UKC

According to https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/30/government-refuses-to-rele... (also reported elsewhere):
The Brexit department has refused to release key details about the 58 secret studies into how leaving the EU will impact the economy, saying officials need to make policy in a “safe space”.

However mild or catastrophic the expected impact is, according to the studies, logically the only advantage to be gained by withholding details is if the EU negotiators are under the impression that the impact may be less severe than it promises to be.

Clearly the EU negotiators must know that, and their expectations must surely be lowered simply on account of the UK's refusal to publish these studies.

It follows that the expected economic impact, according to the studies, is so bad that, even after effectively telling EU negotiators it's worse than they probably thought already, the UK government must still be convinced the EU's adjusted expectations remain higher than the predicted reality.

Does anybody still think that the economic impact of Brexit can be anything other than calamitous? And if so, on what basis do you arrive at that opinion?

Or is it that you're prepared to see the buying power of the pound in your pocket plummet for many years in return for other advantages of Brexit, in which case what are the advantages you see as important enough to justify it?

Apologies in advance for bringing logic into a Brexit discussion.

In reply to john arran:

Gosh, another Brexit thread, just what we needed .

In reply to john arran:


As Davis one said: “time and time again information is withheld from the public for no good reason other than to spare the blushes of the powerful”

In reply to john arran:

Whilst I agree with much of your analysis, I suspect this is just typical HMG - the UK always seems very secretive and reluctant to release government advice - rather than a deliberate tactic unique to this occasion.

In reply to john arran:

It's all about sovereignty now isn't it, the economic argument is case closed?

As a barman said to me recently:

"What the f*** is sovereignty? It isn't even a thing is it?"

Priceless.

In reply to john arran:

Yes but, but democracy. And we're taking control. And, err straight bananas. And, hmmm unelected eurocrats telling me not to sh1t on the beach. So. There.

In reply to john arran:

Don't be daft, this is all part of our brexit negotiators' grand plan. There won't be any severe consequences https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-23/the-harder-brexit-gets-t...

And jobs will grow http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41803604

We're taking back control.

In reply to Andy Hardy:


Nonsense that. Urban myth about those bananas.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1994R2257:200...

In reply to Rampikino:

Sorry for the confusion: Under EU diktat on Emojiis (227/8799) clause (ix) para 3, I am only permitted to use "winking or smiling emojiis, sparingly, at a rate of less than 4 per week" - and I had a busy day yesterday. Honestly I can't wait until we've thrown off the shackles of the EU and we'll be free to use as many winky faces as we damn well please.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

Hope you're not having bendy cucumber for lunch...

(another EU regulation that should be a myth but sadly, is not).

In reply to john arran:


You cannot reason people out of a situtation they did not reason themselves in to.

We're Bayesian inference machines and our first guess can be way out. Repeat experience can help our judgment zero in on 'truth' but when our experiences are manipulated by right wing disaster capitalists and Russian bots, our innate/evolved territorialism/nationalist identity can be easily exploited.

There is still hope. What we need to do is draw Article 50 out until the folly of Brexit is widely evident and unquestionable to all (at the moment, any difficulty around Brexit is being put on to Remoaners & 'traitors'). Then, hopefully, we can re-engage with the World's biggest and most valuable trading bloc.

In reply to Shani:

it's time to call out the Brexiteers as those who have allowed us to drift unter ifluence of a Putish Plot. Give him just what he wants

In reply to Shani:

I could understand the constant hysteria if people were going to lose something that mattered to them. But no, it's only about money. That's the most important thing.

In reply to David Riley:

What is the most important thing?

In reply to David Riley:


What... Job? Home? Functional public services? A mutually beneficial relationship with our nearest neighbours and allies bringing much needed stability to a continent long wracked by war? We can't eat 'sovereignty' and precious few of us will be in a position to profiteer from they chaos being brought down upon us by those who will.


Don't be so willfully daft, it's not about money per se, it's about the things money and a stable economy underpinning that money buys.
jk

In reply to David Riley:

Money affects quality of life, which translates into how much UK plc brings in, which impacts on the available services for the poor the disabled and the vulnerable (among many other things).

I thank my lucky stars that my mental health has recovered before Austerity kicked in, never mind the possibility of Brexit and it's impact on the economy. Friends of mine are trying to access mental health services and being told there's nothing available for them, where there once was.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

To me the most important thing is avoiding being an insignificant part of a superstate, which will end up corrupt and draconian, that we probably cannot leave in the future.

In reply to David Riley:


That's why every member has the power of veto. The EU is what the member states wants it to be.

In reply to David Riley:


We can't leave now. But we will. And then, think of the opportunities...

In reply to David Riley:

Imho, the UK never would have been an insignificant part of the EU, due to the size of it's economy, which has shrunk since the vote for Brexit, the fact that Cameron had secured agreement of no further integration of the UK into the EU, and that more than 90% of the time, anything the UK has had a vote in - has gone the UK's way.

The UK has benefited from being in the EU, and wouldn't have become subsumed by it thanks to what Cameron secured agreement on. You can google what he'd got the EU to agree on.

In reply to Rampikino:



I have news for you. Nine and a half years past it's sell-by date, sorry about that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/2453204/Bent-banana-and-cu...

In reply to David Riley:

This is a simplistic analysis. There are a whole host of EU regulations that underpin our society, which wealthy Brexiteer captalists call 'a brake on our economy', but which the rest of us call 'a brake on exploitation of workers and the environment by the privileged & powerful' :

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2017/10/may-slammed-for-promoting-brextremis...

In reply to David Riley:

Which would never have happened against the UK’s will as long as the U.K. was part of the EU, for the simple reason that any treaty changes have to be ratified at unanimity.

The irony is that as a result of brexit the U.K. may well indeed make the EU superstate a reality, even a necessity, but on top of that, we’d have managed to relinquish all influence over it.

In reply to john arran:

I know that this thread starts off with a discussion about the economic impact of Brexit, but that is not the whole story. This is an interesting counterpoint to the received UKC wisdom:

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/10/obliged-reconsider-support-...

The idea that an elected official needs to seek asylum whilst the EU stands by and does nothing, in contravention of its Articles, should give everyone pause for thought.

There is an excellent and active discussion of the economic issues, with a detailed look at the treaties and the real-world implications here:

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/category/brexit

In reply to gallam1:

All rather points to the fact that the EU is just a group of its member states and not actually a super state. You can't have it both ways.

In reply to David Riley:


This is tinfoil hat territory. But let’s say you’re right, we’re now going to be just outside a corrupt and draconian superstate with absolutely no influence over it, plucky little Britain standing alone while the EU jackboot grinds down the rest of Europe. All rise for the national anthem.

In reply to gallam1:



Can you explain where the contravention of their article is ?

Anyway, the article makes a moot point. As others pointed out the EU is not a superstate, it’s simply a bunch of democratic countries setting policy together. Given that most if not all of the EU members gouvernement are siding with the Spanish government, the careful position of the EC is not surprising.

If the Spanish state has actually violated the EU treaties, then the independentists can take a case to the ECJ. If not for the EU they would have no practical recourse whatsoever.

In reply to gallam1:

I suspect it all the fault of the BMC!

In reply to Sir Chasm:

Didn't that happen already ?

In reply to RomTheBear:


It'll be there with the bent bananas and cucumbers, probably.

In reply to john arran:

I think it's even worse. May and the senior ministers are saying they haven't read the reports, just the summaries.

My guess is the reports are so bad for Brexit the lawyers/PR people advised they'd be better off not reading them so they still have the option of saying 'I don't know' or claiming the exact opposite of what the reports found without lying.

In reply to gallam1:

Lots of criticism and a media-friendly toys-out-of-the-pram moment, yet I didn't see a single reference to any attempt to put right the alleged non-compliance from within, or indeed at all.

In reply to gallam1:



I'd have been pissed off if the SNP had declared themselves independent from the UK and the EU come out in support of them over the rest of the UK.

What should they do? Members of the EU are sovereign states, this just gives lie to the idea that national govts are under the heel of the EU.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


Their agenda is driven by politics, not by facts, so why bother.


Anyway I can’t think of anything in these impact assessments that somehow wouldn’t be already in the public domain or couldn’t be worked out quite easily by the EU.

The argument around secrecy being needed to preserve negotiating advantage is therefore complete bollocks. The real reason they are kept secret is because they would be politically embarassing and come at a bad time.

In reply to RomTheBear:
Broadly speaking, if you are in a negotiation with another party over, let's say, an apple pie and you can make the event of disagreement extremely disagreeable to the other party (for example by shooting them), you will find you end up with an agreement in which you receive all or most of the pie. This is the non-cooperative substructure of the Nash Bargaining Solution that underpins a lot of negotiated outcomes.

See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bargaining_problem

I would suggest that this is the reason that the UK Government does not want to reveal these documents. I have no doubt that the documents indicate that we know that a disagreement will be painful. It is also the reason why there is so much ambiguity left by the UK over the Northern Irish border question. In the event of a disagreement, and a hard Brexit, the Irish border will fatally undermine the protection needed for the single market and the CAP to operate.

In reply to deepsoup:

I'm aware.

But not a myth - they really did implement them, even if they dropped them later.

In reply to gallam1:

>the Irish border will fatally undermine the protection needed for the single market and the CAP to operate.

So the EU will have to try to force its member state to have a hard border against their wishes.

In reply to David Riley:

Yes, and in the case of Ireland the EU will be up against the fact that for the average person in Ireland there is a de facto united Ireland, thanks to the single market and the Good Friday Agreeement. This was the strategic goal of the Free Staters and has taken a century to achieve. No amount of bullying by the EU is going to persuade the government of Eire to build a wall along the border. Don't forget also that the British Army was tasked with protecting the border and failed.

In reply to David Riley:



Let me guess: you are simultaneously horrified the EU isn’t able to force countries to prevent immigrants arriving with hard borders.

