Forum Topic

Brexit

Remoaners are such bad losers, so unbritish one might say. Talking to a Norwegian friend I learned that their vote to keep ou of the EU was won by a narrow margin but they had no Cablelike chorous of 'Let's have another vote'. My contribution to mock the remoining is my BIOB game.  Blame It On Brevit. What unseasonable weather for a bank holiday weekend. BIOB! Arsenal were rubbish against Liverpool. BIOB. Leeds have their best start to a season for many years. BIOB. Our church has taken 27 years to get its rebuild programme going. BIOB. The doctors are uncertain as to why I had heart failure BIOB. All that rain in Texas. BIOB. Trump has had a total eclipse of sanity. BIOB. The North Korean missiles failed. BIOB. Play up, play up and play the BIOB game. And BTW I am old and wise enough to remember an independent UK before the lies of traitor Heath.

Graham Weeks ● 2990d157 Comments

Putin is making Russia great again. and Trump is quite hostile to the investigation of Russian influence on the election. I tend to think that maybe the Russians have some dirt on him. He is useful to the Russians and in the recent nerve agent discussion Trump has been silent for such a prolific twitterer. The idea is stability at home contrasting with chaos everywhere else. The foreign policy of the US and allies tends to be disastrous and so Putin knows that he can interfere in so many places. as for Russian influence we see the papers claiming Corbyn as a stooge whilst not mentioned Russian money backing the conservatives. We are in a new era and Putin knows that. We have bumbling Boris to deal with it.

Peter Chadburn ● 2787d

I fear you may be right Andy.

Graham Weeks ● 2787d

The revelations about Cambridge Analytica that have come out in the last few days are likely to be just the beginning and I'm pretty sure we are set to learn more about Russian connections. I don't think Putin will be particularly concerned about an increasing trail of evidence linking him to attempts both to influence the EU Referendum and the American presidential race. And I'm sceptical the actual impact of these activities was enough to be decisive on either vote even though a relatively small number of votes was needed to change the result. Whilst we probably can't blame Brexit on the Russians they certainly haven't been slow to exploit the opportunities it presents to them. Having effectively neutralised NATO's second largest source of troops in Turkey they have moved on to the third largest i.e. us. They know that whilst there may be a total consensus on the desirability of a continuing military alliance within Europe, the political fractures that the ongoing withdrawal negotiations are going to create means that divisions are inevitable. Putin will take every opportunity to stir up arguments between us and European countries exploiting the fact that Germany's energy dependence on Russia means there is only so far they can support us. As soon as he believes he has caused the maximum dissension within Europe he will turn up the heat in the Baltic states in the hope that British commitment to maintaining troops there if there was any chance of shots being fired will have been undermined at that point. Putin knows he only has a short window of opportunity because the conditions of the Trump presidency will never be repeated so look for this to escalate very quickly.

Andy Jones ● 2788d

A never ending process...  What a waste of time.

Philippa Bond ● 2788d

On reflection BIOR could account for Brexit too :-)

Graham Weeks ● 2789d

I repent of BIOB. Now it is all BIOR - blame it on the Russians - especially this snow.

Graham Weeks ● 2789d

Optimism despite the dire Brexit moans. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42769090

Graham Weeks ● 2843d

Graham NF always reminded me of one of those dodgy characters played by Terry Thomas who was a posh wide boy. As a Eurosceptic I disliked him as I found he had no real arguments unlike the serious people within the Tory Party like Bill Cash and others Politicians who did serious analyses. especially of Maastricht and the Euro. Those people were right and so was I about the Euro. However NF is a publicity seeker and a classic carpetbagger!! I Voted remain as I felt that the real issue was not so much being in or out of Europe but what kind of Europe it was going to be. Outside then Europe will become the Super State that will solve all problems by eliminating democracy and we will suffer. Staying in could have halted that process if we had combined with other dissenting voices. I love your brain of Jelly comment, however I love Jelly and feel that is a bit unfair on the Jelly!!

Peter Chadburn ● 2853d

Skint on that pension? As skint as Kinnock, Mandelwhatsit and all the rest of the gravy trainers! This is the first time this voter has thought NF to be idiotic. I have until now liked the man's policies. But now this idol has not only feet of clay but a brain of jelly.

Graham Weeks ● 2853d

I wonder why that reptilian creature is given airtime. Let him languish talking to his cronies on LBC.

Penelope Crocker ● 2853d

Farage wants another one because he is skint and realises that the Gravy train is ending. Then he can spend the next 15 years campaigning to leave.

Peter Chadburn ● 2853d

'A reminder to all the Remainers....we had a second EU referendum!  The first was in 1975, the second in 2016.  We were promised it was 'one in a generation'...so you can have your third in 2057!' - ‏David Robertson@theweeflea

Graham Weeks ● 2853d

Actually I think Trump has sewn that title up for the USA. As for Brexit. The Irish question is almost forcing a soft brexit on everyone. We were looking from the white cliffs of Dover when we Voted and actually the Irish Border which was quite rightly under discussion in the first phase is a very crucial question. without that being resolved nothing can happen.

Peter Chadburn ● 2861d

' At the moment we are the laughing stock of the world.'  ....And the evidence is?

Graham Weeks ● 2861d

I’m not even sure that Brexit will happen at all. If it does it may take the shape of a non-Brexit Brexit to allow Britain to save face. At the moment we are the laughing stock of the world.

Judith Jaafar ● 2861d

Nigel Farage as a butcher.......now there's a thought ;)

Penelope Crocker ● 2867d

I was in two minds as whether to post this here or in the smiles thread. But to show I can laugh even at myself, http://www.suffolkgazette.com/news/turkey-who-voted-for-christmas/

Graham Weeks ● 2867d

My reasons for Brexit have never been Up Yours though I do recall with warmth the old Sun headline for Delors.I do not expect a good deal for if remainers are not bad losers the EU certainly is.

Graham Weeks ● 2882d

Possibly Leslie but in the true spirit of 'up yours' which the 'Leave' vote was, I don't think anyone cares anymore. I think we will leave with No Deal anyway - always have done. Many don't care.

Penelope Crocker ● 2882d

Surely, if the remain side return a "NO" vote on the Final Deal, we then have to leave without the deal that gave the EU Migrants permission to stay, and also on WTO terms with NO DIVORCE BILL (The two year timeline to leave post Article 50 is EU legislation not UK, so our parliament has no legal jurisdiction to extend it, despite what some remainers are asking). They remain side have stitched themselves up, and are so far up their own to realise it.

Leslie Bailey ● 2882d

Given that we usually follow the US like lapdogs, I find it fascinating that Alabama has elected a Democrat. How long before the poor in the UK realise that Brexit is a big tax avoidance fest for the rich?

Penelope Crocker ● 2882d

I think you're probably correct there Penny. It should be remembered that 60% of Labour party members voted to remain in the EU and despite Momentum voices I can't see the majority of current Labour MPs all being deposed of easily and replaced by anti-EU Labour MPs and thence to a Labour government. In general terms, the young voted to remain and Labour's support, unlike Tory support, comes largely from the young and that in ever-growing numbers.

Susan Rowe ● 2882d

Quite clear he wanted out. He has a lot in common with the far Right in that his extreme views do not want to be tempered by the EU. The lurch to the right which this country is taking will of course enable a counter movement to the left. This was one of my many reasons for preferring to remain inside a bigger unit. It goes some way to prevent extremism of any kind

Penelope Crocker ● 2883d

Guardian: "Corbyn’s team believe Labour’s general election strategy of appealing to both leavers and remainers worked well and that spelling out a more specific position now would risk alienating key groups". Told you Remainers. He mugged you good and proper.

Graham Weeks ● 2884d

Perhaps I want a crystal ball for Christmas?

Graham Weeks ● 2884d

I agree with you Graham although we are both on opposite sides. It is a very expensive way to achieve very little. I often wondered if May was playing the long game and I still can't work out if she is that clever. I still think it could go either way.

Penelope Crocker ● 2885d

'That was some week for the Prime Minister. At the beginning of the week she was dead in the water and a complete flop. At the end she is superwoman – having faced down the might of the EU and taken the Brexit negotiation on to another level. Her job is now safe (until after Christmas) and almost everyone is satisfied. Those who want Brexit are saying that we are on our way – out of the ECJ, out of the Single Market and Customs Union – and into a bright new world of free trade alliances and freedom.  Those who want the EU are saying that we are on our way to staying in the SM and CU so whats the point of Brexit anyway?  (Its ironic that they do not see that claiming the British people did not vote to leave the SM doesn’t quite square with s'taying in the SM is basically the same as staying in the EU').  It all depends what paper you read and whose Twitter feeds or Facebook page you follow.As regards Mrs May it is possible that as Juncker and Barnier declared, she is a brilliant leader and negotiator who has compelled the EU to back down and compromise. She could be the first Tory Premier in living memory who has either been deceived by the EU or deceived the British people.  Where Margaret Thatcher failed, she will succeed.Or it could be that she is just the same as the rest. Living in a fantasy world, thinking that the EU will compromise and give her what she wants. When Juncker and Barnier are putting their arms around you and telling you ‘welcome to the club’, you know there is something wrong! When the arch-europhile Ken Clark congratulates the Prime Minister on her negotiations one wonders what is going on.  Perhaps rather than being Thatcher, she is like Chamberlain, returning from Brussells with a piece of paper saying ‘Brexit in our time’!But there is a third option.  My fear is not that the Prime Minister is being fooled but that she knows exactly what is going on, and that she will get exactly what she wants.  downloadRemember she did vote to remain. Britain will in effect remain in the EU – if not in name- at least in practice.  The EU will use the excuse of the Irish border to ensure that the UK stays regulated and controlled by the EU. Then they will have the best of all worlds – a Britain unable to trade freely with the rest of the world and a Europe unhindered by British politicians who don’t buy into the federalist dream of Schulz et al. It is the latter case that seems to me the most likely.  The political class are as a whole, thoroughly wedded to the EU. Most of the Tories, the Nationalists (whether Irish, Scottish or Welsh), the Lib-Dems and the Blairite Labourites will go along with this vision/nightmare. A sign of this establishment unity is indicated by a grand banquet which was held in London recently. The guest speakers were strongly anti-Brexit; Chuka Umunna, Anna Soubry and Nick Clegg.  The dinner cost £2,000 a head so it is no surprise that it was the elites city fat cats, the bankers and politicians, all determined to overturn Brexit. In that sense I do not see much difference between most of the political parties. Brown/Blair/Campbell/Osbourn/May/Hammond/Starmer/Sturgeon/Lucas/Cable are all basically of the same ilk.  Its strange to say but probably the only hope for those who want Britain out of the EU is Corbyn, who if he remains consistent to his life time political philosophy is Bennite in his rejection of the centralized Thatcherite Single Market.One of the many ironies of this is that the DUP will end up giving up the independence of the UK, in order to keep Northern Ireland in the UK. But the question then arises – if the UK is subject to the EU does it really matter whether Northern Ireland is subject to the EU, in or out of the UK?“We’d go from being a member of the internal market to being a subject of it. We’d check out but never leave.” - Spiked'

Graham Weeks ● 2885d

The detailed draft agreement on citizens rights & on a financial settlement are without prejudice to an agreement on a future relationship. The Prime Minister has stated that the payment of any money other than our contributions up to leaving are contingent on a wider Agreement. - John Redwood‏ @johnredwood

Graham Weeks ● 2886d

Oh I think we may both be in England but yours aspires to be that of the last quarter of the 20th century and mine the future.

