating.

Again on science and technology, it would be natural for the UK to continue to be involved but once again the EU are blocking us, despite the fact that much of the tech comes from UK companies and universities. Personally I’m less bothered about this area as we’re more than capable of creating our own technology without the red tape and bureaucracy applied by the EU. As I’ve already pointed out to you before, despite all the money already thrown at technology, not one serious European company has evolved from it. You might as well just church the money down the drain, or stay out and invest in UK companies who can succeed and indeed are succeeding already. Asks the yanks, they’ve already bought several of them like ARM and Autonomy. Hopefully through the governments actions now were out of the EU, our own companies can stay here and grow to maturity?

Our demands on the NI border are not unrealistic if we are to be a completely sovereign country again outside of the EU. No sovereign country can be ruled by outside courts as the EU are trying to do. The UK has suggested numerous ways to resolve the Irish border situation, all completely rejected by the EU due to their intent all along to weaponise the issue and punish the UK at every opportunity.

Look Lusty, I fully respect the fact that you think leaving was a mistake and I also totally accept that things aren’t going well at the moment but I totally reject your constant complaints that everything wrong is by the UK and everything right is the EU. You seem to have a complete blind spot about anything remotely positive from our leaving. We haven’t left Europe, we have left the EU. We want to remain friends and partners whilst accepting we cannot just continue as before but it is the EU who are putting up the barriers not the UK. Until you see that you will continue with your twisted view of events. We are out Lusty and we’re never going back. Both major parties have told you that so why don’t you just accept it, look for positives instead of your constant negatives and help make your “beloved country” great again despite our being a “tiny island?”

I'm having difficulty reconciling the view that on the one hand "we want to be friends and partners" - which I see as essential for survival and growth in a global economy - and blaming the EU for our initial problems, claiming they are being obstructive in the negotiations and crowing that they are the "losers" on the other. Brexit has been neither friendly nor constructive.

I disagree with your rationale regarding skilled guest workers and those willing to do the jobs that Brits refuse to do, and the rationale that somehow suggests that throwing away over 40 excellent international trade deals and replacing them with less favourable ones whilst simultaneously disadvantaging British firms in our largest market is somehow a good thing.

And it's a basic principle of trade that larger markets with greater buying power carry more weight and get better terms than small ones.

How then can Brexit make things better for us when our economy is weaker and nothing tangible has been achieved since we left? In other words please explain how the "opportunities" you talk about can realistically - and "realistically" is the key word here - deliver? (no more unicorns please )

Hahaha!!!

No you're not wriggling out of this by answering a question I did not ask!!!

This was my question!!!

Sluffy wrote:

wanderlust wrote:...maybe, just maybe they'll wake up in time to do something about it before the damage is irreparable?

Brexit - or something vaguely masquerading as Brexit - has happened but that doesn't mean we all should lie down and let it destroy Britain.

Ok, I'll play, what do you want PEOPLE to do then?

No political party see benefit in seeking an immediate return to the EU otherwise they'd pledge to do it by now - certainly well before the next GE.

So PEOPLE can't vote to return.

You answered that here - and that was absolutely NOTHING.

wanderlust wrote:I agree that we can't close Pandora's box now that it's been opened but as all forecasts suggest the full impact of Brexit has not yet been felt, we have to do something to ameliorate the damage.
However, nothing major will get done until it's demonstrably the "will of the British PEOPLE" so unfortunately we'll have to wait until the electorate have had enough before any serious steps can be taken.

All the rest is what a government may do - but WE weren't talking about what the government 'may choose to do' - were we! - and quite frankly WON'T do in this Parliament or the next if the Conservatives get reelected - and probably Labour either (if they ever do!) because like it or not there are still a substantial number of people (and therefore Parliamentary 'seats') that will be lost if any government attempts to bring in such measures.

I mean what's the point of Brexit if we simply rejoin it again in all but name only?

Do you think the PEOPLE want that - you might - but no government will want to return so soon to the one topic that split the country in half.  Politics is about power and you don't win /retain power by deliberately steering a course into a political and social maelstrom of self-destruction!

As for the rest of your post...

wanderlust wrote:That said the Tories have already started to make token gestures in this direction with a series of u-turns on their policies but they are far short of what is required.

I would probably do the following for starters:

* remove all barriers relating to visas for european workers in all sectors...

*reboot the scientific co-operation programme...

