UKC

Positives of Brexit

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
 Andy Farnell 13 Feb 2021

It's been a month and a half since we quit the EU. Any benefits yet? Anyone? Didn't think so.

Quitting has been, and will continue to be, an absolute disaster for the common person.

If you have evidence to the contrary please enlighten me.

Andy F

 Andy Hardy 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

It's keeping web traffic levels nice and high...

 Doug 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

possibly good for journalists ? - plenty for them to write about .

 nikoid 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Shaun mcmurrough:

Patronising little twerp. And everyone knows you don't get peanuts on planes anymore, just those gross pretzel things. 

In reply to nikoid:

👍....duplicitous is often used.

In reply to Andy Farnell:

I for one would be much more forgiving if Brexiters just admitted that they were very badly misled. 

But no, instead of admitting to the disaster they have levelled on the entire country, they just press the anonymous dislike button without written explanation. It looks cowardly, and leaves the rest of us to arrive at conclusions about you that may or may not be true.

 Jim Lancs 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Apparently the fish are happier rotting away in the back of a British lorry rather than being eaten by Johnnie Foreigner.

Although I must admit I heard about this secondhand and I haven't contact any fish for a direct comment.

But it was from a reputable honourable source.

Post edited at 14:19
In reply to Andy Farnell:

The reality has shut Kate Hooéy up.

 supersteve 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

We are having to add the new UKCA approval stamp to all the products we sell, alongside the CE stamp. Both meet the same standards, but we will soon need one stamp to sell in the UK and the other to sell into the EU. Not at all a pain....

 kipper12 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

We have taken on 50 or so new staff, almost all new grads.  I will say I’m no supporter of Brexit and my job has changed a lot and a chunk of the best bits have gone.

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> It's been a month and a half since we quit the EU.

Probably best not to start a sneering comment with a glaring inaccuracy

> Any benefits yet? Anyone? Didn't think so.

Nothing, ... apart from saving thousands of lives with our own vaccine programme.

Don't come back with any nonsense about how it was possible to do what we did under EU law. That's like saying La Sportiva boots are the best because they don't stop you buying a pair of Scarpas. Brexit put huge political pressure on us to pursue our own vaccine approval and procurement schemes and removed the pressure to sign up to the EU communication that compelled member states not to move faster than the EMA and not to negotiate their own vaccine procurement contracts.

Don't take my word for it though, listen to what's being said in the EU itself - https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20210206-how-the-eu-s-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-became-an-advert-for-brexit

 Cobra_Head 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> Probably best not to start a sneering comment with a glaring inaccuracy

> Nothing, ... apart from saving thousands of lives with our own vaccine programme.

Do you not think we were lucky in going a bit early rather than waiting for the full test results?

I'm glad of what we did but, I do think we were lucky, too.

In reply to Cobra_Head:

> Do you not think we were lucky in going a bit early rather than waiting for the full test results?

No, I think it was extremely prudent. Call it a gamble if you like, but it was a calculated good move.

Disclaimer: I am not a supporter of Brexit or Johnson, but credit where credit is due.

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Cobra_Head:

> Do you not think we were lucky in going a bit early rather than waiting for the full test results?

> I'm glad of what we did but, I do think we were lucky, too.

I don't think luck played much part at all tbh.

We arranged contracts with a variety of firms and ordered much more than required to mitigate the risks of particular vaccines being ineffective and having supply issues. The approval process was accelerated by processing trial data as it arrived. The single dose decision was based on sound science. No, I don't think we were lucky.

 Al Randall 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Cobra_Head:

> Do you not think we were lucky in going a bit early rather than waiting for the full test results?

> I'm glad of what we did but, I do think we were lucky, too.

There is undoubtedly an element of truth in that but I see it more in the context of EU failure as opposed to UK success. The whole episode was a neatly bundled microcosm of all that is wrong with the EU and I think this needs to be acknowledged whether you are for or against Brexit.

Al

In reply to Al Randall:

> There is undoubtedly an element of truth in that but I see it more in the context of EU failure as opposed to UK success. The whole episode was a neatly bundled microcosm of all that is wrong with the EU and I think this needs to be acknowledged whether you are for or against Brexit.

I would have to grudgingly agree. 

 pec 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> Any benefits yet?

Lots of smug self righteous tw@ts who decided 5 years ago that Brexit could only ever be a complete disaster, have never tired of telling anyone and everyone that can be arsed to listen to them and will never change their mind regardless of any evidence presented before them are really, really pissed off about it.

Post edited at 17:28
 wercat 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

that "nonsense" you seem to be so well informed about was quoted by someone obviously less well informed than your self-esteemed self

The Lady in charge of the vaccine  approval effort herself, correcting ministers who claimed like you that it was a benefit of Brexit.  She said it during a detailed program profiling her career and character on Radio 4.

Hear, I've found it for you https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000qbgg

Go and tell some more Fibs you lying brexiteer

Post edited at 17:32
 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to wercat:

> The Lady in charge of the vaccine  approval effort herself, correcting ministers who claimed like you that it was a benefit of Brexit.  She said it during a detailed program profiling her career and character on Radio 4.

> Hear, I've found it for you https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000qbgg

> Go and tell some more Fibs you lying brexiteer

Going it alone was a political decision. It was a decision made by politicians, not by scientists

How do you cope in real life when you meet someone with a different opinion? Most remainers are entirely sensible, but some of you are genuinely unhinged

In reply to scratcher:

I've placed a link further in the thread which is an interview with Kate Bingham...

She sounds a very capable person.

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Shaun mcmurrough:

> I've placed a link further in the thread which is an interview with Kate Bingham...

> She sounds a very capable person.

Thanks. Here's the relevant part -

WELT AM SONNTAG: In Germany they had individual contracts with AstraZeneca, but they had to wait for the collective contract with the EU. So don’t you think that maybe in some way Brexit helped to be faster than other countries?

Bingham: The first thing that was the quickest – the MHRA registered the vaccine under European law, so there was no change. Any other European country could have registered the vaccine under European law, using their own regulator. So in Germany, the Paul Ehrlich Institut could have done exactly the same thing. So that was not to do with Brexit. Whether or not other countries could have done what we did. Again, that’s a political matter. I don’t understand whether they had to opt in or could have been able to opt out. We chose to opt out. I don’t really understand politics, and so I don’t know what the constraints are, I’m afraid.

That's entirely in line with what I've said about it being political. Regulation 174 of the Human Medicine Regulations 2012 allowed us to approve without waiting for the EMA, so of course that was possible without Brexit. Being theoretically possible and actually doing so are two separate things though and I fail to see how anyone can claim that the political decision was not heavily motivated by Brexit. Why didn't Germany use Regulation 174?

Kate Bingham is a very capable person. Unfortunately, she was repeatedly attacked by pro-EU commentators for being an inexperienced Tory stooge when her role was first announced.

 Andy Farnell 13 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> Lots of smug self righteous tw@ts who decided 5 years ago that Brexit could only ever be a complete disaster, have never tired of telling anyone and everyone that can be arsed to listen to them and will never change their mind regardless of any evidence presented before them are really, really pissed off about it.

That's maybe because Brexshit is a complete disaster. We have become a 3rd country, lost our freedoms, gained nothing extra of any note in trade deals, can't export and import vast amounts of the things we used to, prices have already started to rise.

The vaccine rollout is nothing to do with Brexit and is a separate issue.

Brexit is going to prove even worse than predicted.

Andy F

Post edited at 18:05
 GrahamD 13 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> Lots of smug self righteous tw@ts who decided 5 years ago that Brexit could only ever be a complete disaster, have never tired of telling anyone and everyone that can be arsed to listen to them and will never change their mind regardless of any evidence presented before them are really, really pissed off about it.

So nothing, then.  Just checking.

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Shaun mcmurrough:

> The single dose decision was based on sound science..

Sorry, what's your point? Are you arguing that the decision wasn't based on sound science?

Apologies for calling it single dose - delaying the second dose for up to 12 weeks is a more accurate description

In reply to scratcher:

She is obviously on good terms with Johnston..😉

The whole interview is interesting. 

I started reading an article the other day and it was suggesting that the Conservatives where very aware that a successful vaccine roll out could be a deciding factor from public perception.

It talked about a famous philosophy from Israel who studied how people reacted to events...ended up at Dead Cat/Alive Cat..😅

In reply to scratcher:

Come on now...not at all.

Are you saying Blair didn't have any influence at all?

Post edited at 18:30
 pec 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> That's maybe because Brexshit is a complete disaster. We have become a 3rd country, lost our freedoms, gained nothing extra of any note in trade deals, can't export and import vast amounts of the things we used to, prices have already started to rise.

> The vaccine rollout is nothing to do with Brexit and is a separate issue.

> Brexit is going to prove even worse than predicted.

> Andy F


QED

 AdrianC 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

I really, really hope that by far the main motivation of the government when ordering vaccines was an overpowering desire to stem the flood of illness and death, rather than feeling pressure to post-justify their desire for brexit.

 Andy Farnell 13 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

Provide some evidence which refutes the negatives of brexit. 

Andy F

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> The reality has shut Kate Hooéy up.

... yes; Kate Hoey, that most unlikely ally of BJ, MG, JRM et al was on Newsnight earlier in the week bleating that the Brexit we now find ourselves lumbered with was not the Brexit she had envisioned... when pushed by Kirsty Wark she almost, almost mind, admitted the whole thing was possibly a mistake...!!!

In reply to Doug:

> possibly good for journalists ? - plenty for them to write about .

... not good for European guidebook distribution... virtually all Cordee's European suppliers have suspended distribution and shipping to the UK for the foreseeable future...

... Freytag and Berndt, a map distributer Cordee has worked with for around 30 years joked last week (although it wasn't actually a joke) that in the current climate it was easier for them to ship maps to North Korea than the UK...

Ordered a load of the new Leonidio guidebooks in mid-January - 160 Euros just to clear the shipment through Greek customs... most, actually all, the guidebook publishers I've spoken to in recent weeks think we 'Brits' have lost our collective minds... they are spot on...

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to AdrianC:

> I really, really hope that by far the main motivation of the government when ordering vaccines was an overpowering desire to stem the flood of illness and death, rather than feeling pressure to post-justify their desire for brexit.

Can you really, really not see how two different governments, one pro-EU and one pro-Brexit, might have that same motivation, but genuinely believe it could be best accomplished by different means, like, er, I don't know, joining or not joining the EU vaccine programme.

 pec 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> Provide some evidence which refutes the negatives of brexit. 

> Andy F


I stopped arguing about the pros and cons of Brexit on UKC about 2 years ago because it had become clear that it was completely pointless.

Threads such as this which tell us absolutely nothing that we don't already know, and the inumerable others which appear ad nauseam only serve to reinforce my decision.

But you carry on telling us why Brexit is the worst disaster to befall humankind if it makes you happy.

 Andy Farnell 13 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

There are no pros of Brexit.

You were told before we left. We are now seeing the effects of the utter stupidity of quitting.

Andy F

 Mr Lopez 13 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> Lots of smug self righteous tw@ts who decided 5 years ago that Brexit could only ever be a complete disaster, have never tired of telling anyone and everyone that can be arsed to listen to them and will never change their mind regardless of any evidence presented before them are really, really pissed off about it.

So about that evidence...

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> The vaccine rollout is nothing to do with Brexit and is a separate issue.

> Andy F

You're not arguing in good faith. How is the vaccine approval and procurement nothing to do with Brexit? We chose to ignore the EU and go it alone - the very essence of Brexit.

If Brexit cured cancer you still wouldn't be happy

 Andy Farnell 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

We could have rolled out the vaccine within the EU, if we hadn't idiotically voted quit.

The roll out is completely separate from the self immolation of brexit.

Andy F

 Rob Parsons 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

> ... yes; Kate Hoey, that most unlikely ally of BJ, MG, JRM et al was on Newsnight earlier in the week bleating that the Brexit we now find ourselves lumbered with was not the Brexit she had envisioned... when pushed by Kirsty Wark she almost, almost mind, admitted the whole thing was possibly a mistake...!!!


Do you remember which night that was on? I'd be curious to hear what she had to say.

In reply to Rob Parsons:

> Do you remember which night that was on? I'd be curious to hear what she had to say.

... it was Tuesday or Wednesday and thinking about it, it was Politics Live not Newsnight (Newsnight reported on the interview she had given on Politics Live)...she didn't have a huge amount to say... she just spluttered a lot... 