In reply to gallam1:

In what way? In the event of the likely catastrophic breakdown in negotiations the border gets closed and passport/customs control posts implemented. How exactly does that undermine CAP or the single market? It probably will act to quickly reunify Ireland and or reignite a dormant war. Alternatively it pares Ireland off from the EU which would be an unlikely choice for them to make in light of the process the UK had just been through. Either way the decision to close/control the border does not lie exclusively in Dublin, the UK cannot achieve its stated objectives around controlled borders without implementing a border somewhere on the island of Ireland and with the DUP weilding power you can bet your ass that's not going to be at UK ports.

The ambiguity exists in large part because a viable solution doesn't.
jk

In reply to gallam1:

It would appear the Charter is only applicable when EU states are implementing EU law, i.e. no consideration in matters outside EU law. It's also separate from the ECHR.

It's not good at all what's happening in Spain but it has to be handled very carefully. Other positions could lead to a mutually destructive situation.

Breaches of the ECHR can be taken to court (not the Charter) so those assaulted can bring cases under this option.

In any case this blogger is very selective: was his support of the EU questioned during the miners strike or the assault by Italian police on peaceful protestors during the 2001 G8 summit (one protester, at least, took the authorities to the ECHR and won)?

Of course, mamy Brexiteers want to leave the ECHR. Sovereignty my FA: they need to 'restore' their ability to influence, shape and buy the laws of the UK and take back control for their own profit.

In reply to jkarran:
Ok, so taking these points in turn:

There is no "customs control" solution to the Irish border, even if the government of Eire wanted to implement one, which they don't.

The fact that the border is effectively open will allow me to import lamb from New Zealand into Northern Ireland, transport it to Eire and then re-export it to the EU for a 40% markup. It's a smugglers dream.

Ireland will not be reunified as a consequence of this situation. That requires the permission of the UK Government.

Eire cannot easily be ejected from the EU on account of the border situation and the politics of that would look terrible.

I agree that a viable solution simply does not exist. That is why the Irish border is a valuable threat point for the UK in the negotiations with the EU.

In reply to gallam1:



There is and it has existed in the recent past. Nobody wants it but we've fuc*ed up so we're probably going to get it. If it happens Ireland will likely receive some short term compensation from the EU to ease the pain and appease the population.


Yes so an open border simply isn't going to happen.


With the demographic make up of NI today, the fruits of a decade of peace beginning to blossom and brexit's economic hardship imposed from Westminster (as it will easily be portrayed) there's a very good chance the people of NI may choose to succede in which case the Westminster government will likely be faced with fighting yet another colonial shooting war in a post colonial era or respecting their right to self determination. Will Ireland agree to take NI on with all the trouble it will inevitably bring and the economic ties currently so valuable severely frayed by the years it will take to get to that point... who knows?


Yes it would so it'll likely be big carrot and a little bit of a very big stick on show.


I disagree it's a fulcrum about which we have any real leverage, it's a problem to solve and one that buys us at best one ally in the EU *if* we can solve it well.
jk

In reply to gallam1:


Sure, but my point here is precisely that in this case publishing or not publishing the impact assessments doesn’t change anything in the parameters of the game, for the good reason that there can’t be anything in those document that probably hasn’t been worked out by the EU or isn’t already in the public domain, and therefore it doesn’t change the perceived cost of disagreement.

So, unless the impact assessment reveals huge costs of a no deal to the U.K. that somehow the EU wouldn’t already have knowledge of (which seems very unlikely), the simple explanation for not releasing them, is that they are simply politically embarassing for the government.

In reply to David Riley:


Not again their wishes. ROI is completely free to leave the single market and the EU, and have no border with NI, if that is what they wish.

On the other hand, NI is not free to stay in the EU single market and customs unions. That depends on the U.K.

In reply to Rampikino:

We did this to death on the other thread, let's just leave it shall we?

In reply to john arran:

I just had a quick look at google maps with a view to the smuggling opportunities presented by the border situation in Northern Ireland.

Can anyone beat the area around Crossmaglen?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.0556153,-6.5799118,18z/data=!3m1!1e3

In reply to andyfallsoff:



Which other thread? The other Brexit thread? Which one of the hundreds?

Leave what? The Brexit discussion. I've barely posted on the whole thing in the last 18 months - less than 10 posts on Brexit from me, nearly all of them on this thread!

My point is that such things SHOULD be a myth but sadly, very sadly, they are not and money/time/effort was spent on them and has simply fed opinions of the EU over time.

In reply to gallam1:


An infamous area during The Troubles, of course. And for the same reasons.

In reply to Rampikino:



So basically the EU countries have agreed to not so great policies, and then later on they agreed to undo it.
Wow, shocker, that’s really terrible.
Let’s replace all this by overly complex bilateral agreements that are even more difficult to change, that’ll make things better.

In reply to Rob Parsons:

There is what looks like a purpose built truck depot here too:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.0554138,-6.5389612,19z/data=!3m1!1e3

In reply to gallam1:

I'm struggling to see how this problem will be any less thorny regardless of the nature of deal eventually struck. Unless of course it retains membership of the customs union, there will still be border issues to resolve. So how is it a bargaining advantage?

Do you really see the UK being taken seriously if it turns itself into a smuggler's paradise? And would that be in addition to a tax haven?

In reply to john arran:
There is an article here that explains the issue from the point of view of the French farmers:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-39946042

The point is that the UK simply has to do nothing. The size of the EU market and the size of the CAP tariffs, combined with the amazingly porous border, mean that the smuggling opportunities are pretty much unparalleled in modern history. It is hard to see how the issue will be resolved if the UK is not in the customs union.

It is a bargaining advantage in the sense that in the event of a disagreement Brexit will undermine the CAP and the single market. That is painful for the EU.

In reply to Rob Parsons:

so bad it gets a page of its own. Horrifically rarely out of the news in those days

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles_in_Crossmaglen

In reply to gallam1:


And in the event of agreement, presumably not including customs union, how is it any less painful?

In reply to gallam1:



The only issue is to find a solution without a hard border, which is of course unachievable unless the U.K. government gets into a customs union with the EU.

In reply to john arran:


You have that back to front. It has nothing to do with the UK.
It makes no difference to us if the EU has future problems with its borders.
But they want to negotiate our helping them with those problems. What is in it for us ?

In reply to David Riley:




So once again we've gone from the brilliant economic advantages Brexit will bring us to "it'll be a shit show but we can at least take down some of our neighbours at the same time". But no, it's the EU who are unreasonable.

In reply to David Riley:


I quote gollum: "The fact that the border is effectively open will allow me to import lamb from New Zealand into Northern Ireland, transport it to Eire and then re-export it to the EU for a 40% markup. It's a smugglers dream."

So no, I don't have it the wrong way around. If you want to maintain good relations with your much larger neighbours and encourage bilateral trade and other agreements, it's pretty obvious that you shouldn't set yourself up as a smuggling hub to circumvent their import controls. I'm amazed that this isn't pretty bloody obvious to everybody.

In reply to David Riley:


It does, if smuggling becomes a large problem and it is obvious the U.K. is becoming some kind of smuggling hub, then the EU will have no choice but to massively increase checks and border security, and retaliate on market access, which would put U.K. businesses at a disadvantage.

Btw I think your assessment is completely overblown, there may be some smuggling going on at a local level but the U.K. is not exactly the type of economy and legal system where smuggling of goods on an industrial scale would thrive.

In reply to Rampikino:
Sorry - but yes, the most recent Brexit thread, where we discussed what aspects of this were a myth, why the truth was exaggerated, what the benefits of the policy would have been in the first place...

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=672093

In reply to Tyler:

I don't know where you get that from. I was just answering the question about how the issue was a bargaining advantage.

In reply to john arran:

Yes you do have it wrong. EU states are responsible for policing their borders. Not the source of the goods.

In reply to David Riley:

What do you mean ? EU states do check the origin of products when they are imported from outside the EU.

In reply to john arran:

Just to add to the deeply gloomy truth, I now see that the UK Pound has been the worst performing currency in the world this last week (we're in the 150th position). At this bottom end of complete crap, the Zambian Kwacha is now doing quite a lot better than we are and even the Colombian Peso and the Romanian Leu are now ahead. This is going to hurt everyone very, very badly, but a lot of people just have their heads in the sand and will not listen. I don't mind Brexiteers hurting themselves very badly (having been told the huge dangers and choosing to ignore them), but I do mind them dragging us all down with them.

In reply to David Riley:


Admit it, you don't honestly believe that's the whole, or even the most important, point. Can you not just think even one step further to how relations would be affected if the UK were to let smuggling on a significant scale develop unchecked? And what effect that would have on trade and relations with our most important market?

In reply to David Riley:


Except of course that a small trading nation recently shorn of all it's trade agreements would be utterly fecking crackers to deliberately start a trade war with its nearest neighbours and biggest export market for basically no good reason. Is this really the what brexit logic has sunk to? A ten year old could understand the cost of 'doing nothing'. It's like you're describing some childish pirate fantasy where actions don't have consequences.
Jk

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Well according to my Bloomberg terminal the pound has appreciated against the US dollar and the Euro over the last week and is roughly where it averaged between 2009 and 2011. Things can't be going too well for our larger neighbours either. The Zambian Kwacha could be the new bitcoin.

In reply to jkarran:
I'm not quite sure why you refer to the UK as a small trading nation. It is the fifth or sixth largest economy in the world, out of a total of about 195. If I was in the top 2.5% of people in the world ranked by height, would you refer to me as small?

And I have not noticed anyone advocating a trade war on this thread either. What do you have in mind?

In reply to RomTheBear:

I see you misunderstood my post. I was saying that only the EU state is responsible, not the country from which smuggled goods originated.

In reply to gallam1:

Disingenuous comparison.
The U.K. may be 6th in size, but the gap in size with the US, or the EU, or the Asian trading blocs, is huge.

You’ve got two different leagues basically, the big trading blocs, and the rest.

In reply to David Riley:

Ho I see.
Typically not ( although I’d be suprised if this couldn’t be taken to WTO arbitration for financial redress), but let’s be serious for a second, nobody would want to do businesses with the U.K. if it appeared it didn’t trade fairly, we would have to fall very low really to get to that point !

In reply to RomTheBear:

I see you still don't understand. The UK would not be involved in the transaction. Do you think New Zealand should be blamed ?