*make a concerted effort to recoup the tax gap which is estimated in excess of £40 billion per annum nowadays - lost through the hidden economy, criminal activity, evasion and avoidance etc. However I believe the current government is complicit in facilitating some of these losses and the proposed activity would include addressing the scurrilous financial activities of some of the super rich....

* drop the unrealistic demands re the NI border...

* substantially beef up the law governing political ethics covering both behaviour and the requirement to justify the veracity of statements made in a political/electioneering environment especially as regards "fake news".

* pressurise social media platforms to police themselves...

That should keep you busy for a while

Nah, non of that will keep me busy as most of it is just pie in the sky and utterly unrealistic, I mean you throw in that the Tory Party are corrupt - (really, where's your proof - or is it that is just what you want to believe?), the government should control social media (like China does perhaps?), open our boarders to all again (isn't that why most voted for Brexit in the first place?), etc, etc.

But it certainly kept you extremely busy posting all that at 4:30 in the morning!!!!

Try reading it properly.

Wanderlust wrote:However, nothing major will get done until it's demonstrably the "will of the British people" so unfortunately we'll have to wait until the electorate have had enough before any serious steps can be taken.

White - on the EU red tape and charges thing...this article - admittedly quoting a British businessman who is now anti-Brexit - highlights the realities of international trade outside the single market and there are some particularly poignant bits of information about trading with Canada and Norway without a deal accepting agreed standards and practices.

Fact is that leaving the EU means more red tape and charges not less e.g. this. which will add cost to imports.

wanderlust wrote:Try reading it properly.

Wanderlust wrote:However, nothing major will get done until it's demonstrably the "will of the British people" so unfortunately we'll have to wait until the electorate have had enough before any serious steps can be taken.

Hahaha...

You do make me laugh!

I asked a simple question as to what would the PEOPLE do because this Parliament isn't going to change its direction - and that as no other party has even outlined what it would do in the next election - let alone even being able to win one outright that it would take the best part of two Parliaments (the best part of ten years) minimum for the PEOPLE to bring about change (bearing in mind that in 10 years time who knows what people may want or is important to them then?).

You of course - as usual - tried to wriggle out of yet again painting yourself into a corner you couldn't get out of because you spouted your prejudicial and highly biased utter bollocks in the first place without any rational thought as to what you were saying - and thus decided to answer a question I never even asked to try to avoid again being wrong!!!

Anyway you did let slip that the PEOPLE could do absolutely NOTHING - as I had previously and abundantly made clear to you and everyone else, in my post setting the question in the first place!!!



But I already knew that and that's why I challenged you in the first place as to the bollocks you had posted and gave you the opportunity to tell us what the PEOPLE should do...

Sluffy wrote:It's YOU living in cloud cuckoo land mate, it's not going to happen anytime soon not within at least two Parliaments of us leaving (= 10 years or so), so what exactly do you want PEOPLE to do to stop this "irreparable damage" and not let it "destroy Britain" that you claim it will...

...by bitching about it daily on a tiny football forum like you are doing perhaps!

Is that your answer to saving the country or have you got any other bright ideas?

Even mass public protests, civil disobedience or riots can't change the fact that we are now out of the EU and it's not within any governments powers to get us back in without the EU voting unanimously for our return - and certainly that isn't going to happen in the near future (10 years) is it?

So what's your answer to solve all this then - you know - before it is too late...???

Don't you think that the PEOPLE having to wait a minimum of about 10 years to "to stop this "irreparable damage" and not let it "destroy Britain" that you claim it will" is leaving it a little late...

wanderlust wrote:Try reading it properly.

White - on the EU red tape and charges thing...this article - admittedly quoting a British businessman who is now anti-Brexit - highlights the realities of international trade outside the single market and there are some particularly poignant bits of information about trading with Canada and Norway without a deal accepting agreed standards and practices.

Fact is that leaving the EU means more red tape and charges not less e.g. this. which will add cost to imports.

Lusty, sadly certain businesses will lose out and it sounds like this one has but there are other businesses that have benefitted but clearly the Guardian wouldn’t go looking for those. I think you’re other point about waiting for the electorate to have had enough and effect a change is a bit spurious. At certain times past our electorate had had enough of the EU but were powerless as no government was prepared to give us an option to leave until Cameron did. 

As Sluffy says, with both major parties committed to not rejoining, there’s zero chance of another vote on it and unless something catastrophic happens, which I don’t expect, the UK will never go back in, even if the EU would let us. In fact, I believe there’s more likelihood of the EU folding than us looking to rejoin and that could be sooner rather than later. 