 Rob Parsons 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

Ok, thanks.

 NathanP 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> You're not arguing in good faith. How is the vaccine approval and procurement nothing to do with Brexit? We chose to ignore the EU and go it alone - the very essence of Brexit...

If the UK doing its own thing on vaccines was only possible because we had left the EU, how come Hungary did its own thing on vaccines? Public health is a national competence in the EU and there would have been nothing stopping us taking our own path if we wanted to. 

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to NathanP:

> If the UK doing its own thing on vaccines was only possible because we had left the EU, how come Hungary did its own thing on vaccines? Public health is a national competence in the EU and there would have been nothing stopping us taking our own path if we wanted to. 

I never said it was only possible because we had left the EU. I said the political decision to do so was undoubtedly made because we have a pro-Brexit government

Vaccines are strictly regulated by the EMA and can only be temporarily approved under regulation 174 for very exceptional circumstances, so your implication that this is a run of the mill issue of public health competency is wide of the mark

 mutt 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Mostly it seems like we may yet get back to a manufacturing economy based on the VAT and tariffs imposed on the imports that used to come from the rest of the world on whatever low tariff that applied. I'm expecting bikes for instance to be priced 30% higher so the likes of brompton might be able to sell more being british sourced and manufactured. I actually work in the service economy but I think the north of england really suffered when the manufacturing sector got outsourced to germany or the far east. Its not happened yet but I live in hope.

My other pleasure is seeing the opportunities to buy ever more crap from the EU and china dry up as firms choose not to export to the UK. I remember when we could live with 10% of what we all think as essential now. Having said that my climbing hold order doesn't seem to be anywhere close to being dispatched.

 NorthernGrit 13 Feb 2021

Ok let's accept vaccine rollout as a genuine benefit of Brexit (whether we all agree or not).

Good. That's one thing. What else?

 NathanP 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> I never said it was only possible because we had left the EU. I said the political decision to do so was undoubtedly made because we have a pro-Brexit government

> Vaccines are strictly regulated by the EMA and can only be temporarily approved under regulation 174 for very exceptional circumstances, so your implication that this is a run of the mill issue of public health competency is wide of the mark

So, to summarise, you accept it would have been possible if the UK government had wanted, even if we had still been in the EU.

To return to the OP, did you have any actual advantages of Brexit or was that it?

In reply to mutt:

> My other pleasure is seeing the opportunities to buy ever more crap from the EU and china .

Ok then the Germans manufacture crap....

👍

 Mr Lopez 13 Feb 2021
In reply to NathanP:

> To return to the OP, did you have any actual advantages of Brexit or was that it?

I have one.

We can drive on the left.

I mean. we could do that before when we were in the EU, but they drive on the right, and we want to drive on the left (f*ck knows why), so the fact we can drive on the left now that we left the EU is obviously because we left the EU, even though we could do it before, but we definitely can do it now.

Take that you smug self righteous EU loving tw@ts. How you like it now

In reply to Shaun mcmurrough:

> Ok then the Germans manufacture crap....

> 👍

... yes... all those crap cars on the road... now, who was it that came up with the Golf and who came up with the Austin Allergro... 

 Andy Farnell 13 Feb 2021
In reply to NathanP:

I was asking for any. It seems, like unicorns and sunlit uplands, they seem to be in very short supply. Probably because they don't exist.

Andy F

In reply to Andy Farnell:

A big positive is the relentless threads about it on UKC, makes is such a positive and awesome forum.....

Change the record.

In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

Thumb up from me.

 George Ormerod 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

> ... yes; Kate Hoey, that most unlikely ally of BJ, MG, JRM et al was on Newsnight earlier in the week bleating that the Brexit we now find ourselves lumbered with was not the Brexit she had envisioned... when pushed by Kirsty Wark she almost, almost mind, admitted the whole thing was possibly a mistake...!!!

This is about the only benefit of Brexit, watching the leave politicians disappear up their own arses now it turns out that the deal they voted for, scrutinised and knew exactly what it means, turns out to be a bag of shite. 

Gove was even quoting the FT article that Scotland leaving the UK would have 3 times the impact of Brexit. This could only mean one of 2 things:  Gove is a f*cking liar, or Scottish independence is a brilliant idea as it would be 3 times as wonderful as Brexit. 

 jkarran 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Loads more work at my place.

No more income to pay for it of course.

Jk

In reply to George Ormerod:

Gove is a f*cking liar

... that goes without saying...

Have just read this... couldn't put it down... not sure what it says about our modern day politics... I guess we just have to accept this is how it is now...

https://www.simonandschuster.co.uk/books/The-Assault-on-Truth/Peter-Oborne/9781398501003

Post edited at 22:05
 squarepeg 13 Feb 2021
In reply to wercat:

It's to be hoped that calling some body a liar is not against the rules, for your sake. 

Post edited at 22:03
 George Ormerod 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

I was listening to Oborne on the Byline Times podcast.  It's interesting because he is a conservative, voted leave, was a previous friend and colleague of Johnson and makes an indisputable case that he is a pathological liar, wholly unsuitable for high office.

In reply to squarepeg:

> It's to be hoped that calling some body a liar is not against the rules, for your sake. 

If it is manifestly true then why would there be a problem? Admittedly I'm not a lawyer.......

In reply to George Ormerod:

> I was listening to Oborne on the Byline Times podcast.  It's interesting because he is a conservative, voted leave, was a previous friend and colleague of Johnson and makes an indisputable case that he is a pathological liar, wholly unsuitable for high office.

... yes, Oborne's background and politics was what piqued my interest in the book when I saw it reviewed in last weeks Telegraph... a newspaper, incidentally (or should be ironically) that BJ, when working as a journalist, was sacked from for lying...!!!

Post edited at 22:26
 r0x0r.wolfo 13 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> Thanks. Here's the relevant part -

> WELT AM SONNTAG: In Germany they had individual contracts with AstraZeneca, but they had to wait for the collective contract with the EU. So don’t you think that maybe in some way Brexit helped to be faster than other countries?

> Bingham: The first thing that was the quickest – the MHRA registered the vaccine under European law, so there was no change. Any other European country could have registered the vaccine under European law, using their own regulator. So in Germany, the Paul Ehrlich Institut could have done exactly the same thing. So that was not to do with Brexit. Whether or not other countries could have done what we did. Again, that’s a political matter. I don’t understand whether they had to opt in or could have been able to opt out. We chose to opt out. I don’t really understand politics, and so I don’t know what the constraints are, I’m afraid.

> That's entirely in line with what I've said about it being political. Regulation 174 of the Human Medicine Regulations 2012 allowed us to approve without waiting for the EMA, so of course that was possible without Brexit. Being theoretically possible and actually doing so are two separate things though and I fail to see how anyone can claim that the political decision was not heavily motivated by Brexit. Why didn't Germany use Regulation 174?

> Kate Bingham is a very capable person. Unfortunately, she was repeatedly attacked by pro-EU commentators for being an inexperienced Tory stooge when her role was first announced.

The EU moving slow and in unity was political. 

The UK would have gone off on its own regardless of brexit. We have never been a 'we're all in it together' country, and would have pursued the vaccine ahead of the EU. 

The pressure to go off and do things on our own has always been there, back in 2016 we even voted to leave the EU, remember? 

Post edited at 22:29
 WaterMonkey 13 Feb 2021
In reply to squarepeg:

> It's to be hoped that calling some body a liar is not against the rules, for your sake. 

😂 That has to be the world’s lamest threat ever!

 JMarkW 13 Feb 2021
In reply to NorthernGrit:

> Ok let's accept vaccine rollout as a genuine benefit of Brexit (whether we all agree or not).

> Good. That's one thing. What else?

Weren't we still in the EU though when we bought all those vaccines?

 George Ormerod 13 Feb 2021
In reply to JMarkW:

> Weren't we still in the EU though when we bought all those vaccines?

The UK was in the transition period, so could have opted into the EU scheme, or not, as could any of the other full members.  Some members are going it alone now (Hungary for example) as there is no doubt that the EU isn't doing a great job and the UK is doing better - at least for the first shot.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> The reality has shut Kate Hooéy up.

I trust that’s a deliberate typo?

In reply to scratcher:

> Nothing, ... apart from saving thousands of lives with our own vaccine programme.

The vaccine programme is one of two good decisions by this government.

Their other, bad, decisions have resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of lives.

Neither of which has anything to do with Brexit. Other than bad decision making.

In reply to JMarkW:

While the EU is heavily criticised for her vaccine management, Kate Bingham can look back at the UK’s success story. But she doesn’t see Brexit as reason for the smooth rollout.

 scratcher 13 Feb 2021
In reply to Mr Lopez:

> I have one.

> We can drive on the left.

> I mean. we could do that before when we were in the EU, but they drive on the right, and we want to drive on the left (f*ck knows why), so the fact we can drive on the left now that we left the EU is obviously because we left the EU, even though we could do it before, but we definitely can do it now.

> Take that you smug self righteous EU loving tw@ts. How you like it now

Very good

I'm not sure what relevance it has though. Nobody is arguing that we couldn't have gone it alone whilst still in the EU. The question is would we have done so?

If Remain had won then I simply don't see how euro-sceptics end up in the positions of power needed to make that decision to go it alone. They'd be banished, just like Osborne was after Leave won. It really was a winner-takes-all vote.

Consider Scotland, with a government that wants to rejoin the EU. Are you seriously suggesting Scotland wouldn't have joined the EU vaccine programme if that power were available to it? As a reminder, here's what the official SNP line on it was at the time -

The SNP’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Dr Philippa Whitford MP said: “At a time when the UK should be accelerating efforts to work with our EU partners towards finding a vaccine, it is concerning that the UK government has instead rejected the opportunity to take part in yet another EU-wide programme.

“The UK government’s short-sighted and increasingly isolationist approach does nothing but hinder the ability to tackle the virus effectively.

“It is not clear which potential vaccines may ultimately prove most successful. Therefore, the UK government must put public health ahead of Brexiteer ideology and step up efforts to engage with international partners to ensure that we are fully prepared around securing potential vaccines.

Source - https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18576012.critics-hit-matt-hancock-confirms-britain-will-not-join-eu-covid-vaccine-purchase-scheme/

 Martin Hore 13 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> I stopped arguing about the pros and cons of Brexit on UKC about 2 years ago because it had become clear that it was completely pointless.

I tend to agree that posting on most Brexit threads on here, whichever side of the debate you are on, is largely a case of preaching to the unconvertable. 

But I'd like to think that if I was on your side of the debate the fact that so many people who share our passion for climbing are strong Remainers would have given me just a little pause for thought.

Martin

In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

Curious book for Oborne to be writing, he having been a supporter of Brexshit for a long time. I suppose he might argue that the lies he saw being told in support of it caused his conversion.

Kate Bingham, mentioned above, is of course the wife of Jesse Norman, long-time Johnson arselicker.

jcm

Post edited at 23:53
In reply to Martin Hore:

Not to mention the fact that Putin and Trump both thought it was a good idea.

jcm

In reply to Andy Farnell:

"53 Tons of Rotting Pork"

Brexit outside of the Murdoch filter: https://outline.com/ghbRw3

In reply to Andy Farnell:

Oh dear! What can the mutter be? This failure of Leavers to provide any concrete positives of Brexit is most peculiar. 

 r0x0r.wolfo 14 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> Very good

> I'm not sure what relevance it has though. Nobody is arguing that we couldn't have gone it alone whilst still in the EU. The question is would we have done so?

> If Remain had won then I simply don't see how euro-sceptics end up in the positions of power needed to make that decision to go it alone. They'd be banished, just like Osborne was after Leave won. It really was a winner-takes-all vote.

Ah, just like Theresa May, that die hard Brexiteer.

The vaccine procurement programme wasn't simply on a EU / non-EU axis, it's far more complicated than that. 

The fact is, you cannot prove that a remain vote would have led us to waiting for the EU programme. Therefore, as the UK was perfectly able to procure vaccine independently it cannot be said that the strategy was a benefit of the Brexit. It's that simple.