Graham Weeks ● 2887d

You and I live in different countries and probably in different centuries.

Penelope Crocker ● 2888d

'At the beginning of this fateful week, it looked like the Ulster Unionists would save the nation. In dismissing Theresa May’s agreement with the EU for “regulatory alignment” between the North and South of Ireland the DUP appeared to have zapped a cancer on the verge of spreading to the rest of the United Kingdom. Just before seven o’clock this morning we discovered the horrible truth, over the course of the night the tumour had silently metastasised to all four corners of our great country.The all-important prefix to the word “alignment” embedded in the Ireland section of the UK's agreement with the European Commission, which the EU27 will approve at next week’s summit, has been changed from “regulatory” to “full” – from semi-skimmed to full-fat Euro-colonial enslavement if you will.Full text: "In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union".Exceedingly optimistic Brexiteers will hold out hope for the “agreed solutions” to come into being, and in a way that enables us to set our own standards and regulations with considerable freedom. The rest of us will face up to the harsh reality: we are staying in the Single Market until the EU itself collapses.'

Graham Weeks ● 2888d

That's correct Graham. As we haven't left the EU any rules we are subject to we will have had a say in their formation and, generally speaking a veto over. After we leave it shouldn't be a surprise that anything the EU wanted to implement but we would have vetoed will be back on the table and we will have to accept it.

Andy Jones ● 2889d

'we continue to adhere to EU rules of which we have zero say in the making.'Present rules we had input allegedly. No new rules without us yet.

Graham Weeks ● 2890d

The triple lock means you have nothing to fear Graham but for the hundreds of thousands who would lose their jobs and the millions who would see a further decline in their income you are likely to see a bit more caution.It is incorrect of you to portray the EU Commission as unfettered by democratic control. They have been given the proxy of the democratically elected governments of 27 countries to negotiate on their behalf but all of them retain a veto. This makes it difficult for them to compromise because it would only take one to feel they have been too generous.The veto of the remain EU members has been brought into focus by the Irish border issue. The Irish Government has made it clear they aren't going to accept border controls and the people of Northern Ireland agree with them by a large majority. Unfortunately Theresa May has put herself in a position in which she is beholden to a die hard minority in Northern Ireland who would prefer economic catastrophe and renewed conflict to any arrangement that integrates the island economically. The choice now appears to be either cliff edge or 'regulatory harmony' across the whole of the UK. The Government seems to have accepted that cliff edge can't be considered (they have read the Brexit impact reports we are not allowed to see) given the way they caved on the divorce bill and their original proposal on the Irish border so it looks like we are heading to 'regulatory harmony' i.e. we continue to adhere to EU rules of which we have zero say in the making.

Andy Jones ● 2890d

Fear not! And to borrow a slogan from across the Irish Sea, No surrender!

Graham Weeks ● 2890d

No, I don't think we will Graham. It is becoming increasingly clear that the only exit we face is off a cliff edge and we will get the splendid isolation you crave. Back to 1975 or whatever it was. Some of you will be happy. Most of us will suffer but hey ho.......

Penelope Crocker ● 2890d

As I expected, the UK will cave into the EU on everything and we will leave the EU in name but probably not in reality.  That’s because the EU Commission has the enormous advantage of not having to answer to an electorate and because the UK government does and knows that about half that electorate are opposed and that numerous politicians, media, civil servants and academics are doing their utmost to try and undermine and prevent Brexit.“Some for example, the Dutch prime minister, Mr. Andries Van Agt, were reasonable, but most were not. I had the strong feeling that they had decided to test whether I was able and willing to stand up to them. It was quite shameless: they were determined to keep as much of our money as they could” (Margaret Thatcher)“But Thatcher was finding that ‘give and take’, in European terms, meant, ‘you give, we take’”- in The Great Deception by Booker and North.

Graham Weeks ● 2891d

Not sure what point you are trying to make by showing us those figures. That EU immigration has risen since Brexit shouldn't be that surprising - there has been an increase in people arriving looking to establish rights of residency before new restrictions are introduced and EU workers already here haven't taken contracts abroad for fear of compromising their right to remain.These figures probably mask a bigger influx of people because there has been a sharp fall in the number of seasonal workers arriving particularly in agriculture. For them establishing residency rights isn't a factor.However, this definitely does not mean that you can be complacent about staffing the NHS in the future. Every EU citizen working for the service could see a significant degradation in their status once we leave. Previously their right to remain and the entitlements they had in this country were guaranteed by international treaty. After Brexit these will be determined by the British Government.'Taking back control' may seem a desirable outcome for some but if you are a non-British citizen living under a government that is committed to bring net immigration down to a five figure sum you will have cause for concern. The only way that target can be achieved is by making the UK an unattractive place to live for EU citizens already here.In the event given the utter dependence of the UK economy on immigrant labour and issue of rights of EU citizens being the easiest thing for Britain's EU negotiators to compromise on it seems highly likely that the deal will be very generous for EU workers. The final arrangement will probably look a lot like freedom of movement.

Andy Jones ● 2897d

Total number of EU nationals in the NHS in June 2016 – 42,153Total number of EU nationals in the NHS in June 2017 – 43,509http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2017/11/24/conhome-diary-the-housing-minister-should-be-in-the-cabinet-why-brexiteers-need-to-up-their-game-in-exposing-remain-lies

Graham Weeks ● 2902d

There is a fund to pay EU pensions but, like most funds here in the UK low interest rates has led to a fall in the actuarial value leading to an underfunding. The amount is a fraction of the underfunding of both state and private sector pensions in the UK.  It isn't in dispute that we have to pay our share of the shortfall but the discount rate used to calculate how much it is hasn't been decided. Working out the present day cost of future liabilities is fiendishly complex but I have not heard it being claimed that the discount rates being proposed by the EU are unreasonable.The problem is that a caucus of Tory MPs are not going to accept much more than the E20 billion mentioned by Theresa May in her Florence speech. Our own expert negotiators would accept that the final number should be in the E40-50 million range based on internationally recognised principles and the EU is unlikely to err on the side of generosity as the rates used will establish a precedent should another country decide to leave. The agreed sum also has to be ratified by the 27 remaining members.Gove and Johnson want to make the 'divorce' payment a red line but they are doing so for entirely party political reasons. It may be that they will cheerfully see the talks break down over the issue or it may simply be that they don't understand or care that grandstanding over the exit bill is a short cut to no deal. They just want Theresa May out.Assuming there isn't a full blown economic crisis should this happen the problem won't end there. Theresa May's government remains dependent on the DUP and although they are notionally a Brexit party they are not going to accept the hard border that would necessarily follow no deal.  The Conservatives would lose their majority in parliament even assuming that 'the mutineers' continue to vote with the party in a 'no deal' scenario. Remember David Davis has said that parliament will get a vote on the deal which necessarily includes a lack of a deal. It seems extremely unlikely that 'no deal' would get through parliament.Quite how this all gets resolved is unclear. Another election seems inevitable and with the economy deteriorating and likely to suffer more if 'no deal' becomes a probability the Tories main weapon against Corbyn, his perceived economic ineptitude, becomes less potent. It is hard to tell people your opponent will screw up the economy if you are doing it yourself.

Andy Jones ● 2906d

Of course or are EU pensions not based on a fund but taxation like old age pensions here? It they have no pension fund it is another example of their improvidence and financial irresponsibility.

Graham Weeks ● 2906d

I think Paul is sceptical that you would be persuaded that your facile analogy is nonsense because any explanation as to why would be complex and technical.Basically you are saying that we should leave the EU and they should continue to be responsible for paying Nigel Farage's pension.

Tricia Arbuthnot ● 2906d

Rofl...better to say nowt Paul if that's the best you can do!

Keith Iddon ● 2909d

It really isn't!

Paul James ● 2909d

This is so far from what's actually happening I don't know what to say!

Paul James ● 2909d

Not in these parts methinks, but possibly on this forum. The others might have something better to do with their time! ;-)

Keith Iddon ● 2909d

Are you and I the only Brexiteers in these parts?

Graham Weeks ● 2909d

That's just about correct Graham.