I worked for a major French manufacturer for over 40 years and spent a considerable amount of time over there and with French colleagues over here and I can assure you they are no lovers of the EU. A vote over there would be every bit as close as here. Forget the Le Penn thing, it’s about the economy, jobs and like us, immigration. I don’t know if you’ve been to Paris or through its outskirts but if not you wouldn’t want to. Don’t ever think they wouldn’t vote to leave given a chance because I very much believe they would and may well get that chance, especially once they start to see how well we have done since leaving.

Definitely can't see another referendum, but I can see a reversal of the policies that the government instituted in order to deliver their promises - as pointed out above.

You mention UK companies that gain from Brexit? The best indicator of that I can find is from the world-leading financial  modeller, Investopedia who provide this guide to Brexit winners and losers.

As far as I can tell, businesses in just about every UK sector have been battered with increased costs, supply issues and/or additional red tape - so apart from the US banks who won big time, can you signpost me to any British company that has benefited from Brexit?

The point is Lusty, it is what it is and yes of course companies are having to complete more documentation to sell into Europe, just as other countries outside the EU have to do but it’s no different than exporting elsewhere, other than the fact other countries aren’t purposely trying to prevent and frustrate us like the EU so obviously are. You need to also remember that 80% of small companies don’t export to the EU anyway. Personally I hope both buyers and sellers reduce business with the EU since there are numerous opportunities to do so. The supermarkets in particular could do a lot more than they do to reduce imports of fruits, vegetables and wine from Europe and switch products to markets in Africa, Middle East, New Zealand and Australia. There are lots more citrus producers than Spain and we grow some of the best Apples, pears and plums in the world right here. We can also produce most salads all year round under cover and with investment both help our industries and reduce travel times. It’s going to take time but we need to wean ourselves off this continual belief that Europe is it. It isn’t and if we’re ever going to make the EU see sense, it will take more than warm words. I’m totally against the government weakening their stance, although initially there may be some areas they practically have to but that should be, and in fact is, a short term measure. We’ve always been a worldwide trading nation and it’s time we got back to that again and ditch the EUSSR.

wanderlust wrote:Definitely can't see another referendum, but I can see a reversal of the policies that the government instituted in order to deliver their promises - as pointed out above.

Oh look you've at last now realised you were talking utter bollocks once again when you said the 'people' should 'wake up' and 'we all' should do something before the 'damage is irreparable'...

They ('we') simply can't of course....

...only governments have such powers and even then they have to rely on other governments to agree in order to change things between themselves.

wanderlust wrote:And rather than "moaning" about Brexit I am merely pointing out how much it's damaging our beloved country. Perhaps if people stopped hanging on to their misplaced trust in what is a contender for the worst idea in British history maybe, just maybe they'll wake up in time to do something about it before the damage is irreparable?

Brexit - or something vaguely masquerading as Brexit - has happened but that doesn't mean we all should lie down and let it destroy Britain.

Now for those policies you listed above...

Sluffy wrote:Hahaha!!!

Nah, non of that will keep me busy as most of it is just pie in the sky and utterly unrealistic, I mean you throw in that the Tory Party are corrupt - (really, where's your proof - or is it that is just what you want to believe?), the government should control social media (like China does perhaps?), open our boarders to all again (isn't that why most voted for Brexit in the first place?), etc, etc.

But it certainly kept you extremely busy posting all that at 4:30 in the morning!!!!

Whitesince63 wrote:The point is Lusty, it is what it is and yes of course companies are having to complete more documentation to sell into Europe, just as other countries outside the EU have to do but it’s no different than exporting elsewhere, other than the fact other countries aren’t purposely trying to prevent and frustrate us like the EU so obviously are.

The other side of that coin is that we already had a very cushy deal with the EU that massively reduced our costs, effort and paperwork, not only in trading with the EU itself but also trading with the rest of the world via the deals that the EU has and continues to negotiate with the negotiation strength of a massive market - but we threw it all away.

Secondly non-European countries that have had to do the paperwork and pay the tarriffs for a long time have already got their arrangements in place so have an advantage over the UK such as the American banks who have passporting rights already in place.

The full implications of the situation won't be apparent to Joe Public immediately - it will take years of crap deals that lead to price rises, shortages, threats to employment and devaluation of savings and pensions before they start to realise what is really at stake but we'll see how the British people feel at the end of next year when some of it starts to filter through - starting with April's planned tax rises, the additional £1200 per household rise in living costs, wage stagnation and food price rises and shortages.