Post edited at 02:05
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

> Curious book for Oborne to be writing, he having been a supporter of Brexshit for a long time. I suppose he might argue that the lies he saw being told in support of it caused his conversion.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/i-was-strong-brexiteer-now-we-must-swallow-our-pride-and-think-again/

 pec 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Martin Hore:

> But I'd like to think that if I was on your side of the debate the fact that so many people who share our passion for climbing are strong Remainers would have given me just a little pause for thought.

Life must seem so much simpler when you live in a bubble.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Oborne doesn't exactly come across as a great thinker in that; finally realising so much of the Brexit rhetoric was nonsense, but still 'proud of the decision'...

 marsbar 14 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

What is it going to take to pop your Brexit bubble...?

In reply to captain paranoia:

Maybe not. I was merely letting Mr Cox know that Oborne has quite publicly altered his stance even if only slightly. Mr Cox probably knows this already of course 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I'm not saying Oborne is wrong about Johnson, or that he's wrong to have finally had the Brexshit truth dawn on him...

 WaterMonkey 14 Feb 2021
In reply to The Thread:

Genuine question, after 82 posts did we identify any positives?

Apart from a vaccine program we would definitely have done anyway and some happy fish.

In reply to scratcher:

> If Remain had won then I simply don't see how euro-sceptics end up in the positions of power needed to make that decision to go it alone. They'd be banished, just like Osborne was after Leave won. It really was a winner-takes-all vote.

I think you're right.

I'm really pro-EU, and it rankles to have to admit that this is a pretty clear example of brexit having led to a good result. It's tempting to reject it, as after years of becoming more entrenched, I instinctively want everything to do with brexit to be bad, but it's hard to see us having had a government that would have gone its own way with the vaccine programme if we hadn't left the EU.

I still think Brexit was a massive mistake and a tragedy, but nothing of that sort is ever going to be all good or all bad, the world just isn't that simple.

However, and it's a really big however ... brexit also brought us this incompetent, greedy and callous government.

They appear to have done really well with the vaccines so far, and hopefully it'll keep going that way; they're clearly hoping that means that we'll forget that they've done an utterly terrible job of almost everything else.

The UK has one of the very highest covid death rates in the world, AND has suffered terrible economic damage. Doing the vaccines well might stop it getting a lot worse, but it's already very, very bad.

We've already lost well over a hundred and ten thousand people, so many countries have done so much better. It'll be a while before we know how well countries have handled it overall, but the UK is not now going to come out anywhere amongst the best - and I fear that the relief of the vaccine programme going well may lead the public to forget how much needless death and suffering has been caused by the wavering incompetence and blatant corruption this government has given us.

 ianstevens 14 Feb 2021
In reply to captain paranoia:

Maybe dump some of the now non-exportable fish at the doorstep of everyone who voted for Brexit until they begin to realise the consequences? 

Add some extra tax to all Brexit voters to cover the losses of leaving the EU? They wanted "sovrenty" regardless of the economic cost IIRC. So surely they won't mind covering it? 

Edit: another - if one of them could pay for my work permit that would be nice too.

Post edited at 09:56
In reply to WaterMonkey:

I wonder how long it took after we joined the Common Market as it was then before we saw benefits? I personally cannot see any benignity accruing from leaving but you never know.

However, no matter how often it is complained about on here we lost so we had better get on with it. We would be better employing our energy in making the best of it rather than complaining. 

 WaterMonkey 14 Feb 2021
In reply to HighChilternRidge:

> We would be better employing our energy in making the best of it rather than complaining. 

Hence why we are trying to find the positives. There must be some? And if there really are none then surely as a nation we should reconsider our stance?

 deepsoup 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Shaun mcmurrough:

> While the EU is heavily criticised for her vaccine management

If you accept, for the sake of argument, that the relative success of the UK vaccination effort is down to the MHRA being brilliant while the European Medicines Agency was poor.  It seems rather short-sighted and selfish chalking that up as a victory for the UK from Brexit, as opposed to a pitfall of Brexit for the rest of the EU.

Up until the Spring of 2019 the EMA was based in London and the two bodies were very closely linked.  As the most influential country by far over that area of EU policy, not only would we have not been obliged to follow the rest of the EU with our approach to approving the vaccines had the referendum gone the other way, it's highly likely we would have been the ones setting the EU policy.

Hopefully it didn't have a direct effect on their ability to respond to the pandemic, but at the start of 2020 the EMA had only just finished disentangling themselves from the MHRA and relocating from London to Amsterdam.  It must have been a huge upheaval for them.

 Fat Bumbly2 14 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

Clearly swimming in an Egyptian/Sudanese river

In reply to deepsoup:

I should have said what I wrote was taken from an interview with Kate Bingham....

Makes interesting reading...

https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article225865185/Kate-Bingham-Former-UK-vaccines-chief-says-yes-to-Russian-jab-if-data-is-good.html

Post edited at 10:48
In reply to WaterMonkey:

I can not disagree with you but more than half (just) thinks otherwise. Perhaps in a few years we may get a consensus to go back, but will the EU want us? 

 deepsoup 14 Feb 2021
In reply to deepsoup:

> Hopefully it didn't have a direct effect on their ability to respond to the pandemic, but at the start of 2020 the EMA had only just finished disentangling themselves from the MHRA and relocating from London to Amsterdam.

A horrible thought if it has - not least because a larger pot of the virus simmering away on the mainland beside us, mutating away, is also a direct threat to the UK - with our government that seems remarkably loath to actually take control over our borders, when it comes to it.

 Tringa 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

As a month and a half is about six weeks one benefit obvious benefit of Brexit is the UK is £2.1billion better off.

I know this because the PM told me we send £350million a week to the EU and surely the PM wouldn't lie to me.

Dave

 David Riley 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Tringa:

I expect it would have been a lot more next year, now Draghi wants money for Italy.

 carl dawson 14 Feb 2021

In contrast to some rather abstract replies to the OP, as a 'common climber' I offer a quick summary of my own (climbing-relevant) Brexit Bonus.

Minus £46.95

My copy of the 2021 Leonidio guidebook was posted six weeks ago and, for reasons of Brexit, looks likely to never arrive.

I look forward to reading concrete examples of other bonuses.

 HardenClimber 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

I'm not sure why everyone is so myopic, there are huge upsides....

The Dutch pharmaceutical industry gets a boost, European Finance Centres get a boost, Spain Gets Gibralter, Argentina gets Falklands, Russia has an easier ride, US clogomerates get a new market for dodgy food. UK's red tape industry has a huge boost, smugglers in NI do well, Tory donors get new contracts.... to many positives to list.

We do need to accept and reconise this. It is important in assessing our political parties performance. Obviously from a practical point we need to move on, but without acknowledging the changes, our decisons and plans for moving on will be a faulty as the decisions which led to this.

Post edited at 12:43
 neilh 14 Feb 2021
In reply to skog:

Well put. 

In reply to carl dawson:

> My copy of the 2021 Leonidio guidebook was posted six weeks ago and, for reasons of Brexit, looks likely to never arrive.

> I look forward to reading concrete examples of other bonuses.

... it might still turn up... we (Cordee) have had a few deliveries from Europe trickle in but there appears to be some confusion over VAT... books have never have VAT on them in the UK but it would seem HMRC have neglected to pass this information on the the various parcel carriers (no surprise there)...

What I think should  happen now is any shipped goods from Europe need an invoice attaching to the outside of the packaging stating both what is in the package and how much it's worth... from this the carrier can then work out how much VAT + handling charge to invoice the recipient for.

In your case, I suspect said invoice is not in evidence, so the Royal Mail, or whoever it is simply doesn't know what to do with it... if its just one book; they'll eventually get bored looking at it and deliver it to you...

... either way the whole thing is a complete s**t-show...

 Mr Lopez 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

> In your case, I suspect said invoice is not in evidence, so the Royal Mail, or whoever it is simply doesn't know what to do with it... if its just one book; they'll eventually get bored looking at it and deliver it to you...

If it's in the hands of Royal Mail then standard practice is to put it in a pallet and send it Wellers Auction House to be sold off in lots and pocket the profits

In reply to Mr Lopez:

> If it's in the hands of Royal Mail then standard practice is to put it in a pallet and send it Wellers Auction House to be sold off in lots and pocket the profits

... ah well... in answer to the OP, maybe a "Positive of Berexit" will be a more profitable Royal Mail... ;-)

 carl dawson 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

Thanks, Richard, for the positive thoughts... but I'm not holding my breath!

Good luck with your European orders; I hope things improve for you. If, and when, you get some in, I'll be putting in an order with you. 

 owlart 14 Feb 2021
In reply to carl dawson:

> My copy of the 2021 Leonidio guidebook was posted six weeks ago and, for reasons of Brexit, looks likely to never arrive.

If it's any help, we're currently seeing delivery times of up to 8/9 weeks from UK to Europe by standard post, and courier times anywhere from 1 week, up to the courier getting fed up of border delays and returning the parcels to us after 6 weeks (DPD, twice now!)!

 Bob Kemp 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:
According to Dominic Raab we need to wait 10 years to see the benefits: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/14/raab-shrugs-off-brexit-troubles-urging-people-to-take-10-year-view?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

It also seems we will benefit from future trade with the growing economies in Asia. I’m not sure why we couldn’t do this in the EU of course.
 

 neilh 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

There is really no reason to do this other than a just in case. 

If you ups etc stuff to the States which has vigourious customs controls it can all be done electronically. And you can get parcels delivered easily in a couple of days. 

Asides from the cost   of customs clearance  ( a needless expense courtesy of Brexit.). There really is no excuse for the current backlogs at the likes of. Fed ex, ups, dhl and others
 

 john arran 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Bob Kemp:

> It also seems we will benefit from future trade with the growing economies in Asia. I’m not sure why we couldn’t do this in the EU of course.

Because if you see international trade as a zero sum gain, which the Tories' focus on competition rather than cooperation would suggest they do, then any UK success in Asia would of course be at the expense of EU success.

And if you subscribe to British exceptionalism, for which ordinary folk could be excused in light of the incessant media barrage to that effect, then you'll be convinced the success/failure equation between UK and EU would of course be in the UK's favour.

In reply to neilh:

> There is really no reason to do this other than a just in case. 

> If you ups etc stuff to the States which has vigourious customs controls it can all be done electronically. And you can get parcels delivered easily in a couple of days. 

> Asides from the cost   of customs clearance  ( a needless expense courtesy of Brexit.). There really is no excuse for the current backlogs at the likes of. Fed ex, ups, dhl and others

... yep; am well aware of this and agree with you... we've been bringing stuff in from the States, Canada, Asia etc for years... 

... we know how the system is supposed to work, however, on the evidence of the past few weeks the reality is somewhat different... when speaking to most of our European suppliers, the answer is always the same; we can't ship to the UK at the moment because we have no idea of the procedure and required paperwork... this is usually followed by: 'are you planning to open an office in Amsterdam or Gibraltar'...

Post edited at 14:28
 Rob Parsons 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

> ... it was Tuesday or Wednesday and thinking about it, it was Politics Live not Newsnight (Newsnight reported on the interview she had given on Politics Live)...she didn't have a huge amount to say... she just spluttered a lot... 


I couldn't find that unfortunately; all I could find is a Sky News interview with her, regarding the 'Northern Ireland protocol' (namely: https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1359422280238047237)

In reply to Rob Parsons:

> I couldn't find that unfortunately; all I could find is a Sky News interview with her, regarding the 'Northern Ireland protocol' (namely: https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1359422280238047237)

... yeah... it was all part of the same interview; she was obviously doing a tour of all the news / media outlets... on the BBC, it started with a debate on the NI protocol and then Kirsty Wark, picking up on her discomfort, widened the discussion to take in Brexit as a whole...

... interestingly; I've had a look this morning but all mention / footage of the latter part of the interview seems to have disappeared...

Post edited at 15:46
 Alyson30 14 Feb 2021
In reply to neilh:

> Asides from the cost   of customs clearance  ( a needless expense courtesy of Brexit.). There really is no excuse for the current backlogs at the likes of. Fed ex, ups, dhl and others

There was a podcast on bbc world service a few years ago. Someone from the parcel industry was explaining how parcels from outside the UK go through customs. It involved giant warehouses and giant x ray machines. According to him the capacity to process the same from the EU just simply wasn’t there, whether it’s in the EU or the UK and a hard Brexit would cause a disaster.
As far as I can tell what happened in exactly what he predicted.

But hey who cares about what the experts are saying, when instead you can peddle banalities and point fingers.