Keith Iddon ● 2909d

Dave Davis is at the golf club returning his locker key when Mr Barnier the membership secretary sees him."Hello Mr Davis", says Mr Barnier. "I'm sorry to hear you are no longer renewing your club membership, if you would like to come to my office we can settle your account"."I have settled my bar bill" says Mr Davis.."Ah yes Mr Davis", says Mr Barnier, "but there are other matters that need settlement"In Mr Barniers office Mr Davis explains that he has settled his bar bill so wonders what else he can possibly owe the Golf Club? "Well Mr Davis" begins Mr Barnier, "you did agree to buy one of our Club Jackets"."Yes" agrees Mr Davis "I did agree to buy a jacket but I haven't received it yet". "As soon as you supply the jacket I            will send you a cheque for the full amount"."That will not be possible" explains Mr Barnier. "As you are no longer a club member you will not be entitled to buy one of our jackets"!"But you still want me to pay for it" exclaims Mr Davis."Yes" says Mr Barnier, "That will be £500 for the jacket. "There is also your bar bill"."But I've already settled my bar bill" says Mr Davis."Yes" says Mr Barnier, "but as you can appreciate, we need to place our orders from the Brewery in advance to ensure our bar is properly stocked".. "You regularly used to spend at least £50 a week in the bar so we have placed orders with the brewery accordingly for the coming year". "You therefore owe us £2600 for the year".."Will you still allow me to have these drinks?" asks Mr Davis. "No of course not Mr Davis". "You are no longer a club member!" says Mr Barnier."Next is your restaurant bill" continues Mr Barnier. "In the same manner we have to make arrangements in advance with our catering suppliers". "Your average restaurant bill was in the order of £300 a month, so we'll require payment of £3600 for the next year"."I don't suppose you'll be letting me have these meals either" asks Mr Davis."No, of course not" says an irritated Mr Barnier, "you are no longer a club member!""Then of course" Mr Barnier continues, "there are repairs to the clubhouse roof"."Clubhouse roof" exclaims Mr Davis, "What's that got to do with me?""Well it still needs to be repaired and the builders are coming in next week", your share of the bill is £2000"."I see" says Mr Davis, "anything else?"."Now you mention it" says Mr Barnier, "there is Fred the Barman's pension". "We would like you to pay £5 a week towards Fred's pension when he retires next month". "He's not well you know so I doubt we'll need to ask you for payment for longer than about five years, so £1300 should do it". "This brings your total bill to £10,000" says Mr Barnier."Let me get this straight" says Mr Davis, "you want me to pay £500 for a jacket you won't let me have, £2600 for beverages you won't let me drink and £3600 for food you won't let me eat, all under a roof I won't be allowed under and not served by a bloke who's going to retire next month!""Yes, it's all perfectly clear and quite reasonable" says Mr Barnier."Pxxs off!" says Mr DavisNow we understand what Brexit is all about.

Graham Weeks ● 2909d

Will the Eurocrats be ruled by economics or pique and prejudice? I think they are more PP than  E.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42020008

Graham Weeks ● 2909d

Penelope, you judge me aright and post sense.

Graham Weeks ● 2909d

I get the impression that it isn't about jobs or the economy for Graham. As discussed, there are many and wildly varying reasons why people voted Leave and why people voted Remain. I can vouch for the under reporting of bad news. In my company results are 50% down on the same quarter last year. Not blaming all of that on Brexit because we have no way of knowing why our customers aren't buying but it is a tad scary.

Penelope Crocker ● 2923d

It's a bit silly to claim that one example of jobs moving from the EU into the UK is proof that everything is fine and dandy with Brexit. It has to be set against hundreds of other examples in the opposite direction. Rather than people getting hysterical about this, my impression is that the true extent of the problem is being under reported because firms are going about this gradually rather than doing it all in one big go. In some cases no jobs are actually lost but the management of a client or a contract is being moved to an office in the EU just one or two senior managers are moving. Graham, if you talk to people who actually have jobs and ask them to tell you what hiring policies have been like recently in their industry you might realise that you are being very complacent about what is happening.

Helena Cavanagh ● 2923d

Well if free trade is a barking idea for British food buyers it is excellent news for the developing countries. BTW, this is from the blog of The Wee Flea in Dundee.Such is the irrational obsession with this (Brexit) and the way that people filter everything through their confirmation bias that it really affects the way that news is reported.  For example if you heard that 140 jobs were going from Dundee to Malmo in Sweden because of Brexit can you imagine how the Scottish press, and government would have hailed it as proof for their doom and groom predictions.  But the fact that it is the other way round - 140 manufacturing jobs are coming from Malmo to Dundee despite Brexit, or actually because of Brexit.  But instead of singing this from the rooftops, our politicians are silent because it doesn't suit their narrative.  They actually want the doom and gloom stuff - because they cannot possibly conceive they could be wrong.

Graham Weeks ● 2924d

I do. Cheapest beer outside of Harrogate.

Graham Weeks ● 2924d

I don't think you can really credibly argue against the view that the removal of protective agricultural tariffs would lead to widespread depopulation of the countryside. That would certainly be the opinion of the National Union of Farmers. Apart from twee Cotswold villages or anywhere with fast connections to major urban centres there would be widespread internal migration. Without people there are unlikely to be many pubs.This isn't remainers talking doom and gloom just a straightforward rebuttal of a daft and impractical idea that only you and Tim Martin think makes any sense. Every non-certifiable advocate of Leave is insistent that both agricultural subsidy and tariff protection for farmers will remain after we depart the EU. What we don't know at this stage precisely what the arrangement will be but the more benign scenarios which aren't going to result in higher food prices are looking less likely by the day. The problem with the facile and incorrect argument about us paying in £350million a week to the EU was that well over half of that was paid in the form of agricultural subsidies. We effectively got most of that back in the form of lower cost food that we imported from the EU. If we want subsidised food going forward the taxpayer will still have to pay for it only now we are likely to have to pay more as there will be tariffs on top.If a moment's consideration doesn't make it clear to you that complete free trade in agricultural products isn't a barking idea please explain to us how it won't be a disaster for British farmers and British rural communities?

Andy Jones ● 2924d

'This is a joke right?.....that there wouldn't be any pubs outside cities any more.'No. No pubs outside of cities? That is the sickest joke I have heard in the name of remoaning.Once again, remain is spelled doom and gloom.

Graham Weeks ● 2924d

And who the hell wants to sit in a Wetherspoons? He would be happy - he thinks more of us will be forced to holiday in the UK. Not me.

Penelope Crocker ● 2924d

This is a joke right?I am not aware of any country in the world that allows all food products to be imported tariff free - it would result in the immediate destruction of the domestic farming industry.Tim Martin is probably keen on this daft idea because he would be able to to increase his margin by using tariff free foreign ingredients in the beer he sells although he needs to consider that there wouldn't be any pubs outside cities any more.Brexit has already driven food prices up because of the collapse in the value of our currency. Our agricultural production is already falling because farms can't find workers as we have discouraged EU nationals from coming here to work. If we left the EU with no deal it would drive food prices up even more as we will always have to buy a significant proportion of our food from Europe.The people who suffer most from all this will be low income groups for whom food takes up a much larger part of their income.

Tricia Arbuthnot ● 2924d

https://www.jdwetherspoon.com/tims-viewpoint/the-wetherspoon-manifestoNot everyone shares the gloom. Cheers!

Graham Weeks ● 2924d

When he was a young journalist Boris Johnson was a Brussels correspondent a job he partly because his father worked for the European Commission. It that role he did his master's bidding in coming out with a stream of anti-EU stories most of which were completely fabricated like the straight bananas one but because they were in broadsheet newspapers and nobody thought they would print outright lies they are still widely accepted as being true.

Helena Cavanagh ● 2936d

As far as I am aware Boris never actually advocated leaving the EU until he made the decision to back Leave during the referendum. He certainly made numerous pro-EU, pro-single market statements in his career prior to that point. For instance see the video here:http://www.itv.com/news/2016-06-19/video-emerges-of-boris-johnson-supporting-the-european-single-market/Nobody is disputing that he is only interested in himself and he will adopt whatever stance will advance his career but he does indeed seem to have always thought leaving was a bad idea and I would be pretty confident he still does. That won't stop him advocating it if he thinks it gets him closer to being Prime Minister.

Andy Jones ● 2937d

"Most of the Cabinet including the PM, the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary have always though leaving was a bad idea" - Andy Jones I think you can leave the Boris Johnson out of that side of the equation. Boris Johnson is only interested in himself and certainly can't be included as someone who always thought that leaving was a bad idea.

Susan Rowe ● 2938d

"Remoaners are such bad losers, so unbritish one might say"Haha yeah like there's any version of reality where Remain won and ol'Farage *didn't* immediately exclaim 'The battle might be lost but the war isn't over!'.Sorry but the entire reason we had the referendum was because a large number of people thought the country was going in the wrong direction, you can't flip the table and expect everyone to silently accept the complete opposite.In the same breath as crying "it was a democratic vote, accept the result" you're also implicitly accepting the democratic voice of malcontent...

Nick Foote ● 2938d

An interesting article here:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/15/oligarchy-lessons-ancient-greece

Philippa Bond ● 2941d

A deal was never on the cards. Why would the EU give us any kind of 'good' option when it would lead to other countries opting out too?  If we are seen to suffer then it strengthens their union. Yes, lessening/punitive trade with us will affect them slightly but they can absorb those losses amongst themselves. Naive to think anything else. I am also inclined to think that the right wing has many ulterior motives here and dismantling the NHS etc etc may well be in their hopes.

Penelope Crocker ● 2941d

No I think the situation has spiralled out of their control. Most of the Cabinet including the PM, the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary have always though leaving was a bad idea and even the most ardent leavers will recognise that they should be going through with a policy that their advisers are telling them is going to turn out so badly if there is no deal.The problem is that any deal will be hard to explain to their support base as it necessarily will involve lots of compromises and in its final form may not look exactly like taking back control of our borders or reclaiming sovereignty plus there will be a very big divorce bill to pay. At this point UKIP would come back from the dead and backbench MPs in marginal constituencies would split leading to a general election.The drift towards no deal and the economic catastrophe that would represent is being rationalised by the Conservatives as being the only option other than handing power to Jeremy Corbyn under whom things would be even worse. It's a cock up rather than a conspiracy.

Andy Jones ● 2941d

You don't think that Brexit was a divide and conquer move by the Tories so that we would be distracted while our NHS and benefits systems were dismantled?

Philippa Bond ● 2942d

Reading the papers this weekend has been both informative and deeply worrying. There seems to be a developing consensus among people who look at the Brexit negotiations that it is now almost impossible to see a deal being reached. There is agreement that this is down to the fragility of the current Government who simply doesn't have the ability to survive having to make any significant compromises in negotiations. Therefore the only option open to them is to drift on and blame the lack of progress on the EU.Now this weekend we learn the Government or at least the Treasury has crunched the numbers on the impact of 'no deal' and the result will be an increase in the annual deficit of £60billion. This will require savage cuts in health, social welfare, defence and definitely the end of the triple lock for our national finances to even begin to look anything but precarious. Of course there will be people who will refuse to accept that these are projections that have been carefully calculated by well-informed and impartial civil servants who have an obligation to present ministers with a true picture of the situation. The question this raises therefore is where are the alternative projections from those advocating Brexit even to the point of no deal which show exactly what we can expect our fiscal position to be if this happens.

