UKC

Looks like it is taking longer than we thought. If a hard Brexit (leaving the single market immediately) means 4 percentage points off GDP - ie a recession, I can't see it ever happening. I could imagine a scenario something like this: the bumbling idiots put in charge of negotiations come back with the message 'no single market without free movement'. No reputable politician could envisage deliberately putting the economy into recession, the City, business and the unions wouldn't accept it. So where would that leave us?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/22/brexit-means-brexit-when-is...

In reply to Pekkie:

Aggggg

We have to discuss read about this again?

Didn't The Cyberwoman May say that she would not make a statement of intent till next year?

How are things not going fast enough when May gave a target time which has not expired yet?

In reply to The Lemming:

>> We have to discuss read about this again?

Well I'm certainly not going to waste time discussing it again! Just checking in to assess 'progress'.

In reply to Pekkie:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2016/aug/21/martin-rowson...

In reply to Pekkie:

I would challenge that, IMO, the political cost for a Tory government for not going ahead with Brexit is likely to be higher in the short term than the political cost of sharp slow down, or even a recession (which can always be blamed on the evil EU for being uncooperative anyway). Especially with a weak and discredited opposition.
At the end of the day their core voters will be largely insulated (at the expense of future generations) thanks to triple lock state pensions.

In reply to Pekkie:

https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/761857140122382336

In reply to Pekkie:

Whats a Brexit?

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

A snack you can take while at work rest and play.

However it causes constipation of an economy.

In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:


Scotland leaving the British Isles.

In reply to Pekkie:

Really surprised at the lack of a coherent response to my post. Before the vote I would have been overwhelmed by Brexiters ridiculing my pessimistic prognosis and asking for evidence to back it up. Now the pro-Brexit politicians have, like a kid's dropped ice-cream, melted away into the cracks in a hot pavement and no one wants ownership of a shit hand. What once had many fathers is now a poor little orphan. (See what I did there? Mix three metaphors?)

In reply to Pekkie:

I thought quite a few of those pro-brexit politicians made up the cabinet...?

In reply to JayK:

No, no, no! You'd never have a pro-Brexit MP as Foreign Secretary, or Secretary of State for Environment or Secretary of State for International Development or Minister of State position at the Department for Work and Pensions, they've all "vanished" apparently!!?!?

In reply to Big Ger:

If you think the Foreign Secretary was truly pro-Brexit you've obviously never seen Mel Brooks 'The Producers'. Brexit was the last thing Johnson wanted.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
He was the leader of the Leave campaign, the accusation was that he had, "like a kid's dropped ice-cream, melted away into the cracks in a hot pavement". He hasn't, far from it.

In reply to Pekkie:


Are you spooling for a fight? Maybe everyone is doing like the government and playing a game of wait and see how this develops rather than slap all our trump cards down. Seems to be working so far looking at the very mild form of disquiet in the economy. Would you prefer panic across all sectors?

In reply to Big Ger:


During the campaign Boris was all over the media. Now you never hear from him. Pretty quiet for a Foreign Secretary. No peace inititatives, trade intiatives. No initiatives whatsoever. And where are Gove, Farage Leadsome and the rest?

In reply to BnB:


I am actually. The Brexit camp were continually asked for their plans if the the vote went their way. Not a dicky bird. Now we are faced with the possibility of a self-imposed recession. (Walks over to window and opens it so he can shout into the street) Yes I'm mad, and I'm not going to stand for it any more!

In reply to BnB:


I think Pekkie is trying to illicit a response from Brexiteers on how this connundurum might be resolved.

I agree with Rob, bojo never wanted Brexit, it's inbetween the lines of his telegraph articles, especially the last one. To use his own type of analogy, he was running away from the mess he'd made when matron dragged him back by the ear and ordered him to help clear it up.

In reply to BnB:


Waiting too long may not be such a good idea for the UK and the EU. Brexit has not affected consumption so far, more or less as predicted, but investment plans in key sectors dependent on being in the single market are being put on hold, and there is only so much aggressive monetary easing can do. Unless the government steps in with public spending (if it can afford it) this is most likely going to lead to a slow down on the coming years, with repercussion on wages and unemployment.

In reply to BnB:


I wouldn't describe the current situation as "working". It's a big self-inflicted mess where most people are blithely ignorant of what they've let themselves in for. You can see that in the increase in consumer spending for July yet with the poor business confidence figures. In the area I work most businesses I deal with have had contracts cancelled or put on hold because of the Brexit vote, and that wil eventually trickle through into job losses. The only sensible thing to be done now is to get us out of the EU as quick as possible because the longer that's delayed the worse things will get.