Post edited at 16:40
 Big Bruva 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> It's been a month and a half since we quit the EU. Any benefits yet? Anyone?

Blue passports? Anyone...? 

 jimtitt 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

> ... it might still turn up... we (Cordee) have had a few deliveries from Europe trickle in but there appears to be some confusion over VAT... books have never have VAT on them in the UK but it would seem HMRC have neglected to pass this information on the the various parcel carriers (no surprise there)...

> What I think should  happen now is any shipped goods from Europe need an invoice attaching to the outside of the packaging stating both what is in the package and how much it's worth... from this the carrier can then work out how much VAT + handling charge to invoice the recipient for.

> In your case, I suspect said invoice is not in evidence, so the Royal Mail, or whoever it is simply doesn't know what to do with it... if its just one book; they'll eventually get bored looking at it and deliver it to you...

> ... either way the whole thing is a complete s**t-show...


Of course, the delivery has to be accompanied by CN 22 or CN23 depending on it's value (up to €1000) and with a commercial invoice (not the normal invoice) otherwise it 's automatically rejected.  The UK is now a third country under trading law.

 neilh 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

What banalities is that ? At the moment the U.K. is not checking inward imports . That is to start  in a few months time. It will only get worse then .

the issue at the moment is exports  to the EU and issues like warehouses in Germany stuffed full of packages as German customs hand checks  consignments . 

In reply to Bob Kemp:

> According to Dominic Raab we need to wait 10 years to see the benefits:

Didn't JRM say it would be fifty years...?

 Martin Hore 14 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> Life must seem so much simpler when you live in a bubble.

I'd appreciate an explanation here. Are you suggesting that I'm in a bubble - I presume you mean a "Remainer" bubble - and you are not in an equivalent "Brexiteer" bubble. If that's what you meant, I can't see how that works.

Martin

 jimtitt 14 Feb 2021
In reply to neilh:

What banality is that? If I send a shipment to the UK with customs documents it is processed through the normal system otherwise the confirmation documents would never arrive back in Germany. That the UK ism't set up to process unaccompanied shipments is clear. 

All exports from the EU must be controlled (as must those from the UK normally) unless you have approved status which the average internet seller won't have.

 pec 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Martin Hore:

> I'd appreciate an explanation here. Are you suggesting that I'm in a bubble - I presume you mean a "Remainer" bubble - and you are not in an equivalent "Brexiteer" bubble. If that's what you meant, I can't see how that works.

OK, you said

"But I'd like to think that if I was on your side of the debate the fact that so many people who share our passion for climbing are strong Remainers would have given me just a little pause for thought."

Well firstly you're making quite an assumption that leave voting climbers didn't pause for thought, how on earth would you know whether we had or not?

But frankly, what other climbers think is a complete irrelevance. Why should climbers be party to some superior wisdom that some other groups of people aren't?

FWIW, most of my climbing friends (and non climbing for that matter) are left leaning, metropolitan remainers and despite their high levels of education etc etc I see no evidence that most of them did anything other than fall into line with what 'my tribe thinks' when it came to the referendum. So yes, they largely share the same world view because they have the same life experiences and they are just as susceptible to group think as any other self selecting group. They are, by any reasonable definition, living in a remainer bubble at least to some degree.

The fact that most of my friends have very different politics to myself and I post regularly on here where I'm out of step with the majority suggests to me that I'm not the one living in a bubble, comforting as that may be if I were. I don't post on, or use any other social media and I work on my own so my views aren't really influenced by anyone, it would be hard to be in less of a bubble.

I've no idea who you socialise with or what you're political influences are so I wasn't accusing you personally of living in a bubble, how would I know? But the idea that I should be influenced by people just because they like climbing up pieces of rock any more than people who don't is frankly bizarre. Climbing is my hobby, it's not a cult.

Post edited at 19:32
In reply to pec:

PILATE: Hoo hoo hoo ho. The little wascal has spiwit.

CENTURION: Has what, sir?

PILATE: Spiwit.

CENTURION: Yes. He did, sir.

PILATE: No, no. Spiwit, siw. Um, bwavado. A touch of dewwing-do.

 Morty 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

After 118 posts, can anyone give me a quick summary of the positives that have been flagged up - particularly if they have been supported by concrete evidence.  Anyone?

 Ian W 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Morty:

Yup, here goes......

Errr.....

There, is that ok?

 Martin Hore 14 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> FWIW, most of my climbing friends (and non climbing for that matter) are left leaning, metropolitan remainers and despite their high levels of education etc etc I see no evidence that most of them did anything other than fall into line with what 'my tribe thinks' when it came to the referendum. 

That's a pretty sweeping statement, and rather uncomplimentary towards your friends I would have thought. I hope they're not UKC readers. I may be wrong, but it rather suggests your thinking goes as follows:

"I've thought it through for myself and I support Brexit. My friends disagree. Therefore they can't have thought it through for themselves."

>I wasn't accusing you personally of living in a bubble, how would I know?

It did come across that you were accusing me of living in a bubble. I'm not sure how else I was supposed to read it.

>But the idea that I should be influenced by people just because they like climbing up pieces of rock any more than people who don't is frankly bizarre. Climbing is my hobby, it's not a cult.

> Frankly, what other climbers think is a complete irrelevance. Why should climbers be party to some superior wisdom that some other groups of people aren't?

OK, that's an interesting point and I'll try to answer. There are bound to be exceptions, but in general I think being a climber is consistent with a world view that, for example, fosters co-operation and trust in others, places a high value on conserving the natural environment, and seeks a lot more from life than economic status and success. Certainly, in my case, climbing has led me into contact with local communities in many different parts of the world - and to build friendships, trust, respect and climbing partnerships along the way. Yes, I've been very fortunate that climbing has given me these opportunities, but I don't think it's surprising that I've developed a world view in the process that's put me strongly in the Remainer camp. 

Like you, most of my climbing friends are Remainers. Unlike you, I believe that most of them have given the matter a great deal of careful thought before coming to that decision.

Martin

 wintertree 14 Feb 2021
In reply to Morty:

> After 118 posts, can anyone give me a quick summary of the positives that have been flagged up - particularly if they have been supported by concrete evidence.  Anyone?

As pec said at 19:09 on Saturday

Threads such as this which tell us absolutely nothing that we don't already know,

I think that was their way of admitting that they have nothing to bring to the table in terms of benefits...

 Graeme G 14 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

> Climbing is my hobby, it's not a cult.

That’s what they get you to believe first. You’re not past the point of no return. Yet.

 Andy Farnell 14 Feb 2021
In reply to pec:

So most of you friends are left leaning and also living in a remainer bubble.

Makes perfect sense.

Andy F

p.s. still no positives.

In reply to scratcher:

> Nothing, ... apart from saving thousands of lives with our own vaccine programme.

Only a Brexiteer could look at the worst Covid death rates in the world and talk about the government saving thousands of lives.

Up to now the thing which has saved thousands of lives is the lockdown.  The vaccine is not effective immediately and the numbers being vaccinated in the early part of the program were much lower than the recent numbers.   Hopefully, in the future the vaccines will have a large effect too.

> Don't come back with any nonsense about how it was possible to do what we did under EU law.

Clearly it is not nonsense because some EU countries are going completely their own way (Hungary is using Russian vaccine) and many are using a combination of EU supplies and their own procurement.

> That's like saying La Sportiva boots are the best because they don't stop you buying a pair of Scarpas. Brexit put huge political pressure on us to pursue our own vaccine approval and procurement schemes and removed the pressure to sign up to the EU communication that compelled member states not to move faster than the EMA and not to negotiate their own vaccine procurement contracts.

Again absolute bollocks since many member states have negotiated their own vaccination contracts and EMA was not that much slower in approving Pfizer.   

The UK moved fast on vaccines because it let the rate of infection in the community get out of control and it had no choice but to move fast and take chances.

So far it looks like the risk taking has worked, which is good, but it doesn't mean it wasn't a risk.

We won't actually know the outcome relative to the EU for months since the vaccine mix is different.   Getting 64% vaccine into arms quickly might not be as effective as getting 95% vaccine into arms at a slower rate and starting off with far lower rates of infection.

 scratcher 15 Feb 2021
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> Clearly it is not nonsense because some EU countries are going completely their own way (Hungary is using Russian vaccine) and many are using a combination of EU supplies and their own procurement.

I can't imagine why a country with a eurosceptic like Viktor Orban as its leader would choose to adopt the eurosceptic policy of going their own way. Can anyone help solve this gritty conundrum? Could there be a link? Might it not actually be further evidence for my claim that only a government led by eurosceptics, which we got as a result of the brexit vote, would have chosen to go it alone?

Since you're a staunch Scottish Nationalist, perhaps you can comment on the approach the Scottish Government would have taken?

The SNP’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Dr Philippa Whitford MP said: “At a time when the UK should be accelerating efforts to work with our EU partners towards finding a vaccine, it is concerning that the UK government has instead rejected the opportunity to take part in yet another EU-wide programme.

“The UK government’s short-sighted and increasingly isolationist approach does nothing but hinder the ability to tackle the virus effectively.

“It is not clear which potential vaccines may ultimately prove most successful. Therefore, the UK government must put public health ahead of Brexiteer ideology and step up efforts to engage with international partners to ensure that we are fully prepared around securing potential vaccines.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18576012.critics-hit-matt-hancock-confirms-britain-will-not-join-eu-covid-vaccine-purchase-scheme

> Again absolute bollocks since many member states have negotiated their own vaccination contracts and EMA was not that much slower in approving Pfizer. 

Yes, when it became clear that the EU was going to fail on its commitment to procure the vaccines itself. They're still vaccinating at a slower pace than us too, suggesting there remains an issue with supplies - https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2021-01-01..latest&country=GBR~EuropeanUnion&region=World&vaccinationsMetric=true&interval=total&perCapita=true&smoothing=0&pickerMetric=population&pickerSort=desc

Regarding the EMA, I fully accept a previous poster's point that there would have been a much more harmonious relationship between the MHRC and the EMA if we'd voted remain, which could have led to joint approvals happening simultaneously. However, the main issues are with supply, arising because of spectacular policy blunders made by the EU Commission

 Cobra_Head 15 Feb 2021
 subtle 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> It's been a month and a half since we quit the EU. Any benefits yet? Anyone?

One positive of Brexit is that it is now/will be harder to travel to Europe with your pet - less dogs on ferries for example.

One downside though is that it will probably mean a surge in dogs freely roaming around UK beaches/countryside, all whilst their owners advise that they are properly under control, and that they get their mess picked up as they are responsible owners.

 scratcher 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Cobra_Head:

> Interesting twist on things

I agree, if by interesting twist you mean amusing contortion

Let's play a game. For every article you post a link to that is supportive of the EU's handling of its vaccine programme, I'll post two that are critical. We'll see who runs out of supplies first ;)

 Offwidth 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Cobra_Head:

Speaking as a solid remainer I'd say twist is the right word, several of them, with a few logical summersaults.

Nothing stops EU countries buying their own vaccines, on top of the EU scheme, so it's not even a brexit thing.  Oxford scientists and associated entrepreneurs got moving on this last January and so when the UK government arrived they hit the ground running. Great work all round. This fast action hopefully means we can help other countries sooner...AZ is cheap as well and can be stored in a fridge, so ideal for the developing world.

 Graeme G 15 Feb 2021
In reply to subtle:

> One downside though is that it will probably mean a surge in dogs freely roaming around UK beaches/countryside, all whilst their owners advise that they are properly under control, and that they get their mess picked up as they are responsible owners.

You forgot to mention, whilst being told as they jump all over you, “they’re just being friendly”

In reply to scratcher:

Obviously articles in the Daily Mail, Express, Sun, Spectator  and Times don't count, because they just make stuff up. Otherwise, you're on.

 Rob Parsons 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Graeme G:

> You forgot to mention, whilst being told as they jump all over you, “they’re just being friendly”

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/picture/2021/jan/16/berger-wyse-on-naughty-dogs-cartoon

 Cobra_Head 15 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> I agree, if by interesting twist you mean amusing contortion

> Let's play a game. For every article you post a link to that is supportive of the EU's handling of its vaccine programme, I'll post two that are critical. We'll see who runs out of supplies first ;)


I wasn't really support or not, simply posting for info.