Andy Jones ● 2942d

This notion that because experts aren't always exactly right means that we should disregard everything they say is both laughable and dangerous.There was no consensus pre-Brexit about the immediate impact of a Leave vote. The most hawkish forecasts came from the Treasury which was under the influence of George Osborne then but remains resolutely anti-Brexit. Outside the Government there were a range of views on the immediate impact but anyone who can predict accurately what is going to happen in the short term does not publish their views - they set up a hedge fund and make a fortune on their knowledge.Anyone predicting an immediate economic crisis was wrong footed by Mark Carney's policy response in which he injected billions of pounds into the domestic financial system (ironically with lines of credit from the European Central Bank). This resulted in the collapse of the currency and a downgrade in our credit rating but did shore up domestic confidence by turning the taps back on for consumer debt. There will be problems down the line because of this but it was clearly thought the economy was not in a condition to take a rise in interest rates.Whatever differences there may be in how analysts predicted the short term impacts there is a total consensus on what happens in the longer term. Everybody with more than a superficial knowledge of the subject recognises that if we lose our existing access to the single market and tariffs and other barriers are imposed on our imports and exports then jobs will be lost, investment will fall, companies will seek to relocate back into the EU, investment will fall and corporate profits will be hit hard. To say this is a prediction is a bit misleading because these effects will indisputably happen if we leave the single market - the only thing that is up for debate is how many jobs will be lost and how much poorer the average worker will be.The arguments being used here by some people are very similar to those denying climate change - pick an inconsistency or flaw in one small part of the argument and then conclude that all experts must be wrong. That denial of expert consensus seems now to be at the heart of government in both the US and UK we are moving towards an idiocracy in which the opinions of people who know what they are talking about are given no extra weight.

Andy Jones ● 2966d

Anyone who says businessmen deal in facts, not fiction, has never read old five-year projections. - Malcolm Forbes (1919 - 1990)

Graham Weeks ● 2967d

"Doesn't the fact that nearly every credible economist, every city financial institution and even government Treasury officials would probably not dispute what Andy says give you pause for thought at the hardship that is in store for people."These people nearly all predicted the Brexit vote would lead to an immediate recession. And they all failed to predict the 2008 economic crash. They're pretending to know something that is unknowable.

Vlod Barchuk ● 2967d

But is my one dimensional view fair? Other perspectives?

Graham Weeks ● 2967d

Graham in reality it's a view in 1 dimension, which is your view of 4 groups which you've chosen to highlight.

Lee Page ● 2967d

http://christianquoter.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/the-four-ways-to-look-at-eu.html

Graham Weeks ● 2967d

The belief in the fantasy of the EU 'superstate' and indifference to the economic impact of Brexit are clearly widespread among people who are not working and are not directly dependent on those that do.My work does not involve me in day to day contact with the EU but over the course of a few decades I have become familiar enough with its true nature. It is a small part of the bureaucracy of doing business. For the areas of regulation that it covers the rules are usually relatively benign. Like any bureaucracy it can provide irritation but it is certainly no worse than our domestic civil service in the paperwork it demands. As far as I am aware there is no great controversy about any of the regulations. The only EU laws that I consistently hear people complaining about are the ones covering workplace entitlements - these come from senior management and there would be hell to pay if they were removed from the staff that benefit from them. In any case the present government has committed to retaining them.The concept of an EU superstate is clearly ridiculous to anyone with direct experience of how the EU actually operates. I can understand how if you read the Mail, the Sun or Express and have no practical involvement in the world of work you could come to believe in its existence. However, surely you have been given a major clue that it is really a fantasy by the fact that the government is proposing to adopt wholesale EU law in what it wanted to call the 'Great Repeal Act'. Parliament barred it from using that name because it wasn't actually appealing anything. The government is currently proposing to change a tiny fraction of the EU laws that it inherits and even with those there is no consensus. The reality is that these are laws that we had a significant hand in framing and agreed to implement because it was in our best interest - not something imposed on us by an outside power.

Andy Jones ● 2968d

'Those same arguments were made when we opted out of the Euro, with heralded 16b years of growth.'This is completely misinformed. There was no similar consensus about remaining out of the Euro and most city research houses and economists were against joining. Neither side of the argument were claiming that a decision either way would have a catastrophic effect on the UK economy.On the issue of single market there is close to total consensus that the effect of leaving on jobs and growth in the medium term will be negative - the only question is how bad it will be. To dismiss this isn't scepticism but to be in denial a luxury only really available to those who won't be affected.

Paul Corcoran ● 2969d

Well according to you gloom merchants my expenditure is to go up. But I am not bothered as I am a total sceptic as far as economic predictions are concerned.

Graham Weeks ● 2969d

Those same arguments were made when we opted out of the Euro, with heralded 16b years of growth.

Keith Iddon ● 2969d

That's easy for you to say Graham on an income that will not be affected by the impact of leaving the single market. Doesn't the fact that nearly every credible economist, every city financial institution and even government Treasury officials would probably not dispute what Andy says give you pause for thought at the hardship that is in store for people. If so, I have to say I found that very callous.

Tricia Arbuthnot ● 2969d

Andy you are truly a Jeremiah. Time will tell if you are a false prophet. I am happy to wait and see.

Graham Weeks ● 2969d

If that's what you really believe all the shenanigans and machinations of the EU is really all about, we will have to disagree on that one , Andy. Bt I think you are twice as naive as I am skeptical.

Keith Iddon ● 2969d

It means working in cooperation with your neighbours. The EU may have faults but they need to be compared with the benefits that we derive from membership most notably membership of the single market outside which 100,000s will be out of a job and millions of people will be poorer. In that context they are negligible.

Andy Jones ● 2969d

I don't believe you are correct about that Andy. Could you explain what is meant by the much used phrase 'ever closer union' if it does not mean a superstate? Also, one doesn't have to look very far to see the faults of the EU, it's not just the finance.

Keith Iddon ● 2970d

'There's already an organisation enabling defence co-operation, it's called NATO. No need for the EU to get involved in this matter.'Have you heard of a man called Donald Trump?Actually there is every reason for the EU to get involved in co-ordinating defence in addition to NATO because some EU members remain neutral. They can't work with other European armies under a NATO umbrella but they can in a limited way under an EU structure. Moves to coordinate things like logistics and procurement among European armies is something that is both welcomed and encouraged by NATO."Juncker called for all EU countries to join the Euro, a single EU president, an EU finance minister to support 'structural reforms in our Member States' (ie tell them how to spend their money), more matters to be decided by qualified majority voting"Whatever Juncker might say or aspire to it remains a fantasy that the EU is a potential superstate that will bring about the end of European nations. Even after only half a century of operation it determines a fraction of our national laws and most of them are about product harmonisation. All key decisions of state remain with national governments and they retain a say and in most cases vetoes of the carefully defined area the EU has the final word on. It is a delusion that this represents a threat to national sovereignty that is most commonplace in the UK (although not completely absent elsewhere in Europe) because we have a significant part of our press which is owned by people hostile to the EU for their own commercial reasons. It is disappointing to see so many people follow this line so uncritically when half an hours reading would demonstrate it is false.If you want to find problems with Europe then finance is where it is at. The time bomb of dysfunctional banking systems and out of control government liabilities is something that does have to be dealt with. Whether we are in the euro or out or in the EU or out we will need to be part of the solution as our banks have lent so much of their capital into Europe. I don't think a co-ordinated solution is anything but sensible and I don't think that asking problem economies to make reforms to tackle their own issues is unreasonable if you are providing them with financial support. Once again this has nothing to do with anybody in the EU wanting to create a superstate.

Andy Jones ● 2970d

There's already an organisation enabling defence co-operation, it's called NATO. No need for the EU to get involved in this matter.Juncker called for all EU countries to join the Euro, a single EU president, an EU finance minister to support 'structural reforms in our Member States' (ie tell them how to spend their money), more matters to be decided by qualified majority voting (ending national vetoes) and extending the Schengen area of free movement to Bulgaria and Romania. This is how the EU operates, taking a few powers whilst claiming it has no intention to take any more, then coming back in a few years for the powers it said it had no interest in.

Vlod Barchuk ● 2971d

Martin, it's far better to create an atmosphere of mutually beneficial co-operation between nations than to force them together in a political construct that tries to please everyone and ends up pleasing no-one fully. Different cultures and traditions need to be able to express themselves in their own way. There is a long standing tradition of democracy and self determination in this country, not least because we are an island nation and have succumbed to no one since 1066.There is no reason we cannot view our European friends as equals and trading partners. I am nor =t particularly nationalist, I am just anti EU.

Keith Iddon ● 2971d

Martin, it's far better to create an atmosphere of mutually beneficial co-operation between nations than to force them together in a political construct that tries to please everyone and ends up pleasing no-one fully. Different cultures and traditions need to be able to express themselves in their own way. There is a long standing tradition of democracy and self determination in this country, not least because we are an island nation and have succumbed to no one since 1066.There is no reason we cannot view our European friends as equals and trading partners. I am nor =t particularly nationalist, I am just anti the EU as a political entity.

Keith Iddon ● 2971d

I am no metal worker but AFAIK you can only weld identical metals. That is the problem.

Graham Weeks ● 2971d

So what is the problem? This is a laudable long term aim of welding together nations that have fought each other down the centuries. A coming together of different languages and traditions for the good of all. If mankind is to survive on this planet then at some point we must all work together for the common good. The EU could be showing the way ahead if petty nationalistic rivalries were put aside

Martin C. Harris ● 2971d

You've obviously never heard the expression ' ever closer union' and are unable to read between the lines..

Keith Iddon ● 2971d

'Did you not hear Jean Claude Juncker's speech earlier this week?'Yes I did. Despite what the headlines of some of our national newspapers claim it doesn't advance the idea of a European superstate. Increased cooperation in defence is imperative for mainline Europe with Russia increasingly aggressive and the countries which provides the largest armies (US and Britain) now less committed to the area. In finance it is clear to everyone that the huge challenges that are ahead need a co-ordinated approach.Even if you don't see these aspirations as reasonable and Juncker as being engaged in a scheme simply to expand the power of his office it falls a long way short of the EU and any proposals that arise will be subject to the approval of the member states. We are a million miles from a superstate.