In reply to Rampikino:

bendy cucumber for lunch...

He's the one out of Sherlock right?

In reply to David Riley:

No I understand perfectly well, if the goods are smuggled from the U.K. to the EU and clearly the U.K. facilitated it, the U.K. would clearly be involved and would be the object of retaliation.

It’s a bit pointless this discussion, your idea that somehow the U.K. has a future of harming the EU by becoming a smuggling hub is frankly fanciful and bizarre.
Not only it would be easily thwarted with more comprehensive border checks and security, which would harm the U.K, but it’s completely ridiculous to suggest that somehow this would be anything other than self destructing.

In reply to RomTheBear:
There are really 3 main global trading blocks- the EU, the USA and China.You can debate about which one is shrinking and which one is growing.

But it gets confusing because the USA and also the EU uses a status of " most favoured nation" to allow other countries into their block.

Also you get issues like Japan having a FTA with China. So I have a customer in Japan who imports my machines and then sells them onto China and there is 0% customs duty. Whereas if they do direct to China it is 25%.

Juts because you are outside a big tading block does not mean you are small. Japan would fit into that category.So would we, as there are plenty of countries who still want to trade with us.

The advantage with a trading block is just size in negotiations so the EU is really an offset to USA and China's negotiating muscle.

Meanwhile Russia and Brazil do their own thing.So do others like India etc.

On our own we will probabaly be viewed as like Japan, but easier to deal with.

And in the current Brexit negotiations the EU/UK could possibly agree MFN status within WTO rules..well that is my theory anyway.So harmonising duties at 0.

The issue then is VAT, now that is more complicated.I just have not got a clue what they will do about that.

In reply to David Riley:

WTF? The channel ports would grind to a halt at French customs if we don't play nicely and they get picky with paperwork and searches.

Imagine what operation stack on a regular basis would do to the reliability and costs of British exporters.

In reply to elsewhere:


Ah, but then we could reciprocate and make it really hard for the EU to export to the UK ...

and thereby shoot ourselves in the other foot, to add to the one we've already peppered with bullets.

In reply to elsewhere:

There are loads of ways that freight companies can move stuff away from the ports into bonded areas etc. Commonly used at the moment.

Not that anybody will want to do that. Its in neither sides interests for this to happen, so its just needless scaremongering by the doomsayers and makes nice headlines.I would treat it as such even though I want to remain.

In reply to David Riley:


Putting to one side the fact that most foodstuffs goes Ireland-UK-mainland EU because it’s a much quicker route, so smuggling huge amounts of food from NI into Ireland would be reversing all the chains, how does the NI/Ireland border problem help the UK in our negotiations with the EU? To what do you want them to acquiesce? Do you want to stay in the EEA and the customs union?
And with food traceability of course a certain amount of blame will fall at New Zealand’s door if large amounts of their lamb turns up in the EU outside of the normal supply chain, they might not consider the hassle with the EU worth it.

In reply to neilh:

Except nobody has the room to run that sort of operation https://www.politico.eu/article/cargo-food-production-producers-brexit-burn...

In reply to neilh:


If the alternatives are really sufficient why do Kent Police have operation stack? Somebody should tell them!

If your goods haven't cleared customs they're not with the customer. That's a delay for the customer and cash flow problem for the exporter.

In reply to gallam1:


We have become successful within the framework we've just ditched. Time will tell how we fare alone but before we've even left the single market we're slipping down the rankings of global economies, we're being outperformed by all our peers and our currency has tanked, inward investment has collapsed, businesses are relocating. The British empire was a global force. Britain within the EU was a regional force with global influence. Brexit Britain...

And no, I'm not advocating a new empire before some wally suggests it.


What do you think the consequence would be of Britain operating Northern Ireland as a state sanctioned smuggling hub? Do you think really the EU will just roll over and accept it or do you think there would be heavy economic pressure applied to Ireland and the UK to deal with the issue properly and promptly? Who has all the power in that relationship, insular little Britain or the EU with the world's biggest free trade zone growing behind them?
jk

In reply to elsewhere:


And a death knell for businesses moving perishable goods or reliant on just in time supply chains.
jk

In reply to elsewhere:

That is because areas are not classified as bonded areas.......at the moment.

It is not difficult to do as a backstop.

When I ship stuff into the States or eslwehere outside the EU, it does not get stuck at a port or aiprort. waiting for paperwork. Its moved along in the system and shifted away elsewhere.Its all done pretty effortlessly and seamlessly these days in the developed world.

As regards cashflow, that is a different subject and will depend on methods of payment etc etc.

In reply to jkarran:

It can still be done with a bit of thought if all else fails.

In reply to neilh:



I don't understand how coverting the m20 into a bonded warehouse would reduce delays in getting the goods into the hands of the customer or makes the customer happy to pay for something still sitting on the m20.

In reply to neilh:


Ah, our glorious swashbuckling future
It's like a bad dream.
jk

In reply to neilh:


How?

How do you export fresh Scottish shellfish to Spain if it is stuck for a few days on the m20 or a Spanish port/airport?

In reply to jkarran:

I'm still not sure why you refer to the UK as a small trading nation. We are a trading nation, that is true. The description of the UK as insular, little, and small is ridiculous, as I'm sure you realise. The uncertainties surrounding Brexit are such that no-one has any firm idea how the UK economy will develop in the future. You are simply wrong to say "we're being outperformed by all our peers and our currency has tanked, inward investment has collapsed, businesses are relocating." The impression that you give is that the UK economy is suffering in a similar way to the Greek economy, or perhaps the Italian economy. This is just scaremongering and I'm really not sure why you are doing it. You may be anxious about the future, as we all are all of the time, but there is no reason to totally divorce yourself from reality.

As for the point about the UK operating Northern Ireland as a state-sanctioned smuggling hub, I cannot see anyone advocating that position. Why does the state have to sanction it? The reason that this aspect of the discussion is interesting is that the border represents a problem for the EU in the event that the UK does nothing. The private sector in Northern Ireland is more than capable of organising itself without any help from government. When you trace through the implications of a hard Brexit it is obvious that it will create a major problem for the EU along the Irish border and that is a situation that favours the UK in its negotiations with the EU.

Of course there will be pressure applied by the EU to Eire to deal with this problem. The point is that Eire have many strategic reasons to resist that pressure and may not be able to remedy the problem even if they were fully willing. There is of course one solution: a big, beautiful wall. I'm sure the irony of that is not lost on you.

In reply to gallam1:


It's small in comparison to the large trade blocs like the EU and North America and China and increasingly the Pacific region. As a nation it is quite big, but that isn't the measure that matters these days.


>You are simply wrong to say "we're being outperformed by all our peers and our currency has tanked, inward investment has collapsed, businesses are relocating.

The currency has dropped about 20% since brexit, numerous finance jobs are leaving or about to, manufacturing, farming, and many other sectors have stalled due to brexit uncertainty, our growth has been mixed but is now behind the EU, the US, let alone most Asian economies. It is not wrong to say these things, even if you find them awkward.


Honestly, get some perspective. It would be an irritating distraction for the EU, true. But not a major problem -those are things like immigration, major trade deals, Russia, climate change etc.

In reply to gallam1:


We are small in comparison to the EU, that isn’t putting us down it’s merely factual and you denying it shows a detachment from reality. Sterling has dropped, foreign investment has dropped, these things happen and there’s no point you pretending otherwise.


How does it help in our negotiations? It would help if the EU were trying to kick us out and we wanted to stay, but how does it help now?


How is that ironic?

In reply to gallam1:


You seem determined not to recognise the fact that the potential for customs and smuggling problems across the NI border would exist regardless of the details of any EU-UK deal struck. Assuming, of course, that as a Brexiter you wouldn't be happy with customs union. In light of this, could you explain why an outcome that would exist regardless of the deal, would be a significant advantage to one side in agreeing a deal?

In reply to elsewhere:

Just like other fresh food that is imported from outside the EU into the UK!!!

All that other fresh stuff which comes in here from Africa etc.

In reply to RomTheBear:



Yes it is. Because you like to invent something that someone else has said and insist upon only addressing that, avoiding the reasonable point they have made. It seems to be a game to you. Why bother ?
In this case you are claiming I said something about the UK facilitating smuggling when actually I was saying the EU is going to need our help stopping it's own citizens smuggling.

In reply to gallam1:
You haven't mentioned the real problems in NI of a Hard Brexit or a border problem.

The real problems are the risks to peace process or a return to terrorism and army on the streets.

Not much of a problem for 26 EU members, a problem for Ireland but a mainly confined to the UK and particularly NI.

In reply to neilh:



Clearly a loophole or exception in rules of origin and certainly not something you could rely on.



Exactly, we can get better trading terms by being part of a bigger trading block.
On top of that, only 14% of U.K. trade takes place with countries with which the EU doesn’t have a preferential trade agreement ongoing, pre-agreed, or in negotiations.

We’d be starting all over from scratch for essentially no gain.
Tarrifs barrier is less than half the problem anyway, the main issue is non tarrifs barriers, because we have a services, knowledge based economy, that’s where our comparative advantage is.

In reply to MG:

Well just about every manufacturing busines that supplies me has big order books and that includes the fabrication sector( which is a good bellweather of what is going on generally).

And in the electronics sector there are some huge lead times I (I get reports showing these)

Granted the car sales do not look rosy.

So its diffciult to justify sweeping statements like manufacturing is suffering.

In reply to neilh:


You havrn't explained how you export fresh Scottish shellfish to Spain if it is stuck for a few days on the m20 or a Spanish port/airport?

You have stated it will be fine if there are no delays.

In reply to neilh:




Manufacturing, overall, doing OK in the U.K, according to the figures, however not doing as well as the rest of the EU, or the US, which is kind of disappointing given that the pound has fallen drastically.

To start with below average performance despite having the pound in the toilet but still full access to the single market is not particularly encouraging, given the prospect of much bigger headwinds ahead.

In reply to David Riley:


Well sorry if I misunderstood, but your point was rather muddled, there is a reason why I interpreted it the same way as everybody else who replied to you did.

No, I don’t think the EU will particularly need our help in stopping smuggling, in any case, it wouldn’t be in the U.K. interest to not try to minimise it.