But let's give it a go, since I'm here

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?fbclid=IwAR3i1Vku3PVXvQScASKDEgrXe6h5SwCRdvWtSZQl-5uHym4hNnonzIt6N4o

Not trying to denigrate or support anyone, but EVEN you might have to admit, since most people have only had one dose so far, there aren't many people who've been vaccinated "properly" in the UK, so far.

 graeme jackson 15 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> Since you're a staunch Scottish Nationalist, etc........

Bloody Hell!. The first T in E post I've ever seen where he hasn't promoted independence and told us how much he hates the English and you go and wind him up. I fully expect this thread to turn to the TinE darkside now. 

back on track. On a purely personal level (and I stress 'personal') I've not seen any effect on my life from brexit. Shopping costs the same and parcels are getting delivered to the door in about the same timescales as before.  Mind you, I'm not a fisherman and don't run my own international business so what do I know. 

In reply to graeme jackson:

Pre-Covid, did you not have any kind of social life, ever go to the pub/cinema, etc?

 graeme jackson 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Cinema yes. Only ever go to pubs if I'm going to be on-stage. Not sure how brexit would have affected that though?  

p.s. my earlier reply was TiC but I guess you know that. 

In reply to scratcher:

> Regarding the EMA, I fully accept a previous poster's point that there would have been a much more harmonious relationship between the MHRC and the EMA if we'd voted remain, which could have led to joint approvals happening simultaneously. However, the main issues are with supply, arising because of spectacular policy blunders made by the EU Commission

The AZ factory in the EU had production problems and AZ f*cked them by not assigning some of the output from factories in the UK despite what it said in the contract they'd collected $400 million from.   Then the EU got tough and AZ/UK backed down.

It is also be worth pointing out that the UK warehouse full of AZ vaccine narrowly avoided being flooded out and a couple of days later had bomb disposal people there doing a controlled explosion on a suspect device.  We got lucky that time - not competent but lucky.  The EU AZ factory with production problems got unlucky.

It is premature to be claiming victory in some kind of vaccine race with the EU.  UK is at about 20% of the population vaccinated.   The EU AZ factory will sort its production problems and the new capacity they are putting in in the Pfizer factory will come on stream.  Their vaccination rate will increase and they'll be using mainly 95% effective Pfizer vaccine while we are using 64% effective AZ.

 scratcher 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Obviously articles in the Daily Mail, Express, Sun, Spectator  and Times don't count, because they just make stuff up. Otherwise, you're on.

Guy Verhofstadt - "Pro-Europeans should be the first to be critical when things go wrong. On vaccines, they certainly have…"

https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/1360554313802788865

 Maggot 15 Feb 2021
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

I'm not starting a new thread and other one is shut.

Looking at the mild fiasco going on at the moment with people flying into the UK, what do you think is going to happen when Scotland leaves the UK?

 Graeme G 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Maggot:

> I'm not starting a new thread and other one is shut.

> Looking at the mild fiasco going on at the moment with people flying into the UK, what do you think is going to happen when Scotland leaves the UK?

There would be a border?

In reply to Andy Farnell:

208 companies in Yorkshire have closed so far due to Brexit. It's being recorded on the Digby Jones Index: https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/the-digby-jones-index/

 wintertree 15 Feb 2021
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> Then the EU got tough and AZ/UK backed down.

Did they back down?  Looks to me like they found the smallest bone they had and threw it to the EU so the EC could backpedal without loosing all credibility...

 George Ormerod 15 Feb 2021
In reply to Shani:

Keep the faith remoaner scum.  Just wait 10 years (Raab), or if not by then, 50 years (Rees Smugg) for the sunlit uplands.

 tom r 16 Feb 2021
In reply to skog:

'I still think Brexit was a massive mistake and a tragedy, but nothing of that sort is ever going to be all good or all bad, the world just isn't that simple.'

Exactly! It would be very odd if a massive upheaval like Brexit would not create some opportunities/advantages for some. For example I wouldn't be surprised if some jobs have wage increases due to the reduction of EU migrants. UK wages are reported to be increasing. Now for the overall economy the reduction of EU migrants might not be a good thing but for people who do have wage increases it would be.

This post by Mutt seems largely ignored as well. 'Mostly it seems like we may yet get back to a manufacturing economy based on the VAT and tariffs imposed on the imports that used to come from the rest of the world on whatever low tariff that applied.'

Post edited at 01:10
In reply to Maggot:

> Looking at the mild fiasco going on at the moment with people flying into the UK, what do you think is going to happen when Scotland leaves the UK?

My own personal preference would be to hire EU Frontex border guards and give them a bonus for trolling the Brexiteers.

 Alyson30 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

> Exactly! It would be very odd if a massive upheaval like Brexit would not create some opportunities/advantages for some. For example I wouldn't be surprised if some jobs have wage increases due to the reduction of EU migrants.

A total myth. Every study that’s been made found only marginal impact of immigration on real wages - and in most cases it was positive.

 Enty 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

> It's been a month and a half since we quit the EU. Any benefits yet? Anyone? Didn't think so.

>

I found one! 150,000 fewer trucks on the M20, M25, M1, M6, A5, A55 ;-)

E

 jimtitt 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

> Exactly! It would be very odd if a massive upheaval like Brexit would not create some opportunities/advantages for some. For example I wouldn't be surprised if some jobs have wage increases due to the reduction of EU migrants. UK wages are reported to be increasing. Now for the overall economy the reduction of EU migrants might not be a good thing but for people who do have wage increases it would be.

On the other hand rather than wages in low skilled occupations rising due to labour shortages the government quietly moved the immigration income requirement from £35,800 down to £20,480. Cheap workers just got cheaper.

 Andy Hardy 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

> This post by Mutt seems largely ignored as well. 'Mostly it seems like we may yet get back to a manufacturing economy based on the VAT and tariffs imposed on the imports that used to come from the rest of the world on whatever low tariff that applied.'

If that were the objective, clearly planned for by h.m.govt, then you'd have a point. But there doesn't seem to be an objective let alone a plan to achieve it. Brexit must mean Brexit after all, complete and perfect to the converted.

 Alyson30 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

> Exactly! It would be very odd if a massive upheaval like Brexit would not create some opportunities/advantages for some.

Just like pandemics create new opportunities for funeral directors. You see, not all that bad !

Post edited at 08:30
In reply to George Ormerod:

😁

 graeme jackson 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> My own personal preference would be to hire EU Frontex border guards and give them a bonus for trolling the Brexiteers.

And how are they to identify the Brexiteers, or do you just mean 'the English' as usual?  

 elsewhere 16 Feb 2021
In reply to graeme jackson:

> And how are they to identify the Brexiteers, or do you just mean 'the English' as usual?  

They wouldn't be identified. They'd be trolled by the mere presence of something EU.

 baron 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

> A total myth. Every study that’s been made found only marginal impact of immigration on real wages - and in most cases it was positive.

Really?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46918729

 Cobra_Head 16 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

From the very article

Remember that this sort of research is difficult to do - comparing what actually happened with what might have happened is complex and there is considerable uncertainty about the conclusions.

 james wardle 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

It's an I'll wind that blows nobody any good.

I work with a technology staffing and company who provide consultancy to broadcasters around the UK and Europe.  3 years ago most of the staff where  UK based.  Because of Brexit and the cost and difficulty in obtaining work permits for UK staff the company has moved 90% of those roles to Europe and can employ the same skill set at a much lower cost.  The tax base is also lower (Estonia).

So while it was very sad to say goodbye to most of the UK staff, and I dont feel good to pay much less tax in the UK.  As a company, we are much more profitable, and the workforce is much more multilingual and locally connected which is opening more doors.

Post edited at 10:40
 baron 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Cobra_Head:

> From the very article

> Remember that this sort of research is difficult to do - comparing what actually happened with what might have happened is complex and there is considerable uncertainty about the conclusions.

This is true.

 Andy Farnell 16 Feb 2021
In reply to james wardle:

That's excellent news. For Estonia and its citizens.

Andy F

Still waiting for a positive to the UK economy though.

 Alyson30 16 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> Really?

The article confirms what I’ve said. I’ve read all the MAC and NIESR reports in details so I pretty much know the issue quite well.

« Current research suggests there was a small, negative impact on the wages of low-skilled workers »

What the article doesn’t say is that the small negative impact on low skills workers is outweighed by a equivalent small positive impact on higher skill occupation, and most of that small negative impact is concentrated on lower skilled migrants themselves, whilst natives have benefited.

It’s basically a non issue. The impacts are negligible, and concentrated on non-natives.

Post edited at 12:59
 baron 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

> The article confirms what I’ve said.

> « Current research suggests there was a small, negative impact on the wages of low-skilled workers »

> What the article doesn’t say is that the small negative impact on low skills workers is outweighed by a small positive impact on higher skill occupation, and most of that  small negative impact is concentrated on lower skills migrants themselves, whilst natives have benefited.

> It’s basically a non issue.

Unless you’re a low paid worker.

 Alyson30 16 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> Unless you’re a low paid worker.

No, because the impact is insignificant, and mostly concentrated on migrants themselves.

Besides, the post Brexit immigration rules are far more likely to drive down wages than the pre-Brexit ones.

Basically we are just replacing immigrants who had the same rights as UK workers by a disposable workforce completely at the mercy of their employers, with no bargaining power.

Post edited at 13:48
 Ian W 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

> This post by Mutt seems largely ignored as well. 'Mostly it seems like we may yet get back to a manufacturing economy based on the VAT and tariffs imposed on the imports that used to come from the rest of the world on whatever low tariff that applied.'

Thats because its utter shite. VAT is charged on UK manufactured goods as well; the issue currently exciting everyone is the place the charge is now made (source rather than sale). If you think the UK will benefit from the change in tariff regimes as a result of leaving the EU, then you are dafter than you look. And I have no idea what you look like, so there's plenty of scope......

 seankenny 16 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> Unless you’re a low paid worker.


Well actually it only affects low paid workers who are in sectors that have seen a very large increase in the immigrant workforce. Obviously the negative effects are bad, but as the report says, they are really small and easily ameliorated through the benefits system.

It's worth bearing in mind that so far Brexit has led to a bout of inflation and a decline in the value of the pound, which has hit all low paid workers. And in the long run, the thing that keeps wages increasing is a general increase in productivity. Higher immigration is really good for productivity increases, so by making immigration into the UK much harder, Brexit reduces wage growth long into the future (consider it a present to your grandchildren).

This is not to mention that, as a Conservative, you probably supported a programme of austerity that as well as shredding the fabric of daily life for millions of poor Britons - after all, poor people need good policing more than those living in pleasant suburbs, and don't forget our courts system barely functions at the moment, not to mention the whole foodbanks thing - has had a really negative effect on overall economic growth. Previously Conservatives talked about a rising tide lifting all ships, but thanks to their disastrous handling of the economy since 2010, there's not much tide worth talking about.

As such, I suspect your sudden regard for those at the bottom of the income distribution is... somewhat synthetic.

 tom r 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

It's a pretty contentious area and like everything there are winners and losers:

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-labour-market-effects-of-immigration/

'The MAC (2018) estimated that an increase in the number of EU migrants corresponding to 1% of the UK-born working-age population resulted in a 0.8% decrease in UK-born wages at the 5th and 10th percentiles (i.e. people in the bottom 5-10% of earners), and a 0.6% increase at the 90th percentile (i.e. high earners). In practice, this means that between 1993 and 2017, the total effect of EU migration on the wages of UK-born workers was estimated to be a 4.9% reduction in wages for those at the 10th earnings percentile, a 1.6% reduction at the 25th percentile, a 1.6% increase at the 50th percentile, and a 4.4% increase at the 90th percentile. The calculation of the total impact should be interpreted with caution, however, because the model estimates the short-run response to migration, which is expected to disappear over time (MAC, 2018: 32).'

 Alyson30 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

It’s exactly what I’ve said. But you’ll observe the impacts are very, very small and short-run.

Moreover, replacing migrants who have the same rights as U.K. workers, by disposable migrants who have pretty much zero wage bargaining power with their employer, isn’t going to make things any better.

Post edited at 14:50
 tom r 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

What do you mean by the disposable migrant bit?

In reply to graeme jackson:

> And how are they to identify the Brexiteers, or do you just mean 'the English' as usual?  

They'd just ask everyone arriving to sing a few bars of Ode To Joy and anyone whose head exploded was probably a Brexiteer.