Andy Jones ● 2971d

"It is amazing how powerful the idea of the European superstate remains even when informed eurosceptics have long since accepted that it isn't a reality."Every eurosceptic I've met (informed or otherwise) believes that the EU's ambition for a superstate is a reality. Did you not hear Jean Claude Juncker's speech earlier this week?

Vlod Barchuk ● 2972d

Suspect the index linking of pensions may disappear in due course...along with many other nasty surprises awaiting us. I haven't had a pay rise for 8 years and always smile when I hear about wage growth on TV. What wage growth ! Anyway, we are where we are. 51.9% are happy that they got what they wanted. 48.9% aren't. Such is life.

Penelope Crocker ● 2973d

It is amazing how powerful the idea of the European superstate remains even when informed eurosceptics have long since accepted that it isn't a reality.There probably where a small number of people in Europe who sincerely believed that the abolition of the nation state was a good thing and that the EU was a vehicle to achieve this aim. To think this would ever happen you would need to believe that the other members of the EU hold their sovereignty more cheaply than we do. They most certainly don't so the superstate was never going to happen.Any residual hope that it would died when the EU opted for a policy of expansion rather than consolidation. To wipe out national difference was a big challenge with a relatively small number of members but became an impossibility once the organisation moved into Eastern Europe. Now the decision making process is so diluted with so many countries having a veto that it only really works when it comes to agreeing on products and standards because it is in everybody's interest to harmonise. That is why the single market has become such a success and even countries outside the EU are adopting its rules. These days 'an ever closer union' really is just about standards and nobody even talks about the political aspect of this anymore - the EU is more of a trading group than it has ever been.On the point made by Graham earlier about the CAP and it being an enemy of free trade, while he is obviously correct that this policy provides a protectionist umbrella he ignores the obvious fact that every economy in the world protects domestic agriculture. When we leave CAP there will not be immediate free access to UK markets for third world farmers because that would destroy our agricultural base and depopulate the countryside. A system of farm subsidies will be put in place which is likely to be more expensive than the current system given that we may need to compensate farmers more if they are excluded from European markets by tariff barriers.It is perfectly legitimate for people on secure incomes like pensioners to vote in what they perceive to be their own self-interest when it comes to Brexit. They will be immune from the economic impacts particularly if their pensions are index linked. However, if those views are based on out of date perceptions of the EU as an institution or misunderstanding of how things like the CAP work perhaps you should pause to reflect on the harm your decision will do to younger generations.

Andy Jones ● 2973d

My understanding of the whole EU problem is that we (UK) joined and later voted to remain in a Common Market some years ago.  Since then, the EU has morphed into a political project first and a trading group second.  Most politicians, here and on the continent, are in favour of even more centred EU and defend it vigorously because politicians like to run a political project.  The gravy train ensued to the exclusion of us ‘ordinary’ people.  David Cameron tried to get some reforms, threatening a referendum to leave if he did not succeed and came back humiliated.  Very few in our government seriously believed that the Leavers would win but as usual, politicians did not understand the mistrust of the political and selfish elite, particularly after the expenses scandal etc.  Similar public attitude put Trump into the White House. I voted leave purely because I could see that the EU would slowly but surely become an overblown monolith of power which made the House of Commons into UK Town Hall.  Even Trump pointed out that the EU was a vehicle for Germany.I am English, a UK citizen and I am European because of our geography but the sovereignty of our own government is very important to me.  Indeed, much has been said about immigration but I have not come across anyone who has any racist or selfish views on it but the right of the British (elected) Government to have the final say and control over who is permitted to enter the UK is of prime importance.If the word ‘immigration’ was substituted by ‘population’ or even ‘congestion’, then the racist connotations are removed.  The UK has always been welcoming to people from other parts of the world for mutual benefit and long may it continue but I dread the thought that thousands of so-called refugees who seek only economic benefits are given EU passports and ‘pushed’ through Greece, Germany, Italy and France, over the English Channel, or whatever they may call it, to further congest this Sceptred Isle.

Brian Davis ● 2973d

Massive lurches to the right are a continental phenomena imo and if we are a little more right wing in the UK, which I am not sure is the case, it is more due to an ineffectual and redundant Labour party. We have blithering idiots as politicians, that's the main concern over brexit..that none of them could negotiate their way out of a paper bag. At least we have rid ourselves of erstwhile anti-EU politicians who end up riding on its gravy train (Kinnock)and opportunists like nest feathering sycophant Mandelson(socialists both ha ha ha)and those who are in its thrall.

Keith Iddon ● 2974d

I disagree. It is an economic and political union which hasn't done us too badly over the last 40 years. We were the sick man of Europe at the beginning of the 70s. We have prospered and become more open, tolerant and liberal under its leadership. There is safety in numbers. I see no abuse.We are in much greater danger in isolation and from a massive lurch to the right.

Penelope Crocker ● 2974d

So Penelope, if you had a friend who was in an abusive relationship, would you tell her to remain in case her partner did something terrible or would you encourage her to leave as quickly as possible.The European Union is an abusive organization dedicated to the  erosion of localised power and national identity in favour of conformity under a pan-european bureaucratic monster run in favor of German domination and I am incredibly proud to belong to the first nation to stand forward and leave such tyranny.

Bob Little ● 2974d

We have allies in other countries who are similarly dissatisfied. From within, we could have built that and Juncker won't be there forever.

Penelope Crocker ● 2974d

Don't make me laugh. We have been members for over 40 years and the EU is still carrying on regardless. What makes you think it will suddenly start listening to us? Get real.

Keith Iddon ● 2974d

I'm with you Peter. We have no influence at all now we're out and we will be punished. I'm looking forward to the next 10 years - not

Penelope Crocker ● 2974d

Yes Graham, The noise coming out of Brussels and Germany during the referendum last year suggested punishment and deterrence and so to leave was going to be a different experience to that some of the leave campaigners were suggesting. Juncker announced to day that the European Project is carrying on regardless. In fact without us it will gather momentum. I would have rather stayed and become "a boil on the bottom" of the project. It would have forced a debate about the direction of Europe, A debate that we should have been part of even if we went another direction. Farage turning up collecting his money, insulting people and doing no work does not represent our thoughts. We should have built an alliance for a looser EU. So where we are now is in a very difficult situation with a lame duck leader trying to get a divorce using useless lawyers against a giant who has all the power.

Peter Chadburn ● 2974d

Current negotiations will continue to be a shambles. As we are net contributors the EU does not want us to go and will be as difficult as possible.

Graham Weeks ● 2974d

Yes indeed Graham. The phrase 'ever closer union' seems to be viewed as a selling point , whereas any nation interested in its own self determination would view it as just the opposite. The EU seems to think that it is a paragon of democracy and freedom and talks the talk but actions tell otherwise. How many countries have been told to go back and vote again when the result of polls have gone against its wishes? Germany has a very young democracy and is more historically steeped in militarism, feudalism and fascism,(that particularly European nonsense)and is taking over by the back door. You are correct about the current team of negotiators, Peter. No-one with any real gravitas.

Keith Iddon ● 2974d

Yes Graham, This is a strand of thought about Political Union which like the emperors new clothes no one dares speak about. The aim of a significant group of people in some countries and in the EU hierarchy is the United States of Europe. This is their answer to the failure of the Euro when in fact the failure of the Euro shows the inadequacy of the whole idea. We are different but with common purpose therefore let us live as good co-operative neighbours. If there is true Political Union then the German people need to pay for the weaknesses elsewhere. Currently we have a Political Union where the Greek public is punished for being in the Euro!! I would have rather remained with the purpose of fighting the Union from the inside. I fear that us leaving will leave the power totally in the hands of the misguided  who in order to preserve the Union will have to erode democracy. In the same way that our democracy will get eroded by the current bill going through Parliament. The EU is deeply flawed, it needs people committed to reform, not dreamers!! Sadly we are neither!! As soon as the Political Union idea gained momentum in the Project then the real benefits have diminished, especially around the Mediterranean. People Voted leave for many good reasons. I Voted Remain for a good reason. But i feel that the current team is a shambles as no-one actually thought we would vote to leave.

Peter Chadburn ● 2974d

My income now is solely from state and private personal pensions. I have no idea of the implications of Brexit for my income as I am not a pension expert or economist.  From the beginning the sixties we were all told it is all about the economy. It was a lie and the politicians knew it. It was all about political union and stopping  a repeat performance of the game twice played in the century, Germany v France. My opposition then was political and it still is. I have never been 'voicing some vague attachment to racial purity in the UK'. I have consistently advocated a sovereign independent UK free to make its own laws and trade arrangements.  No-one under seventy has any real memory of such a country. The EU is the enemy of free trade and the prosperity of developing nations with its tariffs and CAP.

Graham Weeks ● 2974d

The two main effects of the weaker currency on people are the cost of an overseas holiday and an increase in food prices. With the first you can't deny a link but ultimately most people are just going to get less good value for the holiday they have rather than have no holiday at all. The real pain is felt in rising food prices but the effect of that is diffuse and most people will be unaware that their grocery bill has risen because of the weak currency. The cost of this, particularly for people on low incomes, is far far higher than more expensive holidays.

Helena Cavanagh ● 2975d

I am puzzled. Of course Sterling was going to fall and it was widely predicted even if the Brexiteers dismissed the concerns. The very poor don't go abroad anyway so they don't care and to the rich, it is immaterial. It's those of us in the middle who save up to have 2 weeks away from the greyness and dreariness of this country who will be affected.  It was also clear that it will be the next 10-20 years which will be the unknown for the economy.