Overall I think you are making a rather moot and insignificant point, sorry.

In reply to RomTheBear:

I do not get hung up about certificates of origin- they are a European bit of paper - often not relevant to the rest of the world.Something us both in the Uk and the EU tend to forget.Middle east is an issue for it with Arab certifaciates of origin. Outside there- it really is useless.

The EU is a good trading block and I am in favour.

But this doomsayers view needs to be treated with a slight pinch of salt.

If you want me to get really technical on the issues I can do so- but it will bore the pants of most people.

In reply to gallam1:


OECD 35 growth forecasts for 2018 https://data.oecd.org/gdp/real-gdp-forecast.htm place us third from bottom of the table, fractionally ahead of Japan and Italy. 2017 we're 6th from bottom, 2016 and prior years we're mid table. I'd describe that as outperformed by our peers and slipping alarmingly. Experts eh.

As for being small, we are clearly a minnow by comparison with the remaining EU27 when it comes to renegotiating all the trade arrangements we had. We're also tiny by comparison with the major countries and blocs we'll be seeking to build ties with and initially at least be negotiating from a position of isolation and profound need. The deals we achieve will reflect that loss of power.

The GBP has lost significant value against most major currencies in the aftermath of the referendum decision to leave. Tanked may be overstating it but it's not indicative of a widespread belief in Britain's ability to thrive outside the EU.

Our credit rating has been downgraded and the forecast remains negative.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-property-fund-investment-is-at-its-lowest-... Divestment from British property funds. Obviously annother indicator of hopes for a glorious post brexit future.


How else would you describe the UK and Irish state 'doing nothing' to prevent smuggling into the EU via the NI border other than 'state sanctioned' smuggling? This is exactly the nonsense that David is proposing as either a desirable outcome or a viable threat. It isn't either.


Walls are hardly a 'solution' alien to Northern Ireland. Indeed the solution chosen last time the border was controlled: Fences erected, minor roads were blocked, farmtracks were ditched to prevent vehicles bypassing border checks on the few major roads left open. That's not just a dystopian future, it's recent history.
jk

In reply to RomTheBear:

I personally doubt there is capacity in the system for the manufacturing sector to take any any more work at the moment.Something that is overlooked by all the commentators.

The pound is upto a point irrelevant because virtaully all uk manufacturing is niche and commands a price. You sell in $ or Euros not in £. So you keep prices the same.So you make more money ( thus companies have cash- which is what is being reported). If you do not already export then moving into exporting is not easy so it will be a few years before that switch happens.

Must stop being sucked into these discussions.

In reply to RomTheBear:



I don't agree with you.
gallam1 explained it very well and comprehensively.

"In the event of a disagreement, and a hard Brexit, the Irish border will fatally undermine the protection needed for the single market and the CAP to operate."

In reply to David Riley:




And how does that help our negotiations? What do you want from the eu?

In reply to David Riley:



Another completely different point from the one you were making.
Anyways, I don’t really see how the Irish border would fatally undermine the protection needed for the CAP and the single market to operate. Most of what we export to the EU doesn’t go through NI, and anyway, it’s a pretty easy border to secure if you compare that to much larger borders in Eastern Europe.
He makes an equally fanciful point to yours.

In reply to neilh:

Not overlooked, many have pointed out that a tight labour market makes it harder to ramp up production.


True. So what you are saying is, lowering the pound has had the effect of increasing profits, but this temporary pretty much guaranteed to disappear as inflation feeds into input prices and labour costs, and for company that don’t export, they are over-exposed to the U.K. consumer market which is also lagging due to a fall in real wages, and will also slow as interest rates inevitably rise to contain inflation.

You’re painting a much worse picture than mine overall, it seems.

In reply to neilh:

Well, not so sure about that, small businesses may be able to afford not always complying with all the rules, and go through ugh the net, but I assume the big ones are pretty strict on compliance.




And yet the “doomsayers” seem to have got most of the predictions right so far, albeit one year too early.

I have little doubt that the economic assessment for the impact of various forms of brexit on trade are pretty solid, not only they all converge, but the models used are pretty robust.

Much of the uncertainty lies in the type of brexit we get. Ultimately we could be still in the single market and customs union, in which case, the U.K. economy would power through as usual.
I’m simply basing my assessment on an outcome with no single market membership and no customs union, as this is clearly the intention of the government. To be clear, I’m not saying this is necessarily what will happen, I’m simply taking this as an hypothetical starting point.


Please do, always happy to learn more.

In reply to RomTheBear:


It was replying to the statement you had just made.


gallam1 explained it very well and comprehensively.
"In the event of a disagreement, and a hard Brexit, the Irish border will fatally undermine the protection needed for the single market and the CAP to operate."

But I think you are playing your game again. Why ?

In reply to David Riley:



That is not an explanation, it’s just a claim.


What game ? Trying to understand what you’re trying to say, but it seems to be changing every time... you’re muddling things and sidestepping and make no sense.

What is your argument, what’s the justification behind it, and can you give an example supporting your case ?

In reply to RomTheBear:

Your game is what you have just done again.
I said gallam1 explained it very well and comprehensively.
The quote was his claim, obviously not the comprehensive explanation I was referring to.
You had read that, and knew what I was saying, but still replied as you did.
What is the point ?

In reply to RomTheBear:

That depends on if you are an exporter or not. If you are 100% dependent on the uk market then I would agree the picture is not rosy.Otherwise its healthy.

The big issue is really what is the global economy doing? And that is going well, so we will get dragged along in it's wake

In reply to David Riley:

Rom's point is that it isn't 'explained well', its just a fanciful set of unsubstantiated claims which willfully overlook the inevitable negative consequences for Britain and Ireland of the proposed actions. Those claims apparently happen to chime with your world view. To others they look absurd.
jk

In reply to RomTheBear:

Small businesses comply with the rules as you are still subject to them when crossing a border.Do not kid yourself that we can get round them!

I would sit down and talk through them- it is quicker than explaining than typing in a short time frame.

In reply to jkarran:

What proposed actions are you talking about ?
Have I proposed any actions ?

In reply to David Riley:

You proposed Britain doing or threatening to do absolutely nothing to resolve the border issue we've created in Ireland in order to drive a wedge between Ireland and the EU. That is of course assuming I've not fundamentally misunderstood what you meant by:


You appear to think this (in)action or the threat of it would somehow be advantageous to us. I don't.
jk

In reply to neilh:


But surely the crash in Sterling value since the referendum has allowed UK manufacturers to drop their dollar or euro prices and retain their profit margins. And thus generate more business, at least in the short-term while we're still in the EU. I'm wondering whether EU-based buyers will be so keen to enter long-term deals with UK manufacturers if the goods they're now buying tarif-free and on favourable exchange rate terms will be subject to import taxes once Brexit is completed?

So not exactly irrelevant?

In reply to jkarran:

"So the EU will have to try to force its member state to have a hard border against their wishes."

How does my sentence imply all that to you ?
It's a statement, not a proposal.

We have not created the border issue. We want free trade across that border. The EU demand it closed, to maintain their protectionist market. I only pointed out that this will be a very big problem for the EU, and you start going on about pirates.

In reply to gallam1:

So exports from Birmingham go to Stranraer for the Belfast ferry, over the border to Dublin for the ferry to Holyhead, the driver can then wave at Birmingham as he goes past on the way to Dover for the ferry to Calais.

And this is supposed to undermine the single market?

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/Birmingham/Belfast/Dublin,+Ireland/Calais...

In reply to elsewhere:

OK, just to keep things simple, suppose that I am a farmer in Eire with an existing business selling lamb to French supermarkets.

Hard Brexit happens and Eire refuse to have a hard border, for whatever reason (and there are many).

I am then in the happy position of being able to import lamb from New Zealand into Northern Ireland, drive it down to my farm in Eire and then export it to the French supermarkets for a profit. Indeed, I could use that profit to expand my business by undercutting the price charged by French farmers.

Don't take my word for it; just read what the French farmers have to say on the subject:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-39946042

In reply to David Riley:


Are you for real? The Irish border issue was 100% created by the UK invoking Art 50. As seen from the continent, you broke it, you fix it.
Exiting the EU without this issue addressed may even be possible, but don't kid yourself that the prospect of closing that border poses any kind of threat for the EU26 (27-Ireland).
The ROI would suffer, but would most likely be simply be compensated for fulfilling its duty to protect the EU external border. In contrast, NI would be completely f*cked, generating a huge problem for the UK but not the EU.

I assume that the UK will in any case stay in some kind of Norway arrangement, paying into the single market (which, to repeat ad nauseam, is not only a free trade, customs free zone). If not, the UK will be forced to put the customs boundary at the Irish Sea. How many billions would it take to keep the DUP happy under that scenario?

CB

In reply to David Riley:



It's in response to discussion of Britain refusing to resolve the Irish border issue in the event of a carastrophic breakdown in negotiations. Effectively pretending we haven't left the EU once we've left. Leave aside how absurd that sounds and how it solves nothing and how it fails to deliver the brexiteer's controlled uk border...


Well the problem didn't exist 18 months ago so I'd say by any reasonable measure we've created the issue.


It simply isn't going to be a 'huge' issue for the EU. It's a big unpleasant choice Ireland will have to face in the event of Britain fu*king up negotiations: keep the border open and porous in breach its treaty obligations to the EU and face the devastating (to them, barely noticeable to the EU) economic consequences of the fallout from that or control it at significant but manageable cost to them. It's barely a real choice.
jk

In reply to David Riley:


I find this statement absolutely ludicrous. The EU needs to have some control of its borders because a common economic area relies on the fact that there is a distinction between goods from inside the area (assumed compliant with common rules agreed between all members) and goods from outside the area (which have to be checked for compliance, because they come from countries that haven't agreed to sign up to those common standards that facilitate free trade).

By insisting that there is an open border onto the EU we create a problem for the EU in terms of the rules that it has agreed (and that it needs in order to work).

Yes, this creates a problem for the EU, but it is of our making and we seem to be refusing to adopt the solutions (e.g. customs union) that would fix their issue.