In reply to RomTheBear:

There's definitely a balance to be struck but it's only been two months. As a business owner, my confidence is bolstered by the fact that we aren't rushing into a precipitate divorce. One of your recent posts suggested to me that you're an IT recruiter? Have you ever been so overwhelmed with demand for skills than in the period since 23 June? Counter-intutive isn't it? But it suggests the business world expects us to muddle through without the disruption predicted by the Remain camp.

Edit: spelling

In reply to Pekkie:



You could just as easily rail against the Bremainers for misleading the electorate. The Bremain camp predicted an economic Armageddon that simply hasn't materialised. Not that I'm dismissing the possibility, however, all the major indices worldwide, as well as Euro and GBP denominated ones, have shrugged Brexit off within 6 weeks of the result. Consumer spending has held up and there is no hard data whatsoever to indicate a recession, only temperature readings of business confidence amongst middle managers taken too close to the shock of the referendum result to be considered a mature and reasoned, let alone reliable, perspective.

I'm bloody glad the government is taking a very measured approach, not least because it is good negotiating policy as it places more strain on the other side.

In reply to wurzelinzummerset:


That strategy would remove uncertainty but deliver an inferior trading relationship out of the negotiations with long term repercussions. I believe that it's far too soon to assume that knee jerk reactions to an unwelcome news headline represent long term investment policy. Businesses have a well-proven habit of adjusting and gettting on with it and the longer the exit process takes the more it becomes the new normal.

In reply to BnB:

100% agree with that sentiment.I think it is sensible that Uk govt is basically keeping a lid on things for the moment whilst everybody gets their act together- including the EU.

TM appears to have already stamped down on comments from the likes of Liam Fox, good on her for doing that.

Mind you it is holiday period.

I see another classic blunder of a photo opp with merkel , hollande and the Italian PM - what about the other countries - or do they not count.

In reply to BnB:


I don't think "Armageddon" claim is true, except in one or two cases. The majority of predictions were pretty unemotive as far as I could see. Most worst off predictions are still probable.

In reply to wurzelinzummerset:


The point I was making was that a quick brexit as you propose would mean leaving the single market and hence a 4% drop in GDP - ie a recession with all that that entails in terms of unemployment and job losses. Is that what you want? Would you be happy to lose your job? Would you be happy for your kids to lose theirs?

In reply to abseil:


That would actually be quite difficult and would involve cutting along the Scottish border till you reach the earth's mantle and towing away the northern part. That would probably be a big ask even for the would-be miracle-workers known as the SNP. ;0))

In reply to BnB:

They didn't. The Remain campaign emphasised the risks, a few may have laid it on a bit thick but it was actually the Leave campaign who exaggerated the warnings to Armageddon. It was classic propaganda, heavily distort your opponents message then ridicule it. The reluctance to invoke Article 50 , with very little opposition, does vindicate the original warnings.

In reply to BnB:


Deferred judgement until something actually happens one way or the other might be a more appropriate assessment IMO at least.
jk

In reply to GrahamD:


hahaha - thunk
<falls off chair laughing>

I became despairing of the emotion displayed both before and after the vote by folk who were normally quite lucid and intelligent. You only have to look at the ridiculous Facebook and social media reaction on June 24 etc to realise that many people reacted with emotions that would probably get them sacked if displayed in the workplace!

In reply to BnB:


That's just not true. You can't say with any certainty that stringing things out will deliver a better deal. Economically and politically the world will probably be in a very different place 12 months from now so it's just as well to get on with things as soon as is reasonable and avoid the massive collateral damage caused by the uncertainty of not doing so. The longer things go on the more political/economic variables change and the more uncertain outcomes become. Currently we have a position of some, relative, economic strength to negotiate from. That could change.

And the negatives are not just a "unwelcome news headline". It's reality. The capital spending being put on hold now is going to mean people losing their jobs next year and the year after that.

In reply to BnB:


If we wait long enough the EU will fall apart.

In reply to Big Ger:


Where was he during the first session in the Commons following the referendum?

In reply to Big Ger:

Pointless referendum then, eh?

In reply to Babika:




Social media is your source of evidence for hyperbole? really ?

In reply to BnB:


Well thats because we haven't left yet! Quite amusing really - I have read a few overseas journos, claim that Brexit hasn't been as bad as expected, which was quite a shock to me as I thought they must have organised it and upped and left without me finding out.