Maybe have all the signs in the lane for non EU passport holders in Gaelic as well.

 tjekel 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Here's a positive. I could tick the UK off my climbing holiday wishlist.

Well - it has never really been there. 

 Alyson30 16 Feb 2021
In reply to tom r:

> What do you mean by the disposable migrant bit?

I mean bringing in people on work visas which are tied to a specific employer, with very little prospect of settlement.

That’s pretty much the direction of travel of the immigration system. It’s not Australian style, it’s Dubai style: get people in from poorer countries, get them to do a job for cheap with no bargaining power against their employer, and make it really hard for them to obtain settlement or citizenship.

Post edited at 16:52
 seankenny 16 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Interesting thread here on the damage Brexit is doing to our creative sector:

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1361741571620823052

Worth, apparently, £112bn and something in which we are a world leader.

So that's a definite positive if you hate art, music, theatre, film, fashion, making money or British people doing things well. Also a positive if you hate freedom (of movement). What a sour little thing Brexit is.

Post edited at 19:07
 wercat 16 Feb 2021
In reply to seankenny:

it hurts no one who matters and those who matter do not mind

In reply to Andy Farnell:

New Zealand wine's got cheaper.

 Root1 17 Feb 2021
In reply to scratcher:

> Probably best not to start a sneering comment with a glaring inaccuracy

> Nothing, ... apart from saving thousands of lives with our own vaccine programme.

> Don't come back with any nonsense about how it was possible to do what we did under EU law. That's like saying La Sportiva boots are the best because they don't stop you buying a pair of Scarpas. Brexit put huge political pressure on us to pursue our own vaccine approval and procurement schemes and removed the pressure to sign up to the EU communication that compelled member states not to move faster than the EMA and not to negotiate their own vaccine procurement contracts.

It’s not got a lot to do with brexit or the government. It’s our brilliant scientists that produced a cheap vaccine in record time and our brilliant (badly underfunded) NHS that allowed the vaccination programme to run so fast. 

 muppetfilter 17 Feb 2021
In reply to Root1:

"Our Brilliant Scientists" like the French CEO of Astra Zenica Pascal Soriot and Italian research scientist Frederica Cappuchini . Good job we wont be having johnny foreigner coming over for much longer with their science and weird cheese.

You probably failed to notice how Boris and chums have rebranded it the "Government Vaccine" so the gammon think that the Torys acutaly finally havent F**ked another aspect of covid up. The only reason the vaccine roll out is going so well is because ministers have very little input .

 Root1 17 Feb 2021
In reply to muppetfilter:

> "Our Brilliant Scientists" like the French CEO of Astra Zenica Pascal Soriot and Italian research scientist Frederica Cappuchini . Good job we wont be having johnny foreigner coming over for much longer with their science and weird cheese.

> You probably failed to notice how Boris and chums have rebranded it the "Government Vaccine" so the gammon think that the Torys acutaly finally havent F**ked another aspect of covid up. The only reason the vaccine roll out is going so well is because ministers have very little input .

Any large organisation will have an international input, AND we need them as well. All the "johnny foreigners" in our club are bright intelligent people doing highly qualified jobs. Just the sort of people we need in the uk.

I think the lack of government input to the whole process being so successful was my point exactly.

 mark s 17 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Watching the fishermen cry about the issues of trading with others that you are not in a good deal with. Especially the one firm who on twitter were very pro brexit but then upset about the Brexit they knew what they were voting for didn't deliver the promised land. 

In reply to mark s:

> Watching the fishermen cry about the issues of trading with others that you are not in a good deal with. Especially the one firm who on twitter were very pro brexit but then upset about the Brexit they knew what they were voting for didn't deliver the promised land. 

... yep was reading they (the Cornish Fishermen) have been changing the names of the fish they catch to make them more appealing to a UK market as they can't ship their catches to Europe...

... so a Spider Crab has become a Cornish King Crab and a Megrim Sole has become a Cornish Sole... pre Brexit, 90% of the two species mentioned above were exported to Europe... no longer however...

One is tempted to say it serves them right... 

Post edited at 19:44
 Maggot 17 Feb 2021
In reply to Richard Wheeldon:

> ... so a Spider Crab has become a Cornish King Crab and a Megrim Sole has become a Cornish Sole... pre Brexit, 90% of the two species mentioned above were exported to Europe... no longer however...

I, for one, thinks it's a really good thing.  Hopefully encourage the British to eat more sea food and less meat, what with all the bad press meat production is now getting.   And a whole lot less of shipping stuff thousands of miles all over the place.

 wercat 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Maggot:

I'd like to eat more fish but it is so expensive

 squarepeg 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Catch your own in a stream. And that way it will be British fish, at least. 

 Rob Parsons 18 Feb 2021
In reply to wercat:

> I'd like to eat more fish but it is so expensive


Why should it be cheap?

 Enty 18 Feb 2021
In reply to squarepeg:

> Catch your own in a stream. And that way it will be British fish, at least. 


Used to eat Carp from the Leeds-Liverpool until the Polish over-fished it ;-)

E

 wercat 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Rob Parsons:

so we can afford it, rather a daft question

 wercat 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Here is a real Brexit positive - Government by an unelected bureaucrat joining the cabinet - thus keeping to the promises made by Brexiteers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56101215

 Rob Parsons 18 Feb 2021
In reply to wercat:

> so we can afford it, rather a daft question

Rather a daft answer. That's what you personally 'want' - but who cares about that?

It's a finite resource, which needs careful husbanding. If we believe in sustainable fishing, then it will cost what it costs.

Post edited at 11:41
 wercat 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Rob Parsons:

with due respect I said I'd eat more if I could afford to.  You decided to become narky, says a lot about you

 baron 18 Feb 2021
In reply to wercat:

> Here is a real Brexit positive - Government by an unelected bureaucrat joining the cabinet - thus keeping to the promises made by Brexiteers.

Of course, he’s the first person ever to be in the cabinet while not being an MP, isn’t he?

 Ian W 18 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> Of course, he’s the first person ever to be in the cabinet while not being an MP, isn’t he?


Indeed he isn't; the irony is that he is in the cabinet as a direct result of the desire to not be governed by "unelected bureaucrats".

 baron 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Ian W:

> Indeed he isn't; the irony is that he is in the cabinet as a direct result of the desire to not be governed by "unelected bureaucrats".

I think it’s a result of having the best person for the continuing negotiations with the EU.

 George Ormerod 18 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> I think it’s a result of having the best person for the continuing negotiations with the EU.

You mean the same person that negotiated the current deal?  The one that's causing businesses so much harm, had destroyed European touring for the arts and reduced the security of the UK by opting out of security cooperation?

 baron 18 Feb 2021
In reply to George Ormerod:

> You mean the same person that negotiated the current deal?  The one that's causing businesses so much harm, had destroyed European touring for the arts and reduced the security of the UK by opting out of security cooperation?

Yes, that one.

 George Ormerod 18 Feb 2021
In reply to George Ormerod:

Oh and completely ignores services, 80% of the UK economy.  And has shafted the fishing industry, which can't sell it catches.

 George Ormerod 18 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> Yes, that one.

Sounds like the ideal candidate following current government recruitment processes:  Someone you know, but is rubbish (before you say what about Kate Bingham; that seems to just be dumb luck in the nepotism lottery).

 baron 18 Feb 2021
In reply to George Ormerod:

It was him or Gove, take your pick.

In reply to baron:

It seems you haven't heard of 'The First Law of Holes': 'When you're in a hole, stop digging.' Can I politely suggest that you stop drivelling on/ ease off a bit until we see how this (already major economic) fiasco pans out?

 baron 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

> It seems you haven't heard of 'The First Law of Holes': 'When you're in a hole, stop digging.' Can I politely suggest that you stop drivelling on/ ease off a bit until we see how this (already major economic) fiasco pans out?

I don’t remember posting anything about this economic fiasco.

My posts relate to the appointment of Lord Frost to the cabinet.

Which isn’t that unusual but seems to have caused some consternation to some posters.

Post edited at 21:21
 George Ormerod 18 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> It was him or Gove, take your pick.

I think you missed the 'r' out of that last word

 baron 18 Feb 2021
In reply to George Ormerod:

> I think you missed the 'r' out of that last word

😀

 Ian W 18 Feb 2021
In reply to baron:

> It was him or Gove, take your pick.

Now you put it that way......

given that all the adults were purged from the tories, it is true that the available pool of talent is particularly shallow, and maybe he is the best available, in much the same manner as Williamsons best made being head of the office for students, and Dido "data security" Harding being the best person Hancock could think of to head up test and trace......

 George Ormerod 18 Feb 2021
In reply to Ian W:

It gets better, the idiot's idiot, the man who has been wrong about everything on Brexit, Ian Duncan Smith, has:

".....been given a new role as a government adviser following Brexit.

The Brexiteer rejoins government to become an adviser to Boris Johnson on regulatory reform after the UK departed from the European Union".

Post edited at 22:15
In reply to George Ormerod:

Perhaps if he has some spare time he could re-organise the benefit system as well?

'Never over estimate a quiet man...'

 Ian W 19 Feb 2021
In reply to George Ormerod:

> It gets better, the idiot's idiot, the man who has been wrong about everything on Brexit, Ian Duncan Smith, has:

> ".....been given a new role as a government adviser following Brexit.

> The Brexiteer rejoins government to become an adviser to Boris Johnson on regulatory reform after the UK departed from the European Union".


IDS, the only person ever to resign over the effects of a policy his department developed and that he was responsible for implementing.......

 Geoff82 19 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Focusing on Brexit is akin to picking up pennies in front of steam roller when Brexit is contrasted with the triplicate of problems we are going to face tackling climate change, environmental degradation, delivering prosperity to the developing world  and correcting the damage to our society and the economy from the pandemic and response to it.  

Personally I always thought the collective nervous break down over Brexit was ridiculous bearing in mind the the climate and environmental risks that are coming at us and on which we have done virtually nothing about.  My view is we should just move on focusing on the future rather than rehashing the debate from this tired dichotomy ad infinitum.

Post edited at 11:06
In reply to Geoff82:

'Personally I always thought the collective nervous break down over Brexit was ridiculous bearing in mind the the climate and environmental risks that are coming at us and on which we have done virtually nothing about. '

Personally I always though that being part of Europe - the ONLY significant economic bloc to be taking those seriously - was a crucial reason for remaining. Now as a foggy little isle cast adrift in the North Sea we are going to have much less world influence on tackling these challenges than we did prior to 2016.

In reply to Ian W:

He always sounds so angsty and puzzled about why things aren't working as he thinks they should. That, IDS, is because you are a bit dim, have limited experience of the wider world and you understand nothing.

 seankenny 19 Feb 2021
In reply to Geoff82:

> Focusing on Brexit is akin to picking up pennies in front of steam roller when Brexit is contrasted with the triplicate of problems we are going to face tackling climate change, environmental degradation, delivering prosperity to the developing world  and correcting the damage to our society and the economy from the pandemic and response to it.  

I should point out that a Brexiter government got rid of the Dept for International Development and has slashed aid spending, which I doubt a non-Brexit Tory govt would have done. So if you care about the developing world, Brexit was a definite negative.

As for dealing with the pandemic, it's going to be expensive and the very, very hard Brexit we've ended up with is going to seriously dampen our economy. So again, if you find that important, Brexit is not your friend. In fact undoing the Brexit we have is an instant way to get a stronger economy, so to be true to your principles you should be asking for change, not acquiescing.

In reply to Alyson30:

> > In practice, this means that between 1993 and 2017, the total effect of EU migration on the wages of UK-born workers was estimated to be a 4.9% reduction in wages for those at the 10th earnings percentile, a 1.6% reduction at the 25th percentile, a 1.6% increase at the 50th percentile, and a 4.4% increase at the 90th percentile.

> It’s exactly what I’ve said. But you’ll observe the impacts are very, very small and short-run.

It's not a very small impact on the millions of low paid workers.

A 10th percentile worker on £8627 has lost out on £422 per year (£165 per week would be £173).

A 25th percentile worker on £16231 has lost out on £260 per year (£312 per week would be £317).

At these poverty level wages an extra fiver a week can make a real difference to quality of life so by this analysis a quarter of UK employees have lost some quality of life due to immigration into the UK between 1993 and 2017. These are the effects on average earnings and it's also worth considering whether there has been an effect on unemployment as well as earnings.