In reply to gallam1:

And how does that help our negotiating position?

In reply to gallam1:
So you're saying Irish crooks have so far failed to fatally undermine the single market but you think Irish crooks will be able to do it for us.

Do you think Irish crooks will be able to hide the £240Bn UK goods that UK exports to the EU? That would more than double the size of the whole Irish economy and I think the rest of the EU would notice.

What cut will the Irish crooks take for smuggling £240Bn of UK goods?

UK exports to EU £240Bn 2016
Irish GDP £220Bn 2016

In reply to jkarran:


Ranting about what other people said previous to my statement does not make it mean anything different.
It is still just "So the EU will have to try to force its member state to have a hard border against their wishes".

In reply to Sir Chasm:

As per what I said miles up the thread, and now lost in the weeds, if you and I have found an apple pie and we are negotiating about the splits, I will end up agreeing that you get most or all of the pie if you can make the disagreement very unpleasant to me (for example by shooting me, because you have a gun and I don't).

The Irish border is the gun. It's not the only gun in the discussion, but it is there nonetheless, no matter who made it.

In reply to gallam1:

That might be the case.

The issue is that this isn't a one off transaction, we have an ongoing relationship. So we could win more of this pie, but not be invited to the pie shop again, meaning less overall pie.

In reply to andyfallsoff:




So you accept this is a problem for the EU (which is all I said), and you think we should help fix their issue.
I have not insisted there is an open border. I only pointed out that their member state would not want it.

In reply to gallam1:



You don't need to talk about pies, what do you want from the eu?

In reply to David Riley:

Are you seriously now claiming you just tapped that out in isolation, completely devoid of context? That it wasn't in response to the odd claim that Britain doing nothing undermines the single market and even stranger, CAP? If so then please do tell, what inspired you to type it and what exactly did you mean by it?

Clearly Ireland will have to accept a hard border against it's wishes if we fail to negotiate a better arrangement with them and the broader EU. Or accept the consequences of breaching their treaty obligations which they won't do. Or leave which would be madness given the mess Britain would have to have gotten into by leaving to put them in the position where leaving looked remotely appealing. A hard border benefits nobody but while Ireland can and likely would seek some form of interim compensation from the EU for the resulting losses we'll probably be facing a renewed insurrection north of the border as a result of the economic and cultural damage. Remind me again how we play this wonderful Trump card.
jk

In reply to john arran:
Another thought just popped into my head on this subject. In order to take the emotion out of this discussion, consider what would happen if West Germany decided to leave the EU whilst East Germany decided to stay.

I'm not sure that the EU as a whole would be able to survive this situation. The UK and Ireland situation is analagous but on a slightly smaller scale.

In reply to gallam1:


In what way is it analogous?

The UK and ROI are sovereign nations, East and West Germany don't even exist anymore as distinct political entities. Are you saying The EU as is would struggle long term to survive the disintegration of the modern nation of Germany? If so, I agree but see no relevance whatsoever to the UK-Ireland situation.
jk

In reply to gallam1:



There is no east and west Germany. There is Germany, one country. There is also the UK and Ireland, 2 different countries.
Stupid analogy.

In reply to cb294:


Member states are required to control their borders to maintain the protected market.
Has an adjacent country that has never joined the EU caused a border issue?
If the UK leaves the EU without any deal. Is that not similar ?

In reply to elsewhere:




Why on earth did you choose that route?

Try https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/Belfast/Cork,+Ireland/Roscoff,+France

Is it clearer now?

In reply to jkarran:


Got anything more up to date? 20 months later and post referendum there's no sign of a property crash, barely a slow down

In reply to gallam1:



Do you mean the UK and NI situation is analogous? In which case it could turn out to be prescient. If the UK economy tanks as much as the secret reports no doubt promise, it wouldn't be at all surprising if the people of NI were minded to opt for any way out of the mess, options including independence (with a view to EU membership) and unification. It may not seem particularly likely right now, but we're not in that situation yet.

If you mean the UK and Eire, I don't see any useful analogy to be drawn.

In reply to gallam1:

Actually your German analogy would be much more similar to what is likely to be the case with Scotland. Currently there appears to be a small majority in favour of remaining within the UK, but as the horrors of leaving the UK gradually come to pass, who is going to bet that a new independence vote won't be held, and won't then result in a majority for separation?

In reply to john arran:

I do not know anybody who has dropped the prices. Simply because when the £ rises it will be extremely difficult to put up your euro or dollar prices.

You might discount . But your main pricing structure stays the same.

In reply to gallam1:




Sorry but this is so naive. If Ireland was to let smuggled good into the EU markets they’d be taken to court and made to pay compensation and damages.
The reality is simply that there will be a hard border between ROI and NI unless the U.K. stays in the customs unions, that is completely unavoidable.

In reply to jkarran:

So you now agree with me.

"So the EU will have to try to force its member state to have a hard border against their wishes".

In reply to Tyler:


Presumably the issue is not simply fear of a crash but that post brexit other property markets, especially commercial property in the cities which will attract businesses, institutions and investment fleeing London will yield better returns than London property.

Nothing newer to hand but there was a story making the news a couple of weeks back about a reversal of investment flows from significantly inward to slightly outward over the past year, I'm afraid I don't recall which sector and without that my search engine turns up nothing. Perhaps you'll have more luck if you're interested.
jk

In reply to gallam1:

If you insist on treating the border issue is a metaphorical gun, the UK are holding it against their own head.

Even it were possible to treat the resolution to this issue independently of other issues, i.e. a one off negotiation which is the only context where your proposed strategy may work, who do you think would suffer most if the Irish border became a hard customs border?

CB

In reply to David Riley:


I never disagreed with the statement, it's the idea that that somehow constitutes a meaningful negotiating advantage for the UK once all the ramifications are considered that I find absurd.
jk

In reply to neilh:


... in which devil lies the detail!

In reply to neilh:



True, but don’t kind yourself in thinking that losing current and future preferential access on 86% of our trade, which we will have to renegotiate from scratch from a weaker position, won’t have a negative impact.

There is a difference between being dragged along and getting a ahead of the pack, and getting dragged along but falling gradually at the back of the pack.

IMO that’s the most likely economic outcome of brexit. No massive recession but rather, a relative decline with the EU. Pretty much as it was before we joined then.

In reply to RomTheBear:

OK, so now we have got there (finally), can you think of any reasons (historical, economic, geographic or social), why the government of Eire might drag its feet in implementing a hard border? And would such foot-dragging have any negative implications for French farmers?

In reply to gallam1:

The French farmers will merely burn the lorries of lamb, so the implication is they will have to buy more diesel?

Any thoughts on what you want to gain from the eu by using your "gun" yet?

In reply to gallam1:

No reasons at all, even though some idiot recently even suggested that the ROI joined the UK in leaving the common market as a possible solution to the border issue.

Won't happen, the ROI government know precisely which side their bread is buttered on, they will not jeopardize their EU market access and integration just to make Brexit more palatable for NI. Also, simply forget a few hundred tonnes of lamb, irrelevant if they can attract even only a few per cent of the London banking business to Dublin (which requires continued membership of the single market).

CB

In reply to gallam1:

I'm going to ask a question again because you must have missed it upthread:

You seem determined not to recognise the fact that the potential for customs and smuggling problems across the NI border would exist regardless of the details of any EU-UK deal struck. Assuming, of course, that as a Brexiter you wouldn't be happy with customs union. In light of this, could you explain why an outcome that would exist regardless of the deal, would be a significant advantage to one side in agreeing a deal?

In reply to gallam1:

Well there's the Irish Civil war about accepting British rule of NI, the clause that used to be in the Irish constitution until the Good Friday agreement, the Troubles, publicly stated fears of a return to terrorism, nationalist/unionist views within NI on the border but perhaps mainly the fact that republicans/loyalists think the border justifies killing people.

Otherwise not a lot but surely you must have know that some people think the border justifies killing people and both UK & Ireland want to avoid that.

In reply to gallam1:

I can think of better reasons why they wouldn’t be dragging their feet, firstly and foremost, it’s a country with rule of law so they’ll apply the law.

And stating the obvious here, I’m sure the Irish don’t want to see a border there, but think they want to see even less their businesses closing down and people losing jobs because they are being undercut by a criminal enterprise on the other side of the border.
You seem to think the Irish and the Europeans are thick as mud.

In reply to RomTheBear:

I do not disagree. Our growth will just amble along nothing excessive.Even when we were ahead of the game, it was nothing really spectacular anyway.

What was it Adam Smith said on business - it always carries on irrespective of politics- or something like that.

I just think that some of these "all doom and gloom stories" are just that- even though I am a remainer.

In reply to neilh:



Well, maybe you need to review the so called “doom and gloom” stories, because if you look at most of the predictions from IMF, OECD, treasury and so on, different scenarios, none of them predict catastrophic economic collapse. What they predict is a sustained medium to long term impact on growth.

You could say it doesn’t really matter, but a few percentage growth points over 5/10/20 years, and the U.K. can easily end up with significantly lower living standards than our neighbours, or significantly lower than it could have been anyway.

To be honest I’m not even worried at all about the economic consequences of brexit, I’ve got two passports and I work across countries anyway, if people want to be poorer, I don’t really give a flying f*ck any longer, they’ve looked for it, frankly.

The thing that hurts the most for me is the end of freedom of movement which I find a despicable, xenophobic, and selfish backward step, which will massively restrict the freedom and opportunities of millions of young brits, and made me feel rejected and unwanted in the country I considered my home and where I spent the majority of my life.

In reply to neilh:

There is an exit strategy from Bexit

youtube.com/watch?v=DQlMAptIKF8&

In reply to john arran:


Apparently all 58 (?) reports will be published imminently, with heavy redaction.

In reply to RomTheBear:

I think free movement is unfortunately yesterday’s news.

With a predicted population of 70million in a few years time us remainers have lost that argument in the majority of people’s views.

In reply to neilh:


Yes, and that is the sadest thing.


Ending free movement will change absolutely f*ck all to that. At best it will reach 70mil in 2029 instead of 2027, big f*cking deal. No, all it does, is restricting massively the opportunities and freedoms of everybody.