Maybe by then we - and the nation - will be able to have a sensible conversation about what to do about Brexit given that for the time being Brexiteers continue to talk about "opportunities", promises and propaganda when faced with the facts and realities of the situation.

That said I'm probably kidding myself that a divided Britain will be able to have a sensible conversation - in the face of rising poverty and social unrest I'm wondering just how many Brexiteers will turn on the people that sold them a promised land that will be nothing like what they thought it would be?

New Year's Day will be the anniversary of Boris "Getting It Done" but I very much doubt he'll be around by the end of 2022 to help pick up the pieces.

wanderlust wrote:I'm wondering just how many Brexiteers will turn on the people that sold them a promised land that will be nothing like what they thought it would be?

Well as someone who voted FOR Brexit because you believed what  politicians say and NOT what the experts were telling us, you've certainly turned on them AND all your fellow Brexit voters and have ceaselessly moaned about it on here everyday since!

What exactly do you expect to happen though from all your bitching and moaning though, someone to wave a magic wand and make it all better or something?

You've just had to admit yourself that 'people' can't do anything and that only 'governments' can and that realistically is going to take a minimum of ten years or so at the earliest - so why not accept what it is and get on with your life like the rest of us have to do?

You moaning and bitching daily and being bitter and twisted about it all isn't going to change anything is it?

You'd also do yourself a big favour if you moved off social media and stop reading and no doubt replying to like minded loony people who feel the way you do and fuel each others anger and hatred over something that non of you can do anything about, except wind yourselves up about even tighter and tighter every day that passes!

wanderlust wrote:
The other side of that coin is that we already had a very cushy deal with the EU that massively reduced our costs, effort and paperwork, not only in trading with the EU itself but also trading with the rest of the world via the deals that the EU has and continues to negotiate with the negotiation strength of a massive market - but we threw it all away.

Secondly non-European countries that have had to do the paperwork and pay the tarriffs for a long time have already got their arrangements in place so have an advantage over the UK such as the American banks who have passporting rights already in place.

The full implications of the situation won't be apparent to Joe Public immediately - it will take years of crap deals that lead to price rises, shortages, threats to employment and devaluation of savings and pensions before they start to realise what is really at stake but we'll see how the British people feel at the end of next year when some of it starts to filter through - starting with April's planned tax rises, the additional £1200 per household rise in living costs, wage stagnation and food price rises and shortages.

Maybe by then we - and the nation - will be able to have a sensible conversation about what to do about Brexit given that for the time being Brexiteers continue to talk about "opportunities", promises and propaganda when faced with the facts and realities of the situation.

That said I'm probably kidding myself that a divided Britain will be able to have a sensible conversation - in the face of rising poverty and social unrest I'm wondering just how many Brexiteers will turn on the people that sold them a promised land that will be nothing like what they thought it would be?

New Year's Day will be the anniversary of Boris "Getting It Done" but I very much doubt he'll be around by the end of 2022 to help pick up the pieces.

That “cushy deal” we had with the EU we paid Billions for for over 50 years Lusty, to build monuments to Bureaucracy in Brussels, support poor nations who shouldn’t have been in the EU in the first place and rebuild Eastern Germany and the Baltic states, money that could have been spent on hospitals, schools and Social Care in this country. It could also have supported farming, fishing, engineering and other industries destroyed by joining the Franco/ German “club” in the first place.

Why can you not accept that the EU have no intention of treating the UK as friends? You’ve already indicated that the USA and others have been granted passporting rights, which have been denied to the UK, despite our being totally in line on standards and regulations. Tell me why?

Look, I’m not interested in re running all the arguments over Brexit, it’s done now and like it or not we have to deal with it. That means getting behind the governments efforts to renegotiate our current deal, especially around Northern Ireland, which the EU have constantly used to hold the UK hostage, yet you continue to take their side putting all the blame on the UK. Just think what you want Lusty but don’t associate everybody else with your own bitter and twisted view of both Brexit and the EU. Most Remainers and leavers want the country to succeed and will work towards that and it’s just a shame you can’t join them.

We all want the country to succeed. We're all, hopefully, pedalling in the same direction. Our lead rider, sadly, leaves much to be desired.

Reminds me of the first time I gave Nat a lift to the match.