In reply to Big Ger:


And, if it happens, you'll be able to take pride in our contribution to the process.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

...while he watches from the safety of Australia!

In reply to MG:


Europe's sand and soil is steeped in Australian blood. Distance has only provided at best an illusion of safety when Europe has torn itself apart.

The disintigration of the EU seems a strange thing to wish for to me.
jk

In reply to BnB:


If you look at the treasury analysis, they predicted a 10/15% fall in the value of the pound, virtually no change in consumption for endQ2/Q32016, but a drop in investment, and then sharper drops in investment, with consumption starting dropping as well in 2017 and onwards.
So as far as it goes, for the immediate post Brexit economic impact they were bang on the mark, sterling has fallen exactly within the range predicted, somewhere between the "shock" and "severe shock" scenario. And survey data on investment correlates also with their prediction for investment this quarter.

I just hope that their prediction for 2017/2018 is wrong.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36515680

"As a historian I fear Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilisation in its entirety," he told the German newspaper Bild.

No need for a comment on that is there?

Pekkie - seems pretty obvious that many (like me) just see no point whatsoever in going over the referendum arguments again. You didn't listen the first time, you won't now.

In reply to Pekkie:

There is a lot of activity going on behind the scenes, we get glimpses and all I can say is at the moment we are on our way out.

In reply to BnB:


You know we haven't actually left yet?

In reply to Pekkie:

Nothing's going to happen till after elections next year in France and Germany. Voted out but this is what I expected. A very British Brexit, I.E. not really a exit from the E.U. at all. Want to see the Tories blue and red with their backs against the wall come 2020.

D

In reply to thomasadixon:

"As a historian I fear Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilisation in its entirety," he told the German newspaper Bild.


Are you saying its wrong? Bit early to say surely? I can well imagine in a worst case scenario the EU slowly crumbling - say one more lost referendum and deep recession to trigger a collapse. If coupled with Trump winning, there wouldn't be much left of the the West in the sense we have thought of it for at least 60 years.

In reply to Mike Stretford:



I thought he seemed unnerved by the reality of what he'd helped happen.

In reply to thomasadixon:



Other than point out he isn't a British politician and not part of the remain campaign, do you want to bring Trump into it too? Tusk is Polish and obviously had an interest in the UK remaining. They are feeling a bit nervous in that part of the world, an aggressive Putin, a possible Trump presidency.... it is a country that's been through a lot in the last century.

In reply to Big Ger:

If you wait long enough pretty much everything will fall apart. It's not just the EU which has processes that will eventually tear it apart if it doesn't change and adapt. Theresa May's government won't last for ever and the UK itself with Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland getting out is just as likely to fall apart as the EU.

In reply to MG:



I'm not going to go over the referendum arguments again for the reason given. If you don't think that saying it will cause the collapse of Western civilisation is over the top hyperbole then you don't I suppose.

- Mike Stretford


Fair point I suppose, although I'm not sure what on earth Trump has to do with anything. Donald Tusk on the other hand is the head of the European Council. Pretty important in EU terms, although as you say not a member of the remain campaign. It was just the most over the top statement I could recall off hand. Care to post anything to support your claim that the other side were worse?

In reply to thomasadixon:


Just make provocative posts about it instead?


As a worst case, no I don't think it is hyperbolic to identify the referendum as one in a chain of possible events that could lead to the "West" as the dominant political, military and diplomatic entity ending.

In reply to thomasadixon:




Like Tusk he isn't British, but voiced an opinion on the matter, and could have a stake in the outcome.


Can we narrow it down a bit? Do you want the xenophobia and racism or the bullshit?

In reply to MG:


It's provocative to say that the remain camp made over the top claims? There's the reason not to discuss it, immediate fight.


"destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilisation in its entirety" is the quote. I'll leave it at that.

In reply to thomasadixon:

>> "destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilisation in its entirety" is the quote. I'll leave it at that.

Well that's convenient. It will save you having to compare this horrendous campaigning you identify with the likes of a picture of refugees composed in the same way as a Nazi era picture with the caption "Breaking Point"

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-b...

In reply to thomasadixon:

You were right, I had a good point. Not part of the remain campaign, not a British politician, from a country with specific worries right now, and a living memory of horrific occupations.

If that's the best you can come up with it proves the point I made. To be helpful, the worst I can think from Remain was Osbourne's ridiculous 'Brexit budget', it was poor. Desperation, he knew the helping hand of Murdoch had turned against him.

In reply to RomTheBear:



I hope so too. But the Treasury analysis isn't the same thing as the Bremain campaign. Emergency budget, anyone?