In reply to RomTheBear:


Does that mean we won't have to 'listen' to you anymore?

In reply to neilh:

You keep referring to yourself as a remainer but I don't remember a single one of your posts that supports that. Have you had a change of heart? Or are you trying to play devil's advocate? In any case your posts in support of Brexit are far from convincing. So what is it that's so great about the idea of finally being in blissful isolationist poverty that you feel is so attractive?

In reply to Shani:

Apparently all 58 (?) reports will be published imminently, with heavy redaction.

Here's a what-if scenario:

The reports are published and it turns out they're really grim. Corbyn decides to use them as a pretext for withdrawing Labour's support for brexit "in the national interest", and thereby putting the boot into the Tories.

What happens? Does Corbyn get removed by the Labour brexit tendency? Does May resign or call an election or struggle on? Parliamentary vote of no confidence?

(Not saying this is likely, just interested in people's thoughts.)

In reply to andyjohnson0:
Events dear boy. I think 'Sexminster' is going to shred the Tories - and to a lesser extent, Labour.

Brexit will take a back seat.

In reply to andyjohnson0:

Nothing meaningful will be published, it will be heavily redacted, and published so late that it doesn’t really make any difference.

In reply to andyjohnson0:

How about another "what if"? What if the impact assessments had been commissioned and published (unredacted) before the bloody referendum??? We would then have known the cost and implications of "taking control"

In reply to Andy Hardy:

To be frank, there was plenty of various analysis for various sectors made by people worth their salt.

Problem is they were dismissed as conspiracy of the elite and scaremongering and anyway people don’t read the reports, they just get the sound bites, and the simplistic messages.

Plus the leave campaign was very good at producing “alternative facts” of dubious quality, but there is no way for people to make the difference, especially when you have medias like the beeb which, in the name of "equity", reports the opinion of someone who says the earth is flat with the same weight as the opinion of someone who says it's a spheroid.

In reply to Shani:



Or is it the other way around? Anybody guilty of sexual harassment (or worse) should get what's coming to them; no question about that - but maybe the current shitstorm also provides another 'good day to bury bad news'?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Where's Mark Carney on this one.

In reply to Rob Parsons:


There's a lot of bad news to bury!

"‘Food is rotting in the fields’ - NFU deputy president Minette Batters demands urgent action on seasonal labour shortfall"

http://www.edp24.co.uk/business/farming/food-is-rotting-in-the-fields-nfu-d...

In reply to john arran:

Middle ground on most issues, more nuanced.I just disagree with some of you hard line remainers.And I think some of the views on Britains future trading position are just plain wrong and I am happy to say so. I think none of you really address why people voted for Brexit, because you instantly rubbish a view that you disgree with.

Economically I consider that there is a huge productivity issue and that companies have been freeriding on free movement instead of investing.

The EU is fine as a trading block.

I read a piece in the Economist a few weeks ago, and it pointed out that the middle gound in a debate is often drowned out these days and very mar=ginalised.I am in the middle gound-with a remain hat- but I can see the other side. Some of you guys cannot you are too extreme.

In reply to neilh:

I think that's a fine comment and it brought to mind the following from Yeats:

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."

There is not really a debate going on between Remainers and those is favour of Brexit.

In reply to neilh:

That all sounds fine, but how do you justify maintaining a middle ground stance, when as far as I can tell just about every reputable source is predicting severe economic difficulties? Maybe my media influence is skewed, in which case I would be happy to be pointed at reputable studies that show how Brexit will have a positive effect on the economy or on the lives of people in the UK.

You seem quick to dismiss Remainers as extreme, but once all the evidence points to the earth being spherical, it's no longer an extreme position to believe that evidence.

In reply to john arran:

In this context when you say "reputable source" what you really should be looking for is an institution or individual with a proven track record of accurately analysing and forecasting complex economic phenomena.

In the case of medicine, a reputable source is someone who can show a statistically significant positive clinical effect from their suggested course of action. Before accepting any analysis of the effects or otherwise of Brexit, apply a similar test to the source holding themselves out as reputable.

In reply to john arran:

As I keep saying I am in remainer- just more in the middle than the likes of ROM etc.

Sorry if you cannot accept that.

In reply to neilh:

Who said anything about being able to accept it? All I asked was for help in understanding on what information your middle-ground stance is based. I wouldn't expect that to be a difficult or awkward question to answer. I'm genuinely curious as to what evidential basis people like yourself rely upon in deciding to take a middle ground or a Brexiter ground.

In reply to neilh:


You see that's exactly why your supposedly "nuanced" position can't be taken seriously. You just make things up.

A quick look around the EU and you'll find plenty of other countries that have managed very well to have high productivity and investment, and they have freedom of movement as well.

If anything, the available evidence suggests that the influx of EU workers correlates with increased productivity.

https://niesr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publications/Migration%20productivi...

In reply to gallam1:

Sounds to me like you're trying to dismiss the overwhelming weight of expert opinion on the grounds that no single commentator has been accurate all or most of the time. There are people and institutions with far more knowledge and insight than you or I, and if overwhelmingly they agree, then who am I, or you, to dismiss their collective wisdom so lightly, just because doing so may suit a narrative we might like to be true?

In reply to john arran:

My middle ground stance is based on the my simple observations of exporting around the world and seeing what other countries are doing.I just do not recognise alot of the comments from posters who clearly do not do this on a day to day basis.So for example when people day it will be bedlam at the ports- i just think - no- there are ways round it based on what other countries do.

In reply to RomTheBear:

But I am not sure they have had the same level of immigration ( either from free movement or otherwise) into their own countries.So it could equally be viewed that they have had to get more efficient at doing things by boosting productivity.I am not going to read a 71 page report!

In reply to neilh:

Thank you. In your example, do you then stop to consider what benefits the people of the UK, or indeed you, are gaining in order to merit the inconvenience of having to find such 'ways round it'?

In reply to gallam1:

Just in case you missed it a second time:
I'm going to ask a question again because you must have missed it upthread:

You seem determined not to recognise the fact that the potential for customs and smuggling problems across the NI border would exist regardless of the details of any EU-UK deal struck. Assuming, of course, that as a Brexiter you wouldn't be happy with customs union. In light of this, could you explain why an outcome that would exist regardless of the deal, would be a significant advantage to one side in agreeing a deal?

In reply to john arran:
There was a very popular expert opinion in the middle ages that bleeding people with leeches was a good and successful remedy for a number of illnesses. Accepting the opinion of others without evidence of a successful track record is a form of deference that I cannot afford working in the private sector.

Bringing the conversation back to climbing for a moment, would you accept my opinion about the grade of Adam Ondra's latest astounding sports climbing achievement on the basis that I appear to be an expert in climbing with more than 30 years experience? Obviously not, because I have no demonstrated track record in sports climbing at that level.

It is very easy to be swayed by labels and institutions in these matters. Those labels and institutions are wrapping paper, nothing more. Concentrate on the track records to see if the institution you are listening to has any credibility, and keep in mind the fact that the entire medical establishment was once at one in recommending leeches for bacterial infections.

As to your comment about the Irish border, you appear to be very keen to apply the label "Brexiter" to me. Quite why you are so keen to do this I really don't understand. This is not a football match, and I am not a fanatic supporter of either side. I am interested in a reasoned discussion of the issues however.

In reply to john arran:

Clearly yes - and that is why I am a remainer- but at the same time I can see that there is a hell of alot of spin from both sides which may not stack up if push comes to shove so to speak....

I am also not faced with your situation - living in France if I am correct ..and not knowing what the f..k is going on.

In reply to neilh:

Maybe this maybe that... Essentially you have no clue as to whether your claim is true, it's not much more than a hunch. And that's the issue.
Maybe, if you had reviewed the evidence, you'd come to a different conclusion.

FYI, productivity growth was strong and steady up to the financial crisis, which, as you know happened well after the British gov opened the immigration floodgate by deciding to be the only country with no transition to free movement from the A10 countries.

In reply to gallam1:

Laudable intention, but does that leave any reputable voices at all? In which case, which ones do you use on which to base your opinions? Or are your opinions based only on poorly-informed personal observation? Citing examples where the weight of expert opinion in the past has been proved to be wrong, and ignoring the enormous number of examples in which expert opinion has been correct, certainly demonstrates that relying on experts for guidance is not infallible, but does nothing whatsoever to propose a more convincing or reliable basis for your decision-making.

Oh, and by the way:

"LEECH THERAPY
Ancient Indian, Greek and Egyptian texts indicate that these segmented worms have been used to treat everything from flatulence to joint pain for nearly 3,000 years. The medieval practice of bloodletting was perhaps the most infamous use of the vampire-like worm. Doctors believed an imbalance of blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile was the cause of most ailments. Leeches were applied to patients believed to have an excess of blood. While the medical community no longer accepts the widespread use of bloodletting, research has shown proteins in leech saliva can help treat cardiovascular problems, cancer, metastasis, and infectious diseases."
https://www.popsci.com/article/technology/5-old-timey-medical-treatments-ac...

In reply to gallam1:


But to perform statistically valid clinical trials you need a body of data from previous similar cases. Brexit is more like the first case of a previously unknown disease. The appropriate response is precautionary principle of assuming the worst.

In reply to neilh:


Oh, I could move back to the UK any time. But then I may well be just as fcuked there ... along with almost everyone else in the UK, since nobody yet seems to have offered any credible reasoning as to why the huge number of expert predictions of economic hardship are not to be believed.

In reply to john arran:

Dave Garnett just did.

In reply to neilh:

I 'dismiss' why many voted for brexit because having talked to far too many of them for my own sanity pre-referendum very very few of them could actually provide me with a reason that made any sense and didn't boil down to 'because my newspaper tells me to' or 'because I don't like all these foreigners but I'm not a racist' or because 'I remember the Empire from when I was young and everything was better then'. So dismiss is the wrong word, I hear but cannot take seriously the views of many who simply had not and in many cases were unwilling to consider the likely knock on consequences of their one dimensional decision. Does that make me a terrible snob? I don't really care if it does.