Penelope Crocker ● 2976d

Graham, the pre-Brexit forecasts of job losses and falling investment should we decide to leave the EU carried with them the implication that sterling would probably weaken. However, the collapse in the currency has been far greater than most people predicted because of the way the Bank of England responded to the referendum result. The day after the vote Mark Carney signalled to international markets that it was the currency not interest rates that would make the adjustment by injecting billions of funds into our domestic financial system. Ironically this exercise was supported by using lines of credit from the European Central Bank. Mrs May was against this policy because she believes that low interest rates and continued asset inflation cause increased social inequality and she is probably right.Pumping money into the economy has stabilised demand and the weaker currency has given a short term boost to our exporters but the cost is likely to be high longer term both in explosion of consumer credit and the erosion of real wages. An economy which had too much debt piled more debt on top of it. The negative consequences are already starting to feed through. The weaker pound has accelerated the decline of real wages as people on lower incomes have to pay more for food and other imported goods. The pressure is starting to tell and the Government appear to be buckling on public sector pay but that ultimately will just hit the income of private sector works who will have to pay more tax to cover the cost - their pay in real terms has already been declining even faster.This is a result not of leaving the EU but of the policy response of the decision to do so. We have yet to feel the full force of the economic impact which will be profound if we leave the single market. Even if the most rosy expectations of enthusiasts for free trade outside the EU are met it will take decades for this to compensate for the loss of trade with Europe. In the meantime 100,000s of jobs will be lost and millions will be forced to make do with lower incomes.I'm assuming that your income is fixed and guaranteed and immune from the negative economic consequences of the decision you supported. It strikes me as deeply unchristian for you to blithely dismiss the misery and hardship that this will cause for people and claim that there are some greater principles involved. You seem unable to articulate what exactly these principles are and how leaving the EU helps advance them other than voicing some vague attachment to racial purity in the UK. I can take no solace from the knowledge that the version of Brexit we are edging towards will deliver the exact opposite of what you want.

Andy Jones ● 2976d

Bloody Merkel dangerous dangerous woman. Open door let anyone in free for all.As for the Japanese, they keep themselves to themselves. Never see them dictate or try & change our ways & traditions.Everyday read some undesirable who has killed or maimed someone protected by those fools from Brussels

Peter Yale ● 2978d

So if Remain, project fear, was so convinced that Brexit would mean devaluation. why was that not shouted loud and clear if as usual it was about the economy? It wasn't shouted and for some of us it was never about the economy. That was the lie we heard from Heath et al at the start of the CM.

Graham Weeks ● 2979d

The pound fell after the vote, Penelope, so the voters could not hsve voted for Brexit in spite of it. If they had known, I think the result might have been very different.

Brian Conneller ● 2979d

Frankly, most of the people who voted for Brexit (who aren't middle class white( , didn't care about the fall in the pound. They felt left behind by the 'elite' and didn't think they had anything to lose. It was the 'sod it' factor

Penelope Crocker ● 2980d

Insults are usually used when one's defence is feeble. Not going into a complicated system is not at all the same as trying to escape a complicated system, especially when all the consequences were unknown to the voters and still are for that matter. Did the pro-Brexit voters vote, for instance, in spite of knowing that the pound would fall or did they vote to exit not having a clue?

Brian Conneller ● 2980d

Andy,A very good point about lack of exercising control. Lie is a strong word. But against the concerns of the people the Politicians were happy to speak that Lie. This influx of cheap labour proved to be of great use for big business and in effect the building industry in particular neglected apprenticeships and training. The latest proposals are quite strange in that they want to block unskilled labour. But the truth is that many unskilled and low skilled jobs are being performed by well qualified and educated people. I know teachers from Bulgaria and Poland doing Care/Restaurant work. I would say it was a Lie in the same way the dodgy dossier was a Lie. We have seen increasing wealth and a strong economy allied to widening pay margins. The minimum wage is now the maximum for many and as a result we know that the perception was all important in the Vote last year. The Big Lie of 2004 was a critical factor in turning opinion against the EU. Britain politically wanted the Poles in the EU and economically has increased our economy. But has damaged cohesion.When the East European countries joined there was an opt out to avoid a mass migration. We did not exercise that. A costly error of judgement by our clever elite. Any claim by the remain camp last summer was damaged by experience of this lie. As a eurosceptic anti Euro person who voted remain i can see that what happened in 2004 with that deception or Lie damaged the credibility of Politicians who supported the EU.

Peter Chadburn ● 2980d

Graham, you have answer my question with a logical fallacy. Peter Shore was a decent man and believed that EU membership would hasten the end of our steel and coal industries. He may well have been right but being outside the EU would not have saved them. In the 21st century the idea that our government should have unfettered control over our industries is one that serves only to benefit those that seek to exercise that control and would represent a fundamental undermining of our liberty. You might resent the influence foreign governments have over the setting of standards and regulations in this country but their power is diluted and the total effect is minimal. A dogmatic socialist government seeking to run a command economy would have a far bigger negative impact on our lives - whatever you might claim you can't possibly agree with people advocating this.Peter, I don't like to use the word 'lie' in the context of government decisions unless it is clear cut otherwise the word loses its power. I don't believe anybody lied to us back in 2004. A huge error was made in failing to predict the extent of immigration from Eastern Europe. The mistake was probably down to the civil service who would have been responsible for making the forecasts.No place has 'suffered' from this error more than London Borough of Ealing which has the largest proportion of residents born in Eastern Europe and Polish now as its second language. This suffering appears to have been relatively mild the borough voted overwhelmingly for Remain and remember that this was a vote that EU citizens were excluded from so the level of support for Remain among residents is very understated.I don't know exactly what Germany did to restrict immigration but the UK has not been exercising all the controls on EU immigration that it can do under EU rules. We effectively voted to take back control having already decided not to exercise the control that we had. The problem is that although party leadership had set targets for immigration the various ministries lobbied hard to be exempted from any further restrictions to protect their part of the economy. This will continue to happen after we leave the EU. It is likely you will find the only effective way of reducing immigration is to contract the economy.

Andy Jones ● 2980d

In a sense the BREXIT Leave Vote was won when our Politicians made promises back in 2004 based on this report. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21682810Whilst the British people were fearful that a vast amount of people would come here. we were told just 16,000 a year. This was a big lie which combined with Globalisation driving down wages at the bottom end has caused a great mistrust of our leaders. So during the BREXIT Campaign people could not believe what they were told. Only what they saw or felt. So this is a mess. and funnily enough the Germans opted to have controls on immigration which are ok according to the EU. So where is the truth? It escaped a long time ago!!!

Peter Chadburn ● 2981d

Sometimes one makes common cause on specific issues becoming co-ellgerents, not though generally allied. e.g. I agree with the Roman Catholic Church on many issues to do with sexuality and sanctity of life but am totally opposed on some other issues like authority in church government.

Graham Weeks ● 2981d

I understand the problem. It can only be solved by accepting people are going to work longer, save more or some combination of the two. We'll also have to find ways to increase inter generational households. Bringing in more immigrants makes the problem bigger for the next generation to deal with - a classic Ponzi scheme.

Vlod Barchuk ● 2982d

Everything now from remain is FEAR. Doom, gloom and all the fault of Brexit.

Graham Weeks ● 2982d

We've not lost yet. Hopefully the nation will come to its sense and reject brexit before this sh*tshow gets really real

Paul James ● 2982d

Project reality.The leave lot were project fear.

Paul James ● 2982d

Are you really prepared to endorse Peter Shore's vision for the UK outside of Europe? He was an unreconstructed Clause 4 socialist whose problem with joining the EU was that it restricted the ability of the Government to run an autarky and opt the UK out of the global economy. This would have allowed the state to support failing industries and direct prices and wages. This is what he means by taking back control.I very much doubt this is what you want for the future of this country. You appear to have made the mistake of assuming that because someone has used some buzz phrases that you agree with that he shares your point of view.Peter Shore was an intelligent man and I'd be surprised if subsequent events didn't make him change his mind. Globalisation has delivered an unprecedented period of sustained economic growth and dramatically reduced poverty across the world. It isn't perfect and the benefits are uneven but very few people are seriously advocating opting out of the global economy anymore. The only state in the world that has this policy is North Korea which follows Kim Il-Sung's philosophy of juche or self-sufficiency. If you think it would be better if we were all equal in our poverty then he is the chap for you.Probably only John McDonnell has views that are similar to this these days which is why Labour's policy has become so confused. If we have a hard Brexit there are basically two very different roads the country will take. If a Corbynite Labour government are in power they will look to turn their back on globalisation. If it is the Conservatives then it will be globalisation on steroids. The difference between these two positions is even more fundamental than whether or not we stay in the EU. In citing Peter Shore's speech are you saying that you share his vision for our country's future?

Andy Jones ● 2982d

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j-Gb8Pk2Pk42 years ago and still relevant

Graham Weeks ● 2983d

'all brexiteers that I know, have no problem whatsoever with the peoples of Europe,aside from free movement of unemployed'There is no such thing as 'free movement of the unemployed' unless you mean visa free travel which is likely to continue after Brexit. Freedom of movement only applies to labour. The availability of unemployment benefit to EU citizens living in this country is severely restricted and the amount claimed is minimal.The whole point of the EU in its original concept was to avoid one state becoming dominant in Europe. This was why Churchill was such a supporter. Germany can't dictate policy to even the smallest member of the EU because of the way decisions are made. They make by far the largest net contribution to EU and financial support to other European nations so the idea that they give nothing back is completely erroneous.As for the idea of Germany governing us it is difficult to know where to start with this one. The single market is really all about products and standards and even if we go for hard brexit we are probably going to have to retain existing EU standards and adopt new ones as they are introduced. These will admittedly partly be decided by the Germans along with 26 other countries. So we will have moved from a situation in which we are 'partly governed by Germany' but have a saw in the rules we have to follow to a new situation in which we are still 'partly governed by Germany' but have no say. Can you explain to me how this has advanced our national interest?

Andy Jones ● 2983d

I think your answer is partly true and partly rubbish Tricia, I assume you think of my post. The fact still remains that Germany has made little or no reparation for the mayhem and devastation it caused and is now top dog again in Europe. I, along with all brexiteers that I know, have no problem whatsoever with the peoples of Europe,aside from free movement of unemployed,but do not want their governments governing us. There are many reasons why we have had relative peace in Europe and yes, not holding Germany to account is one of them.

Keith Iddon ● 2983d

I for one admire the Germans for their personal friendliness as well as their industry. But no way do I want them having a part in the government of my country.