> Moreover, replacing migrants who have the same rights as U.K. workers, by disposable migrants who have pretty much zero wage bargaining power with their employer, isn’t going to make things any better.

That's true but the millions of low paid people who voted for Brexit didn't vote for that. If that is what happens then people will realise and look for an alternative again. 

 Andy Hardy 20 Feb 2021

> That's true but the millions of low paid people who voted for Brexit didn't vote for that. If that is what happens then people will realise and look for an alternative again. 

I have lost count of the number of times brexiters have said that they did know exactly what they were voting for. 

Trouble is the Tories are past masters at convincing people on £9/hour the problem is people on £8.50/hour.  

 Alyson30 20 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> It's not a very small impact on the millions of low paid workers.

> A 10th percentile worker on £8627 has lost out on £422 per year (£165 per week would be £173).

> A 25th percentile worker on £16231 has lost out on £260 per year (£312 per week would be £317).

You have to put the figure into context, this isn't what they have "lost" it's the estimated impact over a quarter of century. In the meantime their wages would have increased massively over that period, and faster than that of other groups. In no small part because of minimum wage increases, which you could argue were made possible because of strong, open economy.

Moreover, what other studies have shown is that most of this (relatively insignificant) impact is concentrated on migrants themselves, not on natives. Which makes sense given that most migrant bring skills complimentary to those of native workers, rather than duplicate skills.
 

 Alyson30 20 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> That's true but the millions of low paid people who voted for Brexit didn't vote for that.

And I'd argue this is exactly what they voted for, the English working class is incredibly open to immigration by international standard, but what it could never swallow is that they could be equal to them in the social hierarchy.

Post edited at 16:23
 deepsoup 21 Feb 2021
In reply to Andy Farnell:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/21/sussex-medicines-firm-takes-production-line-abroad-white-van-beat-brexit-ban

More Brexit positives here.  New jobs and investment - in Amsterdam, Barcelona and Dublin.

In reply to Alyson30:

> And I'd argue this is exactly what they voted for, the English working class is incredibly open to immigration by international standard, but what it could never swallow is that they could be equal to them in the social hierarchy.

I think it's fairly clear in the surveys that there were two issues that dominated the vote for leave.

The first was a desire to see a reduction in immigration and you might debate about the significance of the impact that mass  immigration has on low pay but it does seem that there is an impact which is felt hardest by those who might be termed "left behind".

The second was as a protest vote against a political system that actively works against the interests of those "left behind" voters.

This is a large mass of people looking for change who haven't been motivated by politics because "they're all the same" but were prepared to turn out for the right moment. My great worry is that now there is no left option the snakeoil of the hard right will be used to motivate this mass of voters. 

 deepsoup 22 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> My great worry is that now there is no left option the snakeoil of the hard right will be used to motivate this mass of voters. 

Mine too.  Particularly now that it seems it's ok for right wing politicians to tell barefaced lies with impunity, and with the prospect of two new 'opinionated news' tv channels imminently opening up shop.  (Because really, who wouldn't look at how things have gone in the USA over the last few years and think to themselves, "that's what we need, a UK version of Fox News!")

 Graeme G 22 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> The second was as a protest vote against a political system that actively works against the interests of those "left behind" voters.

Is there really a movement for political change in England? I get the impression for all the noise no-one is arguing for any significant change. This is one of the primary drivers why I would probably vote yes if Indyref2 appears over the horizon. You all just seem content with complaining about the injustice and lack of representation, but then do nothing about it?

 Alyson30 22 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> I think it's fairly clear in the surveys that there were two issues that dominated the vote for leave.

And I think the surveys only reflect what people say they want, which is usually a facade for far deeper psychological, cultural and identarian motivations, they probably aren't fully admitting to themselves anyway.

After decolonisation, the English had lost an empire, and the former imperial subjects might be unexpectedly infiltrating the homeland, but still the English could think of themselves as superior to them. But then came EU citizenship, and suddenly they were faced with foreigners who looked like them and had all but identical rights to them, in their own country.

For the many with no need for tribal affiliations this wouldn't have mattered. But for those who felt defined by Englishness, this would have left a deep psychological wound.

I suspect the backlash against immigration was never really about the numbers, and had a lot more to do with an inner desire to reclaim the position of the English as the master race, to which even the least of Englishmen belonged, at least in their own country.

Don't look at what people say, look at how they behave, and you'll find a huge difference.

Post edited at 14:45
 Maggot 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

> I suspect the backlash against immigration was never really about the numbers, and had a lot more to do with an inner desire to reclaim the position of the English as the master race, to which even the least of Englishmen belonged, at least in their own country.

That has to be greatest crock of shite I think I've ever read.

In reply to Maggot:

> That has to be greatest crock of shite I think I've ever read.

Really?  It has the ring of an uncomfortable truth about it to me, although I've no idea to what extent it's correct, or how anyone could possibly prove it.

 seankenny 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Dave Garnett:

We're in the process of seeing a change from immigrants as citizens, come here to do work with rights, to immigrants on short term visas, imported chattels similar to Dubai, with no rights and no doubt a bundle of exploitation too. If as a group Brexiters are broadly happy with these changes then it would prove quite strong evidence of this theory.

 neilh 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Maggot:

Broadly similar reaction to what other countries do when there is  immigration.The locals do not like it when migrants get the same benefits etc etc. The bit about Englishness etc is just rubbish and agree with you . Its not a particlulary English trait.Think Turks in Germany, Koreans in Japan, Mexicans in USA and so on.The list is endless globally.

 wercat 22 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

If those were the major issues then they were not enough to carry the vote.   The social engineering attack that carried the vote was aimed deliberately at people who did not know which way to vote (floating voters if you like).  In this part of the Eden valley two of the families in our small circle had women who repeatedly told my wife they did not know how to vote up until the last day or two.

Remember one of the key campaigns "Have your say or lose it"?  That was a shit idea because both of those voters decided leave because of messages from what they trusted - Facebook.  One, who lived with an ex soldier, received information that EU migrants were preventing ex servicemen from getting housing.   The other received information via social media about a lot of rural crime being committed by  immigrants and asylum seekers.

And, if you are what you say you are, you will have seen on the local TV the Idiot running Stobarts in Carlisle telling us how on the day he didn't know how to vote but "Have your say or lose it" influenced him to spin a coin and as he said "The coin said Leave".

Can you see how I am livid to have lies and ill advice ruin the country and break it up?

 squarepeg 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Maggot:

Spot on, totally spot on.

 wintertree 22 Feb 2021
In reply to wercat:

> That was a shit idea because both of those voters decided leave because of messages from what they trusted - Facebook.  One, who lived with an ex soldier, received information that EU migrants were preventing ex servicemen from getting housing.   The other received information via social media about a lot of rural crime being committed by  immigrants and asylum seekers.

Let's not forget that a key person in the Vote Leave campaign and then key advisor to the PM was found in contempt of parliament for refusing to appear in front of parliament to give evidence over the proliferation of false news on social media.

When I dared to suggest that this person may not have been an appropriate member of SAGE during the Coronavirus crisis, and that various scientists had objected to this, I got a good kicking for daring to claim some scientists objected to their presence as apparently there's "no evidence" some scientists objected...

It's amazing really that you can be held in such low esteem by parliament and then go on to a critical committee - when neither elected nor qualified - a committee making critical analysis and recommendations in the worst national crisis in several generations. 

Then we have the backdrop of the ERG morphing in to the CRG...

Edit: coincidence I’m sure, but there’s been a lot of false news and bad faith social media posting over covid, and the approach taken by government has changed significantly since someone left. 

Post edited at 19:08
 neilh 22 Feb 2021
In reply to wintertree:

Bit of an improvement since DC left. Just shows how important Carrie Symonds is.........lol. I could not stand DC.

And in other news on the BBC Business section apparently 1000 EU financial services companies looking at setting up in London ( probably because they did not have offices there before).Bit of a paradox.I wonder if this is true, would not surprise me.

 Ian W 22 Feb 2021
In reply to neilh:

> Bit of an improvement since DC left. Just shows how important Carrie Symonds is.........lol. I could not stand DC.

> And in other news on the BBC Business section apparently 1000 EU financial services companies looking at setting up in London ( probably because they did not have offices there before).Bit of a paradox.I wonder if this is true, would not surprise me.


This one has done the "benefits of brexit" rounds a few times. Indeed its the second time in this very thread......the number is actually closer to 1,500, and is actually the number of operating licences that have been applied for by companies already operating in the UK, but now requiring to be separately licensed as a result of brexit. No new company's setting up, just a paperwork exercise so existing companies can continue with their existing business.

Post edited at 21:00
 Alyson30 22 Feb 2021
In reply to neilh:

> Broadly similar reaction to what other countries do when there is  immigration.

Nope.

Britain is unique in that it is extremely open to immigration, by international standard. 

In the continent a lot of people just don’t like foreigners, just because they aren’t like them. Immigrants, to be accepted, are expected to assimilate to the host culture. 

That isn’t generally the case in England, in fact the opposite, there is huge tolerance for cultural diversity - as long as they stay a notch lower in the pecking order - but assimilation to the host culture is viewed with suspicion.

I found it pretty striking that the same Brexiteers who were complaining about immigration being too high are now applauding the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Hong kongers with very little scrutiny, and don’t have a problem with the massive easing of work visas, or the fact that non-EU immigration has exploded.

Post edited at 21:10
 Al Randall 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

> I found it pretty striking that the same Brexiteers who were complaining about immigration being too high are now applauding the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Hong kongers with very little scrutiny, and don’t have a problem with the massive easing of work visas, or the fact that non-EU immigration has exploded.

It would be interesting to see how you made that conclusion regarding "the same Brexiteers".

Your conclusion is only "striking" to you because of your incorrect pre-conceptions that ALL Brexiteers are anti-immigration. I know many and they are anything but.

Al

 Alyson30 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Al Randall:

> It would be interesting to see how you made that conclusion regarding "the same Brexiteers".

For a start you could look to those in government, who have been peddling their narrative that immigration should be based on skills and need rather than origin, suddenly turning around and allowing hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers in the country.

> Your conclusion is only "striking" to you because of your incorrect pre-conceptions that ALL Brexiteers are anti-immigration. I know many and they are anything but.

You clearly haven’t understood a word I said given that my entire point is that, at least in their majority, Brexiteers were never really anti-immigration, despite their claim to the contrary.

Post edited at 21:31
 Mr Lopez 22 Feb 2021
In reply to neilh:

> And in other news on the BBC Business section apparently 1000 EU financial services companies looking at setting up in London ( probably because they did not have offices there before).Bit of a paradox.I wonder if this is true, would not surprise me.

Looks like someone on the BBC didn't check the dates properly when they unearthed those 'news' https://www.internationalinvestment.net/news/4009394/eu-financial-firms-open-uk-offices-brexit

ETA: Pasted the wrong link above. It was meant to be this as it's the source https://www.bovill.com/london-set-to-remain-financial-services-capital-of-europe-as-over-1000-eu-firms-plan-to-open-uk-offices/

EDIT again: Scratch that, just seen the same outfit released a new one with this years FOI numbers

https://www.bovill.com/london-remains-financial-service-centre-of-europe-final-numbers-show/

Post edited at 21:41
 Alyson30 22 Feb 2021
In reply to neilh:

> And in other news on the BBC Business section apparently 1000 EU financial services companies looking at setting up in London ( probably because they did not have offices there before).Bit of a paradox.I wonder if this is true, would not surprise me.

There is no paradox whatsoever. It’s a completely predictable consequence of the loss of passporting rights. All it ends up doing of course is making lawyers richer whilst increasing costs for everybody.

 Al Randall 22 Feb 2021
In reply to Alyson30:

> You clearly haven’t understood a word I said given that my entire point is that, at least in their majority, Brexiteers were never really anti-immigration, despite their claim to the contrary.

Perfectly willing to concede that I may have misunderstood you but this doesn't help.  I was under the impression that it was remainers who were accusing brexiteers of being anti immigration.

"Brexiteers were never really anti-immigration, despite their claim to the contrary." That sounds a bit like mind reading.

In reply to wercat: Alyson30

Individual people will have had their own individual reasons, flawed reasoning or not, to have voted the way they did.