I think this article in the Economist captures part of what I'm trying to say i.e. the government has to start taking some tough decisions - regardless of how unpopular they might be to some sectors of the electorate - and moreover, sticking to them. The article suggests how some of the issues could be addressed - if the government has the balls to do it.



It's time for Boris Johnson to abandon "cakeism"



A YEAR AGO, as Boris Johnson prepared to take Britain out of the European Union’s trading arrangements after an 11-month transition, he was on top of the world. The trade and co-operation agreement he had signed with the EU was, he crowed, “cakeist”—his term for deals that combine the having and eating of cake, in this case decent access to the single market and freedom to diverge from its rules. But as 2021 ended, little cake was to be had. A backbench rebellion, a stunning by-election loss and public anger at revelations that the prime minister and his colleagues partied during lockdowns in 2020 have hit his poll ratings. The year’s final blow came on December 18th, when David Frost, his chief EU negotiator, resigned, citing his frustration at the government’s failure to make progress on an ambitious post-Brexit agenda.

Some of Mr Johnson’s difficulties are tied to his personal flaws: arrogance, sloppiness and a belief that rules are for little people. But Lord Frost, for all that his bellicose approach to the EU made progress harder, was right about his central charge. On Brexit, which the Conservatives promised would kick-start a national renewal, the government is adrift. Growth has been sluggish and ejection from the single market has, as expected, harmed the country’s prospects: government forecasters put the long- run hit to productivity at around 4%. So far the government has failed to identify policies that could come close to making up for that. To regain momentum it must make tough choices and face up to their consequences.

The problem is less the type of Brexit that Britain opted for than a refusal to accept what flows from it. That is clearest in Northern Ireland. Britain chose to maximise sovereignty and national control, at the cost of leaving the EU’s trading system. The EU, mindful of Northern Ireland’s fragile peace, offered a special deal whereby the province remained, in effect, in the single market and customs union so as to avoid a destabilising hard border with the Republic of Ireland. That meant customs checks in the Irish Sea—an outcome spelt out in the treaty that Britain chose to sign, but which Lord Frost subsequently declared unacceptable and tried, fruitlessly, to unpick.



A similar failure to make a choice and stick to it is evident in Britain’s vacillations between the two options of either escaping the EU’s regulatory pull or staying in tight orbit around the single market and its rules. The reason is partly electoral. Brexit’s most ardent salesmen dreamed of lighter taxes and looser regulations—of Britain becoming Singapore-on-Thames. But many voters rather like the EU’s social-democratic model. Indeed, since leaving the EU, Britain has in some ways become more European. It has raised the minimum wage sharply and increased taxes to pay for social care. If Mr Johnson’s promise to “level up” Britain means anything, it is European-style industrial policy and grand public works.
A dose of realism is needed. On Northern Ireland, that means accepting that for the province to be both inside and outside the EU’s trading arrangements is impossible, and moving on. Britain and the EU can then work to minimise the downsides, such as onerous customs checks—and to maximise the upsides by helping businesses in one of the United Kingdom’s poorest regions profit from their privileged access to the EU’s giant market.
On when to diverge from Europe, Britain needs to assess the costs and benefits, and then move decisively. Often, that will mean concluding that bespoke national regulations, no matter how objectively better than EU ones, are impractical, pointless or impossible to sell to voters. EU regulations on data protection are de facto global standards. In the chemicals industry so much of British trade is with the EU that many British firms have to follow its rules to the letter. When it comes to food safety and animal welfare, Britons like the EU’s high standards and will oppose any relaxation great enough to boost productivity.
In other cases Britain can diverge from the EU in a way that packs a punch. It would not be hard to craft something better than the EU’s wasteful and environmentally damaging common agricultural policy. Competition policy and state-aid rules can also offer opportunities. Nimbler regulation, tax policies and visa rules can help London thrive as a global financial hub.

Taking the cake

Some of the biggest boosts to growth, however, would come from policies that were possible within the EU, such as market-driven reforms to the health service and looser planning rules. These will be hard to sell in the prosperous Tory shires and working-class northern constituencies that voted Conservative in 2019 to “get Brexit done”. Mr Johnson’s cake-based campaign made no mention of tough choices. But unless his government starts making some, Brexit’s future will hold little but crumbs.

wanderlust wrote:I think this article in the Economist captures part of what I'm trying to say i.e. the government has to start taking some tough decisions - regardless of how unpopular they might be to some sectors of the electorate - and moreover, sticking to them. The article suggests how some of the issues could be addressed - if the government has the balls to do it.