Graham Weeks ● 2983d

The is a view of Germany and German people formed by sixties war comics rather than any real knowledge of the country or even direct experience of Germany or German people.The idea of punishing aggressors for the costs of wars that they caused was tried after the WWI and most people who read books will know what the outcome was. After the second world war a different approach was tried and we have seen a half century of no major conflict in Europe.German is not such a strong industrial power because it pulled a fast one after the war. It owes its manufacturing pre-eminence to a culture which values technical skills to the same extent that we value the humanities.Sadly, ill-informed conspiracy theories like this one seem to be the reason many people believe we should leave the EU.

Tricia Arbuthnot ● 2984d

In a way people who come here work for a few years and then go home make a big difference in this dynamic as they are less of a burden and yet contribute through taxes to this country. Taking Immigration as an economic tool the fact is that the promise that only 16,000 Poles would come to the UK was one of those big political lies that really made immigration an issue and therefore the brexit result. The big influx of cheap labour suited the big companies and investment in British talent was forgotten. There are good reasons why people voted for Brexit. it was not about Xenophobia but for many the feeling of being forgotten by politicians both red and blue was a key. When a government tells lies it damages the institution and belief in politicians. Recent Lies have included 16000 Poles, Dodgy Dossier on Iraq, The BREXIT Campaigns and so much more. In fact where can we find the truth. So when these serial liars tell us to Vote one way and we have not felt a part of the good times what can we do. The Maximum Wage is now a benchmark of a divided society. We have so many problems and with Brexit and a Hard one we will see many more changes.

Peter Chadburn ● 2986d

You've misunderstood the issue. The problem we have is a looming imbalance between the working and dependent population. Most immigrants particularly those who arrive through freedom of movement will tend to be younger so they won't become dependents for thirty or forty years. Obviously younger people eventually get old but to say we can't increase the size of the working population now because eventually they will be dependent on the rest of us is nonsense.It almost impossible to predict what the situation will be at that point because we can't really tell what life expectancy rates will be but the chances are the population will be more balanced in age terms because the birth rate will be higher.

Andy Jones ● 2986d

The challenges of an ageing population will not be solved by increasing immigration, as immigrants will get old and add to the number of over 65s. Increasing immigration further will merely exacerbate this problem. You are proposing an inter generational Ponzi scheme.

Vlod Barchuk ● 2986d

Topic: Re:Brexit "Remoaners are such bad losers, so unbritish one might say."I prefer to think that we re-mainers may have thought the consequences through with more attention to details than you and your ilk.Your BIOB game is childish in  extremis, as is your Bible Quoting  monicker.

Tony Wood ● 2986d

The German people may or may not have shown shame over the evil of Hitler but the little 'corporate shame' in my opinion.Successive German governments have not repaid their debt for WW2 and sat back rubbing their hands when the USA rebuilt their industries and infrastructure whilst the money owed to us and countless other devastated countries was used to help in that process. Why else do you think that Germany has such a powerful industrial base and can therefore call the shots?Germany has caused more mayhem and misery than any other country in the history of humanity imo and are now heading an organisation that does will be forced to do its bidding the longer that organisation exists.History is a marathon and not a 100m sprint.

Keith Iddon ● 2986d

These numbers are probably exaggerated given the incorporated assumptions about overstaying students which have now proven to be false. Even so we are probably looking at a net immigration figure of at least two million since it started to rise significantly about 20 years ago. This is also a period of fairly sustained economic growth has occurred so it is not that surprising that we have seen more people coming to work here.To put that number in context it is in the same region as the increase of the number of people in the UK aged over 65. This has risen from 15.9% in 1996 to 18.0% in 2016. Even with this rise we have seen the NHS being brought to what lots of people inside the organisation have described as the brink of crisis.The bigger problem, as I have mentioned before, is that we are at the foothills of the mountain of change that is to come. By 2039 according to Government statistics a quarter of the population will be over 65. From 1996 this will be an extra SIX MILLION people.The burden of providing care for these people will fall on the remaining three quarters of the population who are  not children. But the problem becomes more acute because the number of people of working age is not rising anywhere near as quickly as those over 65. The absolute number of people of 'prime' working age i.e. 25-45 has been more or less static for the last decade or so and is predicted to remain so for the next few years. This demographic gap probably accounts for alot of the immigration we have seen.If we are struggling to cope already when the working population has nearly kept pace with the retired population due to 'mass immigration' what do you expect to happen in the future if we cap immigration but the older population starts to rise at an accelerated rate?

Andy Jones ● 2986d

The problem is not immigration but mass immigration. Before 1997, immigration and emigration were roughly equal. Since New Labour came to power, emigration has been relatively steady but immigration has increased by 200,000-300,000 people a year. The link below shows the figures as a graph. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=uk+immigration&t=h_&atb=v78-3__&iax=1&ia=images&iai=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.mirror.co.uk%2Fmirror%2Fampp3d%2FNovember%25202014%2FIMMIGRATION%2FMigration.jpg

Vlod Barchuk ● 2987d

As a Eurosceptic who voted remain i find some of the abuse at times hurled and the remoaner tags unhelpful. There are big issues around the EU and further integration on the coat tails of the failed Euro. I could list many reasons to want to leave but my feeling that it is better to help the Oil Tanker turn around than to let it flounder on the rocks. The British attitude to the EU and consequentially theirs to us is also unhelpful. The Bile of the Express,Mail, Sun and Telegraph about the negotiations has been such that it does not help. To be honest i feel that our negotiators will struggle to get a constructive deal with the news barons breathing down their necks. The notion of Brussels telling us what to do is a bit of a myth. Yes they tell us what we should do but it is our petty officials in our Civil Service and Councils who interpret these rules in an extreme way. As the French will say "Rules are for the English". I found the same working in Pan European companies. The French were much more efficient. I don't think the Leave people in the Tory party seriously thought they would win which is why it is a mess. I fear for the NHS and Public Safety when we Leave as somehow Hunt, May and Boris will all say that we cant afford the NHS. I am not a Remoaner but a realistic Eurosceptic who sees that a Hard Brexit would lead to massive chaos for businesses all over the country. Many Leave Voters expected that we would be able to stay in some kind of Customs union. In fact they argued that a Soft brexit was on offer. I said Hard or None was the reality. The campaigns were confusing, misleading and in some cases dishonest (Both sides in my opinion). The only logical solution is to adopt some kind of Norway option of out but not out. Even my most ardent Leaver believes that is the sensible option.

Peter Chadburn ● 2987d

Think it is more nuanced than that. The liabilities built up by countries like Portugal and Greece weren't created by the Euro and changing back to the drachma or the escudo won't make them go away. The way out in the past for these countries was to debase their currencies but the notion that this is a pain free option is a false one - it resulted in a history of instability and military dictatorships for these countries. They are not the only European countries who need to make some fundamental structural changes but I think it is a false hope to believe that doing so outside the Euro would be any less challenging.As for the Norway option I agree that in our current scenario it is looking like the only logical option but that is only because of the illogical position we have put ourselves in. Under normal circumstances it would make no sense for us as we lose alot and gain nothing. It only works for the Norwegians because their huge sovereign wealth would mean that they would probably need to be even bigger net contributors to the EU budget if they were members.

Andy Jones ● 2987d

Graham, babies born in this country are not immigrants no matter how many of their parents are immigrants. Your quoted stat has no relevance to my point.Not sure why ethnicity matters in this context either. If you believe it should be a matter of Government policy to keep us ethnically homogeneous then it would be logical to support continued membership of the EU. People coming over at the moment may be 'white Polish' or 'white Irish' etc. but the chances are that like in previous generations their children will self-designate as 'white-British'. If we leave the EU the make up of immigrants will be much more ethnically diverse.

Andy Jones ● 2987d

I would dispute your population growth being due to life expectancy. A couple of quotes from a recent book.“In 2014 women who were born overseas accounted for 27% of all live births in England and Wales, and 33% of newborn babies had at least one immigrant parent, a figure that had doubled since the 1990s.”  Douglas Murray – The Strange Death of Europe Page 3“David Coleman, a professor of demography at Oxford University, has shown that on current trends people who identified themselves as a ‘white British’ in the 2011 census will cease to be a majority in the United Kingdom in the 2060s. However, he stresses, if current levels of immigration to Britain continue, let alone rise, that number will move closer to the present. It would be a time when, as Prof Coleman says, Britain would become “unrecognisable to its present inhabitants”.  Douglas Murray – The Strange Death of Europe(Page 3)But as I said before, immigration is not my main reason for BREXIT.

Graham Weeks ● 2987d

I have no problem with immigration from anywhere providing is controlled properly. None seems to be at present. The nursing I recently received from staff recruited in Philippines and Kerala was excellent. As to trade with Japan, the war ended 1945.  The Japanese unlike the Germans were not acting from a formerly Christian civilisation. The Grman nation has shown corporate shame over Hitler. Japan over POWs? Turkey over Armenians? No but it does not mean I will not trade.

Graham Weeks ● 2987d

The problem with being anti-immigration isn't necessarily due to any imputed racism but that it is based on a misconception.The primary reason that our population is growing so fast is not immigration but increased life expectancy. The fastest growing section of the population is the over 65s. If you look at the prime working age population it has been more or less static for the last 20 years and now looks set to fall if the Government's immigration targets are met.We don't have a fixed stock of schools, housing and hospitals that are either full or not full depending on how many people are in the country. They can be changed according to demand depending on our ability to pay. The problem with our current population structure is that we have an increased proportion of people who make a demand on resources but make little or no net contribution to paying for them. This problem is particularly acute now in the NHS but we are only at base camp of the mountain we need to climb in that regard.The current path we are on works on the assumption that an ever smaller active workforce will be able and willing to pay for an ever larger dependent population of older people. It may be that younger people will be prepared to work longer and harder to pay for benefits and support for other people that they themselves have no prospect of ever receiving - we'll have to wait and see.In Germany there is a greater consensus about the scale of the problem and what needs to be done hence the lack of opposition to Angela Merkel's open door for refugees. They must be looking in wonder at the way we are closing the door on an influx of people who are relatively better educated and are likely to integrate with much more ease.The irony of hard Brexit is that it is likely to lead to more immigration not less. Trade is much more complex than it used to be and movement of people will definitely be part of the free trade deals we will need to sign. So maybe it's not all bad.