I'm sure some have good reasons but even the most articulate brexiteers on here are constantly having to revise and narrow their justification for the vote as the predicted glory fails to materialise. Forgive me if I fail to respect that approach.


An economic downturn and lurch to the right in which deregulated labour becomes cheaper and easier to hire/fire is unlikely to fix that though! Successive government's have shown no interest to date in controlling the influx of immigrant labour despite tough talk, tough talk and an economy that ticks along is all that is needed to stay in power. A nasty recession might cull a few zombie companies but then what would that do to unemployment numbers which will need constant massaging if the government gravy train is to stay on the rails so even that dubious benefit is in some doubt.

Today we hear the reality of actually cutting migrant labour, not through government policy but by creating an environment where latent xenophobia has found a loud and angry voice. It looks like a looming crisis in nursing that will be fixed how? Probably not through real investment in skills and training but by further raids on the nursing schools of the Philippines and others rather than Spain. Brexit doesn't fix any of this, it just makes it worse by creating an environment in which sensible planning and real leadership is secondary to desperate firefighting.

By all means consider and dismiss me as an extremist but personally I think I'm just being realistic.
jk

In reply to David Riley:


You'll have to explain that one to me. Dave suggested that, when direct experience is lacking, a pessimistic, cautious approach is justified. That's exactly what most expert commentators are indicating: we're in uncharted territory and the outlook is extremely poor, so a cautious approach - that of not believing any positive projection without very good reason to do so - is justified.

In reply to john arran:

There is something faintly unsettling about realising that there are no experts in this domain. I may personally agree with Dave Garnett about the precautionary principle but I also have to accept that I live in a democracy.

I am far from being anti-expert by the way. I have great respect for chess grandmasters for example.

In reply to gallam1:


There is evidence to suggest that leeches and other such creatures are quite good at cleaning open wounds and improving healing times. More research is required. So there was some method in the madness, that was just taken to nth degree.

In reply to gallam1:

While you're here, I have something else to ask you - again:

Just in case you missed it a second time:
I'm going to ask a question again because you must have missed it upthread:

You seem determined not to recognise the fact that the potential for customs and smuggling problems across the NI border would exist regardless of the details of any EU-UK deal struck. Assuming, of course, that as a Brexiter you wouldn't be happy with customs union. In light of this, could you explain why an outcome that would exist regardless of the deal, would be a significant advantage to one side in agreeing a deal?

In reply to gallam1:

I wasn't expecting that when I googled 'leeches for infections', an odd seeming phrase, perhaps I should have: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3422960/Leeches-infections-mercur... is that by any chance the reputable institution you place your trust in?

Leeches are still used today with care in evidence based medicine so while every historical use was probably not necessary or effective it's worth considering the possibility they were as effective 500 years ago as they are today in treating certain conditions.


Ok. Simple question: do you think the UK is making the right or the wrong choice by leaving the European Union? For the record I think we're making an historic mistake.
jk

In reply to gallam1:


I'm generally opposed to physically restraining children, especially ones I don't know, but I'd make an exception where one was about to step out in front of a bus.

In reply to jkarran:

I have nothing against leeches and have no interest in the Daily Mail. You really do appear to be determined to entirely miss the point I was making.

I am glad that you have great conviction on the question of Brexit. You presumably then won't mind me making a cheeky bid for all of your UK-based assets at 50% below current market prices? I will pay in any currency of your choosing. If your conviction of a disaster does not extend to a 50% discount, well, name your price and let's talk.

In reply to gallam1:
I don't mind at all but I'll pass thank you (unless you're interested in a pair of old jetskis on a rusty trailer, £450 to you). If it comes to it and the Britain I love truly is lost then I'll be leaving at a time of my choosing not yours and my assets will be worth what they're worth. For now I still have hope.

I see you didn't answer my question. Leaving: right or wrong?

Make your point clearer if people keep missing it.
jk

In reply to jkarran:

So are you prepared to back your convictions with your capital? I could easily arrange for you to have a bet on a falling UK stock market, or perhaps you think the pound will fall below parity with the Euro?

By the way, I'm certainly not saying that I won't listen to your opinion just because you will not back it. I am interested to read other peoples opinions on this matter. It is however quite easy to have an extreme opinion when nothing is personally at stake.

In reply to gallam1:



You should heed your own advice.

In reply to gallam1:


I'm perfectly capable of managing my own money thank you very much but if it makes you feel big and clever to have me refuse you then please do enjoy your moment.


I have a hell of a lot at stake in the future, as do most.

You didn't answer my question. Leaving: right or wrong? It's not difficult, even if you're wavering you could just say so.
jk

In reply to jkarran:

Are you planning on those two jetskis getting you across the channel?

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Bound to be, if they're imported they'll no doubt go up in value by about a 1000% and that should be enough to purchase a ticket on the ferry

Cheers

Toby

In reply to jkarran:

Lurch to the right? I suspect that if there was an election now, labour would walk in.

In reply to john arran:


I get together once a month with a small group of business people ( split 50/50 men/women including 1 hijab wearing Muslim womn).Also 1 person who was a UKIP candiate. The discussions on this economic hardship have been wide and varied.The group is split 50/50 on remain and Brexit.To date the conclusion is that nobodies business is suffering. Time will tell.

In reply to neilh:

Perhaps though I'm much less sure than you. With even a fractionally more likable leader at the helm and the swivel-eyed loons put into check I suspect the conservatives would win back a small majority unless of course Labour were willing to take a really serious stand on democratizing the brexit process while seeking a minimally disruptive Norway style exit which I'm not sure they're ready to.

I don't think there has been a lurch to the left overall, I think the confluence of brexit, dismal austerity, an astute Labour campaign and a truly terrible Conservative effort have turned the young and the socially progressive out for Labour better than in previous elections. Who knows if that's repeatable. Can the Tories really throw two winnable elections in a row? I also think British politics is polarising significantly as the young fail to reap the benefits their parents enjoyed and continue to enjoy.
jk

In reply to neilh:


That'll be primarily because we haven't left yet...........

In reply to Ian W:

Doesn't hold JK back. "the predicted glory fails to materialise."

In reply to David Riley:


Well when Liam Fox puts pen to paper at the stroke of midnight, brexit day to sign the promised slew of easily negotiated advantageous trade agreements forged with major partners to replace what we lose outside the single market I'll eat my hat just for you.

Oh, no... I forgot, that's not actually going to happen is it. They were forced to concede to the brexit select committee just this week that they'd been misleading the public about this and that not only was there no good news at all to report on that front, all they could offer was an absence of any news as to who might be willing to even just 'roll over' existing deals on an interim basis as an indicator of how biggly we'll be winning come the big day in 2019. It's beyond farcical!
jk

In reply to jkarran:

I'll be glad when we're out and everybody calms down a bit.

In reply to jkarran:
Yes, beyond farcical, in a space of a year or so they have gone from

"Screw the EU, we'll sail the world in royal yacht Britannia and sign amazing trade deals around the world in no time”

To

“Actually, we’ll just beg for trying to roll over the same deals as we had before with the EU”

To

“Actually, we’ll probably won’t get that either, so better beg for a transition period with the EU and with a bit of luck we may be able to renegotiate something later, probably weaker, with other countries”


May I add even if they get the transition period they are begging for, it is still fraught with problems.
On March 2019 the U.K. will be out of the EU, even with a transitional deal, there is no guarantee that third parties will still consider the UK as part of the EU for the purpose of those treaties.

In reply to Tyler:

There has been a slow down though, in Sheffield certainly. Interest rates are going up too, but not because the economy is (more) resilient.

In reply to neilh:


Do none of them import parts or materials from abroad?

In reply to David Riley:

Don’t get your hopes up too much, because that’s when the real difficulties are going to start.
Currently we’re just at the stage of negotiating the withdrawal agreement, negotiating the transition will be much harder, and negotiating the future relationship as well as renegotiating the 750+ treaties we have with third parties through the EU even more.

In reply to jkarran:


For that to happen Liam Fox would need to keep his job and the Brexiter's would need to hold their project together for more than a year. I wouldn't bet on either of those outcomes. The sex spreadsheet is going to make it much easier for May to fire him.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

A couple.2 of them had seen no materials prices increases ( work in very competitive markets). 1 business marginal increases. others are in the service sector,so not relevant.. includes 1 who has a sprinkler system design company, she is so busy its unreal for her and her 40 employees......

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


For a variety of reasons I'm quite confident I'll not be needing a good hat recipe.

That said, the already disgraced Fox is apparently made of teflon, he should be in the tower not back in the cabinet. One can only assume he has the job so the inevitable dismal failure to deliver on undeliverable promises doesn't damage anyone else's career or derail their transition to the unelected upper house.
jk

In reply to neilh:


How can there have been no increase in the price of imported materials with the drop in sterling?

In reply to Sir Chasm:

if your business just buys a product from overseas and is a distributor in the Uk then yes there will no doubt be an increase.For example they business next door to me imports dried fruit from a single soure in Turkey and then repacks then his costs will have risen...clear cut.

But if you are adding value by further processing and its a small part of your costs, then you may choose to absorb those costs internally.

Or the other option is that you operate in a fiercelly competitive market where there are lots of overeas suppliers ( so you have plenty of options for sourcing) so prices still stay the same.That is what happened to the 2 companies I mentioned.

In reply to neilh:


So costs have risen and profits drop. Business suffering.


Profits drop. Business suffering.


Well if you can persuade your foreign suppliers to drop their prices you were paying over the odds before.

But anyway, this rather seems to contradict your anecdote that "nobodies business is suffering".

In reply to neilh:


Did that market suddenly get more competitive coincident with the drop in sterling? If not I don't understand your explanation. Surely if it was already super competitive your mates would have been getting the best available price which is still the best available price after the money you buy with loses value, you just get less for your money or spend more to get the same. I'm probably missing something obvious.
jk

In reply to Sir Chasm:

They are certainly not shrinking and getting rid of people.Far from it-- expanding and taking on more employees.... And I was talking about the people I knew.Two of the group had just bought new premises as an example.

Please if you want to be all gloomy-- go ahead.

In reply to neilh:



I'm not trying to be gloomy, I'm trying to understand your position that the fall in sterling doesn't hurt businesses who import parts of materials.