There is though a large constituency of voters who have been ignored by the political establishment and who experience the negative impacts of mass immigration relatively more than most and these voters are those that are often described as "left behind".

In reply to Graeme G:

> Is there really a movement for political change in England? I get the impression for all the noise no-one is arguing for any significant change. This is one of the primary drivers why I would probably vote yes if Indyref2 appears over the horizon. You all just seem content with complaining about the injustice and lack of representation, but then do nothing about it?

There was the 400,000 members who were inspired to join the 200,000 existing members of the Labour Party under Corbyn's leadership to make it the largest political party in Europe. That was a significant movement for political change.

Then 17 million voters actually voted for a massive political change in the Leave vote showing that there is massive dissatisfaction with the status quo. The tragedy as I see it is that the left were too timid to seize the moment and handed that initiative to the hard right. 

 Alyson30 23 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> There is though a large constituency of voters who have been ignored by the political establishment and who experience the negative impacts of mass immigration relatively more than most and these voters are those that are often described as "left behind".

And the vast majority of those voters live in areas where there is very little immigration, and for the most part, would have very little exposure to any negative effect, which in the majority were insignificant.

I don’t think the reason were economic, I frankly doubt that even the most wretchedly simple-minded Brexiteers did really believe that Brexit and replacing EU migration by non-EU migration was going to make them better off.

Post edited at 00:53
 Alyson30 23 Feb 2021
In reply to Al Randall:

> Perfectly willing to concede that I may have misunderstood you but this doesn't help.  I was under the impression that it was remainers who were accusing brexiteers of being anti immigration.

Yes, and imho, they were wrong.

> "Brexiteers were never really anti-immigration, despite their claim to the contrary." That sounds a bit like mind reading.

No, it’s more a case of simply observing what people do.

Brexiteers claimed freedom of movement had to end in order to reduce the numbers of people coming in, and in order select who comes in on the basis of skills. When they got in power they did the exact opposite, and it didn’t bother those who voted for Brexit the slightest.

That is because it was never about the economy, or the number, it was about identity and social status.

Post edited at 00:56
 Andy Hardy 23 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> There was the 400,000 members who were inspired to join the 200,000 existing members of the Labour Party under Corbyn's leadership to make it the largest political party in Europe. That was a significant movement for political change.

> Then 17 million voters actually voted for a massive political change in the Leave vote showing that there is massive dissatisfaction with the status quo. The tragedy as I see it is that the left were too timid to seize the moment and handed that initiative to the hard right. 

Of those 400,000 new members, what proportion voted leave? 

 Graeme G 23 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

Neikther of those are the real change I’m alluding to, ditch FPTP and the Lords. Voting Labour and/or Leave still leaves us with exactly the same governmental structure in Westminster. Depressing.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

> Of those 400,000 new members, what proportion voted leave? 

Of those 400,000 new members, how many were actually Conservative voters looking to mess up the Labour party?

In reply to Ridge:

(Successfully.)

 Andy Hardy 23 Feb 2021
In reply to Ridge:

> Of those 400,000 new members, how many were actually Conservative voters looking to mess up the Labour party?

I'd like to see a Venn diagram of Tory infiltrators and leave voters 

 baron 23 Feb 2021
In reply to Ridge:

> Of those 400,000 new members, how many were actually Conservative voters looking to mess up the Labour party?

Who would even contemplate never mind do such a dastardly deed?

In reply to Graeme G:

> Neikther of those are the real change I’m alluding to, ditch FPTP and the Lords. Voting Labour and/or Leave still leaves us with exactly the same governmental structure in Westminster. Depressing.

I would describe the delivery of a fairer society with improved living standards, investment in a green new deal, communities, education, care, and the NHS, as the real change that is needed whereas tinkering with the voting system is a worthwhile but secondary goal.

Corbyn's Labour was going to replace the House of Lords with an elected senate though and changes to the FPTP system were on the table to be looked at by a citizens assembly.

600,000 people prepared to actively work for these goals is a political movement not to be sniffed at, and an expression of dissatisfaction with the status quo by 17,000,000 people is something you should take notice of if you are also dissatisfied with the status quo.

 Graeme G 23 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

Yeah, but it was Corbyn. Who had no chance, so it was never going to happen. Westminster is just going to bounce back and forth between left and right, with right winning for a significant length of time, IMO. Give it 5 years and the next government gets in and disassembles anything achieved. Same old, same old.

Post edited at 22:34
In reply to Andy Hardy:

> Of those 400,000 new members, what proportion voted leave? 

I think the Labour Party membership is thought to have been split 70% remain to 30% leave.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that 400,000 labour members voted leave, quite the opposite happened. The predominantly remain supporting Labour membership were used cynically by the Labour right to force Corbyn into the losing position of appearing to side with the political establishment on the one issue that mattered to voters.

What I'm saying is that there were 400,000 highly motivated people wanting to achieve political change focussed in a left wing direction. There were also 17,000,000 people with varying degrees of motivation and focus who wanted to express their dissatisfaction with the status quo. If these two groups could have found alignment instead of opposition then great things could have happened. 

The idea that 17,000,000 put a cross in the box because they were dreaming of a vision outlined by Jacob Rees Mogg is ludicrous. It was predominantly a protest vote by people who realise that whoever they vote for, economic policies remain the same, and living standards continue to decline.

In reply to Ridge:

> Of those 400,000 new members, how many were actually Conservative voters looking to mess up the Labour party?

About as likely as the other propaganda idea that gets floated that it was 400,000 communist entryists. There aren't 200,000 Conservative Party members and there aren't 200,000 communists in Britain. 

The surge in membership was returning members who had let their memberships lapse after being let down by Blair and it was students and young people who were joining inspired by a return to left wing politics.

 john arran 24 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

Clearly there was considerable discontent about the status quo, after years of austerity and with things progressively still getting worse for many low paid people. But electing Corbyn was a dream come true for the ERG and the rest of the right wing of the Tories. It effectively meant that they could push radically to the right, knowing that the only real opposition had just all but lost any chance of electability, however fervent a small but significant number of JC's followers were in his defence.

Would be interesting to know how bold, and how successful within their own party, the ERG and other prominent Tory Brexiters would have been were a more moderate Labour leader to have been elected in 2015.

 GrahamD 24 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

I love the idea that anyone swinging to the right as you see it is making a protest vote, but anyone swinging to the left side of labour isn't just making their own protest.

 Andy Hardy 24 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> I think the Labour Party membership is thought to have been split 70% remain to 30% leave.

Well why did the blessed Jeremy whip his MPs to trigger article 50 before even an outline plan had been sketched? 

> To be clear I'm not suggesting that 400,000 labour members voted leave, quite the opposite happened. The predominantly remain supporting Labour membership were used cynically by the Labour right to force Corbyn into the losing position of appearing to side with the political establishment on the one issue that mattered to voters.

 JC was and is a Eurosceptic the "labour right" didn't force anything

> What I'm saying is that there were 400,000 highly motivated people wanting to achieve political change focussed in a left wing direction. There were also 17,000,000 people with varying degrees of motivation and focus who wanted to express their dissatisfaction with the status quo. If these two groups could have found alignment instead of opposition then great things could have happened. 

But the majority of labour support didn't want brexit, so alignment would be a tall order

> The idea that 17,000,000 put a cross in the box because they were dreaming of a vision outlined by Jacob Rees Mogg is ludicrous. It was predominantly a protest vote by people who realise that whoever they vote for, economic policies remain the same, and living standards continue to decline.

17M people were conned, as a result we're all worse off. 

In reply to Andy Hardy:

Maybe I'm not explaining myself very well but you and GrahamD above seem to have understood my points backwards.

The first error is where you understand Brexit in terms of Leave = right wing, and Remain = left wing. There are left and right arguments for both positions but, the British media being what it is, we only ever hear the right wing arguments for either. I throw my hands up in despair every time I hear a someone who is apparently a left winger basing an argument for Remain on the principles of "free trade"!

The second mistake is to consider leave voters to be right wing. There will have been a spectrum of people voting for both Leave and Remain but I don't think most people consider themselves to be either left wing or right wing. However, when you put Labours 2019 policies in front of people without saying they are from Labour it turns out they are massively popular.

It was a protest vote by people who in the main won't be hugely political but who could probably have been attracted to Labour's policy position if they hadn't been labelled for years as ignorant, racist, scum, by people associated with the Labour Party. Of course it suits those on the Labour right to help to drive the working class away from Labour.

> Well why did the blessed Jeremy whip his MPs to trigger article 50 before even an outline plan had been sketched? 

Two important reasons. Firstly because he is a democrat and there was a democratic instruction to do so. Secondly because it was strategically sensible, as I have been saying 17 million people had just expressed their dissatisfaction with the status quo and Corbyn wanted to change the status quo. It was a moment that needed to be seized but tragically, the membership failed to recognise this and ended up tying his hands.

>  JC was and is a Eurosceptic the "labour right" didn't force anything

The Labour right managed to use the membership to force Corbyn into the losing position of appearing to back Remain when Corbyn knew that the only way to win was to honour the referendum.

> But the majority of labour support didn't want brexit, so alignment would be a tall order

It shouldn't have been that way. I was shocked to see the spectacle of furious left wingers railing at the working class. Brexit trumped every other issue for so many who were totally uncritical of the EU and unable to see where this would lead. Stupid. 

> 17M people were conned, as a result we're all worse off. 

In or out of Europe, we would all have been better off under a Labour government and we are all worse off under a Tory government (apart from the disaster capitalists).

 Andy Hardy 25 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

At the time of triggering A50 the Tories had a decent majority. Labours acquiescence was neither required nor good for the UK. A sensible approach (to me) would have been for Labour to only back triggering A50 *if* there was a defined plan for our post brexit relationship with the EU that had cross party support. The cons would have gone yah-boo no and triggered it anyway. The cons would then own the mess we are in wholesale. However all that is history, for me Labour, under JCs lifelong Eurosceptic leadership played a blinder for the ERG.

Obviously I voted remain, but I would have accepted Frank Fields "Norway for now" option, and put the onus on the ERG to square the various circles that we are left with now (like having a border in the Irish Sea and needing a permit to enter Kent)

 Offwidth 25 Feb 2021
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

"In or out of Europe, we would all have been better off under a Labour government and we are all worse off under a Tory government (apart from the disaster capitalists)."

That's a highly minority economic view unless you regard the majority of the population as disaster capitalists. Most felt Corbyn was very high risk of creating serious economic damage in major change and by trying to create a more equal society, this by necessity would have involved equalising down. The majority in the UK rightly laud the inheritance of the Attlee government but they only served one term before the tories were back in; as the major social gains came alongside real struggles for ordinary swing voters at the time. That Labour government leadership wasn't even based on the far left of the party.

 jkarran 16:52 Tue
In reply to cumbria mammoth:

> I think the Labour Party membership is thought to have been split 70% remain to 30% leave. To be clear I'm not suggesting that 400,000 labour members voted leave, quite the opposite happened. The predominantly remain supporting Labour membership were used cynically by the Labour right to force Corbyn into the losing position of appearing to side with the political establishment on the one issue that mattered to voters.

Wow, you think Corbyn's disastrous vacillation on brexit was the fault of Labour's right wing stitching him up. Really, you actually believe that?

Every day is a school day.

> The idea that 17,000,000 put a cross in the box because they were dreaming of a vision outlined by Jacob Rees Mogg is ludicrous. It was predominantly a protest vote by people who realise that whoever they vote for, economic policies remain the same, and living standards continue to decline.

Well they've proved themselves wrong then haven't they. Economic policy has shifted dramatically and their decline has been accelerated, bravo <slow clap>

jk

 runestone 18:21 Tue
In reply to Andy Farnell:

Brexit a total unmitigated disaster in every single area, the only 'positive' leave supporters now raise is that 'we have a sovereignty back'. It truth we still had it within the EU and any decisions and laws that were under the EU parliament (a democratic body) have largely gone direct to Ministers not the UK parliament meaning a loss in democracy!  (Henry VIII powers). Project Fear turned out to be largely the Truth and the Sunny Uplands a lie & myth.....   

Forgot to say we do have blue Passports though LOL - printed in France !

Post edited at 18:23
In reply to runestone:

Yes, we actually have less sovereignty now, in the sense of positive things that we can do (as opposed to slightly increased sovereignty to be offensive to potential trading partners.)


Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Loading Notifications...