Andy Jones ● 2987d

OK Graham and Peter. We get rid of immigration from Europe and we get immigration from further afield. No issue with that? Also, Graham, Theresa May is desperate to sign a trade deal with Japan. They were violent and unpleasant aggressors in WW2. No issue with that either?

Penelope Crocker ● 2987d

I am a retired pharmacist but far more interested in history, Christianity and politics. My reasons for Brexit, https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7447457#editor/target=post;postID=5291870472579538845;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=7;src=postname

Graham Weeks ● 2988d

Purely & simply immigration. Its all been said before with cries of racism 1 second behind. We are an island full up, housing, schools, NHS.Sort out our own backyard ( which doesnt mean deporting anyone north of Watford) but controlling our borders & not being dictated to by fools from Brussels lining their pockets with vastly inflated salaries

Peter Yale ● 2988d

Graham, I am interested in reasons as to why people voted Brexit. What do you do for a living? And can you explain what you understand by independence?

Libby Kemp ● 2988d

Yes Andy,The Euro is the emperors new clothes. and it has helped destroy economies that relied on occasional fiscal realignment. There is no wriggle room and suddenly Portugal and Greece were lumbered with German level costs. The Euro helped destroy economies. The continuing punishment of the Greek people is appalling. Manufacturing in Portugal and Greece became uneconomic the moment they joined the Euro.Our Government have backed themselves into a corner when it might appear that whilst long term we want to be more independent but the half way house of the Norway option is perhaps the only logical choice. The main negotiation is between the remaining countries for what they want or are able to give us. Our negotiators seem to want to play hard ball whilst only offering Jelly!!

Peter Chadburn ● 2988d

This makes a huge deal of sense. There is perhaps a case for the Euro to be made if you argue that the huge problems that Europe has are not caused by the single currency but just brought into the light by it. Fiscal profligacy and dysfunctional banking system is always going to end in tears and it is really just a question of who pays the price. Under the Euro it seems like the Germans are prepared to stump up for quite a lot of it.I wish I could be as sanguine as you about what happens next. You and Helena are quite right to say that the Irish border question is a huge problem. There seem to be two possible solutions - move the border to the sea or accept that only continued single market membership is workable. A Government dependent on DUP votes for survival isn't going to go for option one and the red lines that have been set down by Theresa May (and end to Freedom of Movement and no ECJ) seem to rule out the Norway option while she is prime minister.I'm finding it had to see beyond the talks completely stalling over the border question and the British Government angrily denouncing the EU for being unreasonable in a bid to blame them for no deal being reached. It will probably be global financial markets hammering the pound that will pull us back from the brink rather than government pragmatism but by that stage we will be in the midst of a full-blown economic crisis.

Andy Jones ● 2988d

As a Eurosceptic who voted remain, who accepted the result and wanted the best deal, i am  very concerned by the current lack of negotiations. Our government is trying to tell the club that it wants to depart from how to do it's job. My issues with the EU i consider as things that affect all of Europe but why could we have not linked up with like minded people around Europe and fought for change. The Euro is a disaster for many countries but like the Emperor's new clothes people are not allowed to criticise. When the policies fail we get told we need more integration into the EU super state. So my long standing Eurosceptic view is that we should have fought for change from within. Being outside means that they will trundle on blaming us for their own disasters. As a result we will suffer. My job is ok as most of our customers are abroad and we sell software and not products. But many of our UK customers in manufacturing are very worried. Friends who voted for brexit included many who expected a single market option. But this was never possible. A long standing brexit friend of mine says that as these negotiations are doomed the best option would be to follow the Norway option for 10 years or so minimising the risks for business. The WTO rules option of Hard Brexit is a real danger to jobs. Not immediately but companies will locate elsewhere as it suits. The clear challenge is that if we cant resolve the  Irish border issues in this first stage then BREXIT should be scrapped as impractical at this time. If we cant solve this crucial issue then we cant leave!! Quite simple really.

Peter Chadburn ● 2988d

Project Fear was about what might happen but what we now have to deal with is what is actually happening. When Brexit happened people at my employer in the marketing industry, didn't think it would have much impact. We have a largely UK client base and don't do significant business in Europe. However we have been quite hard hit so far with several clients reducing planned spending and starting to raise awkward questions about how we will handle things in the event of us leaving the single market - things that it had never even occurred to us might be a problem. Nobody has lost their job yet but we have stopped recruiting.Some variation of this scenario seems to be being played out for nearly every friend or family member I talk to about how they are being affected. Everybody refers to the huge uncertainty and the likely ruinous impact of leaving the single market - this applies to people in construction, farming, retailing, manufacturing and finance that I have spoken to. Nobody is relishing the prospect of new markets being opened up by the amazing trade deals we will sign as they don't seem to believe this will be significant.What a few people have pointed out is that it is difficult to see the negotiations progressing beyond the initial stage. Although the UK seems to have accepted that they will have to pay a big divorce bill and it should be relatively easy to come to a deal on continued rights to reside for EU citizens (who are leaving in droves anyway) there is a massive remaining gulf on the Irish border. The EU are placing much more emphasis on this that the UK appear to be partly because they recognise that the Irish have a veto but also because they can see the UK has treaty obligations that it appears to have forgotten. I have met nobody who has any working knowledge of these things who believes you can have one part of Ireland in the customs union and one not without having border checks. The claims by Government ministers about digital checking and frictionless trade are seen as utter fantasies. Without a deal on the Irish border the talks can't even progress to trade and it is hard to see how the two positions can be squared. If that does lead to the hardest of hard Brexits with no deal quite a significant proportion of people that I have spoken to categorically believe they will have no job and the firm they work for will be out of business. We are not talking about hard core internationalists who have an emotional attachment to the EU but pragmatic business people who have an in depth understanding of the way their industry works - unanimously they think things are bad at the moment and in certain scenarios will get much much worse.

Helena Cavanagh ● 2989d

Project fear's results are alive and well.

Graham Weeks ● 2989d

You are clearly very happy with the way things are Graham. You're lucky. I and my children are very worried. We don't have the luxury of not being concerned about economics and the world has changed. Our former enemies are no longer enemies and our former friends are no longer friends. We are becoming increasingly isolated but hey ho, we are free ! Yeah....right.

Penelope Crocker ● 2989d

I will prefer alliance wit those we share in a common heritage of law and allies in conflict. We turned our backs on them thanks to Heath et al.

Graham Weeks ● 2989d

Independence - don't make me laugh. We will just change masters. How can we possibly be independent in a global world? I'd rather be in alliance with similarly democratic and cultured countries than hanging onto Trump's coat tails.

Penelope Crocker ● 2989d

'On Our Tod' is currently only being tried by North Korea at the moment and it is not what Brexit will deliver. Leaving the EU will not mean that we can unilaterally determine the rules by which we trade.  We will still have to make a wide series of compromises with the wishes of other nations in order to remain part of the global economy. To describe Brexit as 'independence' is a delusion because, assuming we leave the Customs Union we will urgently need to boost trade outside the EU to compensate for that which we are set to lose from being out of the single market. Our counterparties will know this and our negotiating position from the start will be very weak and we will have to accept most of their demands if we want to get any sort of genuinely meaningful access to their markets.This will result in a series of profound changes that would fundamentally change every aspect of daily life in Britain and it is unlikely that parliament would any say in what happens. Things like chlorinated chicken, hormone injected beef and beer with more chemicals have already talked about but this is just scratching the surface of the way in which our lives will be different. We will be moving to a new set of product standards in almost everything we use. These changes may not be all bad but they will be dictated to us by countries like the US, China and India with whom we enter trade negotiations with a desperately poor hand. Basically we will be swapping a set of product standards that we had a hand in forming and a veto on for ones that will be imposed on us from outside. This is not independence it is the exact opposite.You ask what is my vested interest. Unlike you I do not have the luxury of being able to ignore the economic implications of Brexit. As yet apart from the eye-watering increase in costs on our recent holiday the direct effect on me has been limited. However, several clients of the firm I work for have already notified us that they are transferring functions to elsewhere in the EU. This doesn't necessarily mean we lose those contracts but experience has taught us that bids tend to be won by firms closer to where the tender is being given out. Our revenues are down and nobody is expecting much of a bonus this year and we are braced for redundancies next year. I have a family to support and a mortgage to pay. When I talk to any of my friends and contemporaries whose work involves them in any way in international trade (which is just about everyone outside the private sector) their situation has deteriorated in a similar way since the Referendum. The true scale of the economic cost of what is happening will only emerge slowly but anybody actively involved in the world of work will already be aware that it is going to be huge. There would be less anger over what is happening if this cost was being incurred for something significant and meaningful. It is a fundamental misunderstanding to talk in terms of 'independence' with regards to the future of Britain outside the EU and the fact that so much financial hardship and stress is about to be inflicted on millions of people for a concept that is illusory is tragically wrong.

Andy Jones ● 2989d

Good things?I only need one. Starting to regain independence. Our most radical move since Henry VIII split from Rome. I have one first question for any on the other side. Most votes are made on economics. What is your vested interest? You may be like the Kinnocks, first class passengers on the EU gravy train or a university researcher in an institution with an EU grant. But the whole project was sold nearly 50 years ago as being about economics. My opposition was never finance based and my Brexitting is not an economic motivation though I do not subscribe to the view that Brexit is the edge of an economic abyss. I am even considering alternative nomenclature. Adapted from the Irish but expressed in my native Yorkshire tongue I give you OOT. On Our Tod.

Graham Weeks ● 2989d

This seems like a good game.Rising prices in the supermarkets - BIOB. A worsening of the acute shortage of NHS staff - BIOB. Holidays becoming much more expensive because of weak currency - BIOB. An increase in racist attacks since the referendum - BIOB. A large reduction in investment in the car industry with subsidies being demanded for any that is made - BIOB. Stress for families because one of their members is an EU citizen - BIOB. Increasing the risk of a nuclear accident by leaving Euratom - BIOB. Major City institutions transferring key staff to Dublin and Frankfurt - BIOB.Of course Brexit hasn't actually happened yet so the game will get much more interesting. Funny there isn't an equivalent which involves listing good things that have happened because of Brexit. I'll start... no sorry can't think of one.

Andy Jones ● 2990d