In reply to neilh:
Sprinkler systems, I wonder if that is because of the tower block fire?

Cheers

Toby

Sorry off topic.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


So costs have risen and profits drop. Business suffering.

Turkish lira has performed worse than sterling over the same period, so costs will not have risen and profits should have gone up in this example. Not as much as they might have, granted...but still a good business, on the up, not suffering, despite Brexit.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Well what Neil said was "his costs will have risen...clear cut.". Perhaps you can explain why the cost of your materials rising is good for a business.

In reply to jkarran:



Prices don't reflect markets so much as mirror companies' priorities. When a shock occurs new strategies emerge.

In the event of a rise in suppliers' prices owing to a currency fall, the buyer will typically re-tender the supply chain putting pressure on existing suppliers to drop their prices. The loss in profit is as likely to be at the foreign component manufacturer as it is at the UK assembly plant. Or the local supplier may get a look-in.

Meanwhile,BMW is suffering more from the fall in GBP than UK car buyers because they've chosen to absorb a high proportion of the hit. Their strategy runs counter to your assumptions.

Not saying it's all roses but you can't simply extrapolate a currency fall in the way people are trying to here.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Because the value-added in his process has fallen in (relative) cost making his product more attractive overseas.

In reply to BnB:


That's great if he's exporting.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

You keep using this phrase of hurting businesses. Business adapts and changes all the time , so all depends on the environement/market you operate in etc etc.But to say it hurts all businesses who import just does not stand upto scrutiny.

In reply to BnB:


And it doesn't actually answer the question.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

I was replying to both of you...just highlighting that the example given didn't actually work very well for the point trying to be made. I also thought it was worth mentioning that whilst sterling has fallen, it's not the only currency out there that hasn't performed, so it's never quite so clear cut.

In reply to Sir Chasm:
Clearly when this guy has bought a brand new industrial unit drives up in his latest Tesla, and is in the throws of getting planning permission to expand his newly acquired unit..then his business is not suffering!

In reply to Toby_W:

Spot on....off topic. Phone started ringing the day after and has never stopped.

In reply to neilh:


I haven't used that phrase at all, read the thread. I haven't said it hurts all business. I asked you a simple question - i.e. do any of the businesses you say aren't suffering (your word not mine) import parts or materials from abroad? And if they do import and their costs have increased how does that not lead to their business suffering (again, your phrase)?

In reply to neilh:


Not sure why it's off topic. You've said several times that your business is doing well in a post-referendum environment, giving the impression that Brexit isn't affecting business at all. Now we know why - and it looks to be a chance occurrence not even Brexit-related, quite probably even despite Brexit.

In reply to BnB:


Which I understand but it doesn't quite tally with what was said about the particular market already being super competitive, were that actually the case then there wouldn't be the required slack you suggest is available for renegotiation to be effective, it would have been taken up competing for business in the first place. If a new strategy allows them to suddenly be more competitive then I'd argue they weren't that competitive to begin with.


Yeah, good luck to the plucky British olive and almond growers


Doesn't BMW have a significant UK production plant, supply chain and staff so both costs and income in GBP? Not every business will have the scale, complexity and flexibility to make the same choices at minimal harm to themselves. Indeed BMW may not be able to justify keeping that strategy up in the long term.
jk

In reply to john arran:
That is not my business !

And I never claimed it was-- just somebody I know who is in that business group that I talked about.I just mentioned that this group included one person who runs a sprinkler design system company.The group includes 3 manufacturers,2 companies running nurseries, 1 running a large elderley care group,1 skate board park,2 marketing companies, a gp practise and a landscape contractor. An electic mix, just like most of the uk.

There are lots of businesses doing very well.........either with or without Brexit being a factor.

In reply to neilh:


Apologies then. Details lost in a complex thread.

In reply to john arran:

Crossed wires.......

In reply to jkarran:


Most of the costs are in Euro, or USD. The mini factory is an assembly plant, with many components being ourced from Europe, but many many sales being to Europe, so self-hedging. The Engine plant on Deesside similarly has both supply and sales largely in Euro, so again, minimal effect.

In reply to neilh:

How well would the export sector do if the EU implemented a 20% tariff like the USA has just done on imports of Canadian timber? I can't see them all absorbing that sort of hit.

In reply to Toerag:

Never mind all this bulls~~t from both sides of the remainers and the brexiteers debate....can you really see that happening with the tit for tat that would ensue.It cuts both ways .Pro quid pro neither side benefits/loses, its a draw.Way down list of important issues.

Worst case you could possibly switch to MFN ( most favoured nation status) under WTO rules on both sides...so tariff would be 0% for both the EU and the UK...neither side will want that... it looks embarrassing globally.

In reply to john arran:

Brits are happier since the Brexit vote despite a squeeze on real incomes from higher inflation and the weaker pound.

Average ratings of life satisfaction, feelings that the things we do in life are worthwhile and happiness increased “slightly” in the UK between the years ending in June 2016 and 2017, data on personal well-being from the UK Office for National Statistics showed on Tuesday.

https://www.ft.com/content/31c0b890-1af0-3b2b-aee0-860eee379cd0

In reply to Big Ger:

Key things there:
the words "slightly" was the increase within the error bounds of the survey?
And
This increase has occurred whilst we are a member of the EU, we've not been fully hit by the impact of all our trade deals being ripped away and completely inadequate preparations being made.

Obviously I'm not respecting "the will of the people" here, but then neither is this government....

In reply to Big Ger:

That's good news. We must have moved then up from 19th in the top 20 world's happiest countries?

W

In reply to Bogwalloper:


Would you like that half empty glass topped up?

We're never going to do well in those ratings while we are dragging people like you along with us.

In reply to DaveN:

As someone else said, Brexit is not about the economy.
It’s anout a renewed exceptionalist sense of national pride and identity.
And that’s exactly why it is so irrational and dangerous.

In reply to Big Ger:

Did you look at the chart? It's simply a continuing trend; it doesn't appear that the Brexit vote was particularly relevant in the trend.

In reply to RomTheBear:
Many people had no idea what they were voting for. The signal to noise ratio was too high.

A good example is Grimsby where 70% voted Brexit. Snd now "Brexit exemption sought for Grimsby seafood trade":

http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/brexit-exemption-sought...

In reply to Big Ger:

and if the glass is 3/4 empty and emptying more? I'm glad for your good circumstances - enjoy them

In reply to Big Ger:



Anyone who can currently look at the situation with our government, brexit negotiations, pound Sterling, hate crime increase, division amongst the population, businesess making contingency plans etc etc etc AND still think their glass is half full is either on crack or a good pension.

W

In reply to Shani:

As if the headline wasn't bonkers enough, they also quite a Tory Eurosceptic who is describing this as an opportunity arising from Brexit.

Are they completely mad?

In reply to andyfallsoff:



It makes perfect sense; in a similar way that crashing your car would provide a good opportunity to sell the scrap metal and make some cash.

In reply to Shani:

"Mr Vickers said the possibility of free trade status for northern Lincolnshire’s ports was a sign of post-Brexit optimism.

“We couldn’t do that if we wanted to at the moment,” said the Eurosceptic Tory.

“But once we get control of our own economy again, that is one of the things that could be looked at and which could be very beneficial.

“That emphasises the freedoms and opportunities that could be opening up after Brexit.”

Totally (and deliberately) NOT saying that no such special status is required if we're IN the EU, because that's one of the main benefits...
<facepalm>

In reply to john arran:

Shani mentioned disaster capitalism. Brexit is clearly being viewed as such by the assorted vultures that are now circling, eg. see the Legatum Institute:

"In this, the Legatum Institute seems to be paving the way for its "parent undertakings", engineering a "disruptive transition" for Brexit, then to reap the profits from chaos. Its task is assisted by useful fools and fellow travellers on the Tory right. What we have often characterised as incompetence, therefore, may be more sinister. There is money to be made out of a hard Brexit."
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86556

In reply to andyfallsoff:


But, if the disasters forecast by the remainers "team fear", mass-unemployment, country going bankrupt, plagues of boils for everyone, had come true then the trend would have gone off a cliff edge.

Coinsidering the political farce we've seen from May et all since then, it's a wonder that we're not all slitting our wrists, is it not?

In reply to Bogwalloper:


Which I take it you are not?

Misery loves company, spread your depression wide if it makes you feel good about yourself....

In reply to Big Ger:


You already know the obvious response to this, right?

Meanwhile, I await news of all of the trade deals which are ready to be signed in March 19, and for the EU capitulation to all of our demands which we were promised.


I think about half the country are being optimistic and viewing their incompetence as a sign they might not be able to manage to follow through on leaving the EU, and hence damaging this country for a long time.

In reply to Big Ger:



Not so much a plague of boils.... just scratching that itchy mole and hoping it will go away.....

In reply to andyfallsoff:

We all know how much the whole world loves us - The government's "rapid progress" in getting the six British ex-servicemen released from a sympathetic friend nation shows that...

In reply to Big Ger:


I think I must have missed all that on the side of a bus anywhere near me.

In reply to john arran:

Minor thread resurrection, but there is an interesting article from the Guardian on the Irish question:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/11/ireland-will-not-be-ignored-p...

Eire are refusing to countenance a hard border. The UK Government and the DUP are refusing to consider an arrangment whereby Northern Ireland is treated separately from the rest of the UK.

This really is the irresistible force meeting an immovable object.

In reply to john arran:

Tedious in the extreme. You should stop taking the Grauniad. Your probs best out of it living it up in France. Wierd though that Macron wants U.K. to pay for cost of Sangatte. And that despite the apocalyptic stuff from the Arranistas thousands still clamouring to come to Britain. Must be the food and the weather.

In reply to john yates:


I agree, the frogs should give up on Sangatte and send them all to Blighty.

In reply to john arran:

We were never given enough information and that's just the way it's got to be.

In reply to David Riley:


How does it feel being an insignificant part of a corrupt and draconian sovereign state. I don't like being at the mercy of Michael Gove Boris Fox Priti Patel et al. It feels pretty dangerous to me and right now I feel utterly bereft of any sort of control.