Edit to doff a cap to Mike for alighting on the same example

In reply to BnB:

Turkey joining the EU, 350 millions per week for the NHS, anyone ?
That's the problem with the electorate behaving like sheep to be fed and just listening to soundbites instead of doing their homework.

You don't need to convince that the campaigns were disgraceful (although on balance IMO the Leave campaign was particularly nasty, vague, and clueless).

I'm just making the point that the treasury analysis looks like it wasn't off the mark - so far.

In reply to RomTheBear:


The irony is that we effectively voted not to have a veto on it.

In reply to RomTheBear:

I suspect, but could be wrong, that a significant proportion of Leave voters think that we have left the EU already, or have at least started the process. At the risk of sounding patronising, politics and governance hardly register in the lives of the less-well educated who have been hurt most by austerity and globalisation and who tended to vote Leave. That was certainly my impression when campaigning for Stronger In. The Referendum simply gave many a chance to voice their discontent and to hurt the establishment. Very likely now they would probably not even notice if we went ahead and left or not, especially given that any trade agreement would almost inevitably involve free movement.



TM may be making an astute - or dangerous - political gamble. The pensioners aren't likely to change their voting preferences at this stage in life, especially if the Triple-Lock is guaranteed in the Tory manifesto. The Daily Mail can grumble all it likes but its readership are hardly going to start voting Green are they? The demographic who grew up before entry to the EEC is being eroded from both ends as the current, more pro-EU early 40-somethings age. If May can string this out until the 2020 election then it'll potentially be six to seven years "narrower".

There are also signals that businesses are factoring in A50 being delayed to 2018 - or not at all. odds of this are running at 6/4. Yes, I know the bookies got it wrong in the Ref. That could mean business as usual for at least four years and time to draw up contingency plans if we go ahead and pull the pin on A50.

All speculation (or wishful thinking).

In reply to GrahamD:



Actually no. The Grauniad hyperbole was so OTT that I gave up buying it for a bit as I decided they'd all lost their marbles.

Returned to it last Saturday to find a nice calm article from the Economics Editor saying he voted Brexit and felt vindicated. Quite refreshing really given the papers background and a return to balanced reporting which is really all that I want rather than histrionics from either side.

In reply to Babika:


Larry Elliot, the economics editor, was consistently pro-Brexit before the vote, as were other contributors.

His weekend article was a bit silly, in a 'told you so' sort of way. He can't be vindicated, we haven't Brexited, or invoked article 50, or even said when we'll do it. We have a non Brexiteer PM and 2 of the 3 Brexiteers charged with delivering Brexit say we should have access to the single market.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

This "access to the single market" thing is a bit silly. Virtually every country in the world has "access" to the single market. That's a completely different proposition from being "part of" the single market.

In reply to RomTheBear:


Ok 'continued tariff-free access', as David Davis puts it.

In reply to Babika:


Unfortunately I have to agree. A bit of a sad state of affair of the British press in general, the Torygraph and the Grauniad used to be respectable newspapers, but with the rise of online they became focused on click-bait opinion pieces, with no balanced journalistic analysis of the facts, pre-masticated feces to be fed to whoever needs their own bias confirmed.

As for the BBC, they are so scared of being accused of bias, all they do is being impartial, which is in itself a form of bias. One guy says the earth is flat, the other says the earth is round, they'll just give the same weight to both views as if they were equal.

In reply to RomTheBear:
Nah, there's balance in both, a range of opinions in the guardian and the 'reality check' series was calm analysis, not always to the benefit of the Remain campaign. James Kirkup winds up the swivel eyed loons in the Teleagraph, quite amusing reading the comments sections after his articles.

You just need the patience to look through and not flounce off when you see an article/post that doesn't agree with you, much like UKC.

In reply to Timmd:

'I thought he seemed unnerved by the reality of what he'd helped happen.'

I thought it was a brilliant move - get all the Tory support for being a Brexiteer, but once the vote to leave was lost he'd be a shoe-in for Cameron before the next election.

Trouble was, he was too good, and he won. What's more, he realised he was winning/losing several weeks before the vote, and basically went invisible. Still lost/won, though.

In reply to Rog Wilko:


Good idea.

No offence, dear Weegies

In reply to Rog Wilko:

Reactivate the Solway Line!
(the geological one, not the railway)

In reply to Dave Garnett:


Certainly!

In reply to MG:

Ermmm... no, by the time that that happens, I will be safely back in Blighty.

But don't let that stop you playing the man not the ball.