Hahaha!

Mate, I don't think anyone has ever doubted that the government has handled all this badly but this isn't what we - or you - have been talking about.

You've been moaning that the PEOPLE need to stop all this and that WE need to wake up and do something before it is too late.

I think you've finally after over THREE YEARS of constant bitching understood that WE the PEOPLE can't do anything at all - in the real world it is elected governments that negotiate and agree trade deals with other countries and not a random mass of disenchanted folk on social media.

The next thing you need to get your head around is what politics is all about.

It isn't much if anything about people wanting to do the right thing for the country and all to do with doing whatever you need to win power and once you've done that doing whatever you have to, to keep hold of it thereafter.

Nobody thought Brexit would happen - there was only a referendum because Cameron felt he needed to slap his Eurosceptic wing of his party down to keep control of everything and retain his power.

Likewise why Johnson stood to lead the Brexit group, not because he thought it would win, by all accounts he wasn't even a believer in Brexit at all - he simply wanted to have the Eurosceptic vote in his pocket for some future tilt at becoming the Tory leader.

Once he found he had won and that no one (Cameron, May or even himself) had any idea of what or how Brexit would actually happen, then he just exploited his sudden power within the party to undermine May's attempt to define Brexit - you know the 'Brexit means Brexit' incomprehensible gibberish and trumped her with his 'Let's get it done' mantra that people wanted to hear at the time.

He played to the public to consolidate his and the party's 'power' even if that meant throwing the country under the EU 'bus' so to speak.

His reward was a 80 seat majority, the end of the Labour Party as any meaningful opposition and an unassailable position as leader.

That was his (and his political hangers on and backers) objective - nothing at all to do with what is best for the country.

Also don't get confused that this is all some sort of a master plan by Murdock, or Putin or America, etc, etc, it is not.  The reality is that politicians take the opportunities they can to obtain and then retain power first and foremost - and they seek out or welcome what external support that looks to back them because they have a mutual interest for them to succeed.

Johnson, the Tory party will do what is right for them to retain power from now on.

If the Tory party believe they can win with Johnson they will keep him as PM if they don't they will dump him.

Similarly if Johnson thinks he will have the backing of the Tory power doing what he has been doing up to now, then he will continue doing just that, if he doesn't then he will change his style and politics to stay in power as the PM.

It's all about power and what is best for the country comes a poor second.

That's the way the world works and that is why I truly believe all politicians, whatever party they are in, are all as bad as each other - they are all after just one thing - power.

And as the saying goes - Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.


It is actually worth reading the whole of what Lord Acton was saying at the time he made the quote over 150 years ago as it still rings true even now.

In 1870, along with his mentor Döllinger, Acton opposed the moves to promulgate the doctrine of papal infallibility in the First Vatican Council, travelling to Rome to lobby against it, ultimately unsuccessfully.[15] Unlike Döllinger Acton did not become an Old Catholic, and continued attending Mass regularly; he received the last rites on his deathbed.[16] The Catholic Church did not try to force his hand. It was in this context that, in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887, Acton made his most famous pronouncement:

But if we might discuss this point until we found that we nearly agreed, and if we do agree thoroughly about the impropriety of Carlylese denunciations and Pharisaism in history, I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. That is the point at which the negation of Catholicism and the negation of Liberalism meet and keep high festival, and the end learns to justify the means. You would hang a man of no position like Ravaillac; but if what one hears is true, then Elizabeth asked the gaoler to murder Mary, and William III of England ordered his Scots minister to extirpate a clan. Here are the greatest names coupled with the greatest crimes; you would spare those criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice, still more, still higher for the sake of historical science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dalberg-Acton,_1st_Baron_Acton

Whitesince63 wrote:

As usual wander, like most remain voters you only pick out the bits that show Brexit negatively. You could easily have mentioned that inward investment into the UK is at its highest ever level, the AUCUS deal or the new trade deals that we’ve done outside the EU, or the projections that the City of London would be trashed by moves by business to the EU were completely unfounded as more European companies open offices within the square mile.

There's been a development on this front today White (I assume you were joking about the inward investment and the "trade deals")

Apparently only half of the financial services firms granted temporary licences to trade in the City have applied for full authorisation according to the FCA.

Not all doom and gloom as discussed here but it speaks volumes about the Brexit bullshit.