In reply to Mike Stretford:


Not really, Brexit was needed to make the nations of the EU come to their senses, and to realise a loose amalgamation of nation states, each with it's own proud heritage, culture economy and people, is far better than the EU "ever closer union" nightmare bureaucratic beast.

In reply to Pekkie:

Meanwhile, back on the news front:





https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/23/uk-economic-surveys-defy-b...

In reply to Big Ger:


Evidence ?

In reply to RomTheBear:

Evidence of what? That I think this was the case?

There they are, my thoughts.

In reply to Big Ger:


How do you come to that opinion, that's my question.
I've lived in different parts of continental Europe. It doesn't seem to me that a looser agglomeration would make sense. In my experience the small difference of heritage and culture within regions of nation states are often greater than the differences between the nation states themselves.

In reply to RomTheBear:

How does anyone come to an opinion?

You do not think "a looser agglomeration would make sense", I think it would.

In reply to Big Ger:

Hopefully, with facts, experience, and reasoned arguments ?


But why.

In reply to RomTheBear:
Mainly due to the failure of the current EU organisation. It's a monolithic bureaucracy which consumes and consumes, yet produces little of value. The UK is blessed by our exiting.

In reply to Big Ger and RomTheBear:

Please can we have our thread back? I enjoy both your contributions but once you start on each other it gets tiresome. At least keep your mutual animosity to the "Euro" thread.

In reply to BnB:


I think I agree with that. 'I bet my dad can fight your dad', 'It doesn't', 'it does' 'it doesn't, doesn't, doesn't' kind of argument gets tiresome after a while. My original post was made (regardless of whether I think the EU is a good idea or not) to point out the difficulty of negotiating tariff-free access to the single market without accepting free movement and the difficulty of changing our trading patterns within the two years set by invoking Article 50. It can't be done. Anyone who has taken the trouble to research it (ie not the vast majority of brexit voters) knows it can't be done. I suspect that May knows it can't be done and is thinking ahead to when these bleak facts become apparent.

In reply to Pekkie:

I think there is a misunderstanding in this debate in general. In most cases the UK does not have a "trading" relationship with the single market, we are an integral part of it.
What we are talking about with Brexit is really painfully extricating ourselves out of it - and then try to limit the damage by trying to negotiate the best trading relationship possible.

Of course the impossibility of negotating staying part of the single market without having all the rules, including freedom of movement is not only clear, it's nonsensical, given that this is those rules that make it a single market - but I think most brexiteers have at least accepted that.

In reply to Peter Metcalfe:

As I said earlier, from the inside it appears we are going ahead with exit. There is a lot of activity going on that the public are not aware of, all moving in one direction. Not that it cant be halted, but at this stage the message is clear, we are on the way out

In reply to kipper12:


If you read the link in my original post you will see that you are wrong. The EU will not negotiate until Article 50 has been served. And they won't talk to Fox and Davies anyway - negotiation is carried out between country leaders and their civil servants. The link also makes clear that we don't have the experience or the expert staff to negotiate trade deals - which will most likely take decades to sort out. And once it becomes clear that we might face a 4% drop in GDP - ie a recession - if we leave the tariff-free single market.... Which politician is going to go down that road? Would you advocate going down that road if it meant you or your children losing their jobs?
Like I said - don't hold your breath!

In reply to RomTheBear:
You both seem to generally agree on the difficulties bordering on impossibility of extricating ourselves.

That in itself is worrying - I don't recollect a "till death do us part" clause mentioned when we signed up to the EU.

In reply to Pekkie:

That's not what I said, the UK Government is engaged internally across and within departments over the details now, there is a lot going on you are not seeing All of the activity leads me to believe it will happen. None of this activity could have taken place before the vote. You will also find that there is a lot of back-channel communication going on too

That's not what I want to happen though, it is just I think it is the reality, based on what I am seeing and hearing. As for loosing my job, in reality it will only change what I do, and for some it will make their careers.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

" James Kirkup winds up the swivel eyed loons in the Teleagraph, quite amusing reading the comments sections after his articles."

I thought the Telegraph had turned off comments quite a while ago

In reply to kipper12:


According to one piece I read, the UK Government is still trying to recruit suitable trade negotiators, and is some way short of the numbers needed. I'm sure there is stuff going on which we're not seeing, but I doubt anything is going to happen quickly.

In reply to BnB:


No sooner said than done!

In reply to tony:

And obviously BIS shutting it's out-lying offices eg Sheffield and Cardiff and loosing very experienced staff won't help.