I predict a riot: Amazon UK chief foresees 'civil unrest' for no-deal Brexit

Amazon's UK chief Doug Gurr has claimed Britain will descend into "civil unrest" in weeks if it leaves the EU with no trade deal in place. Gurr made his comments during a business leaders' meeting in England last week with new Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab, according to The Times. He is reported to have told the meeting, …

[Pointer2null]

eh?

How can there be civil unrest if the world ended?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Maybe that means civil unrest in Heaven, when the Brexiteers get there and find out that the EU's founding fathers have taken over the bureaucracy in the hereafter. "You Brexit lot--out!"

(In Heaven, the bananas all have proper curvature.)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

There will be Civil Unrest all the likely scenarios:

1/ Hard Brexit: Civil unrest as food and gas become scarce

2/ Soft Brexit: Civil unrest, as it's not want Brexiters wanted, and didn't understand our reliance on EU trace

3/ No Deal: See 1/

4/ Second Referendum, See 2/

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: eh?

1/ Hard Brexit: Civil unrest as food and gas become scarce

You really haven't a clue how world trade and WTO rules work, do you? Why on earth should any of that happen?

No wonder people get scared of Leave when there's such blatant nonsensical remainer FUD around. Project FEAR is alive and well, it seems.

[Teiwaz]

Re: eh?

1/ Hard Brexit: Civil unrest as food and gas become scarce

You really haven't a clue how world trade and WTO rules work, do you? Why on earth should any of that happen?

No wonder people get scared of Leave when there's such blatant nonsensical remainer FUD around. Project FEAR is alive and well, it seems.

Well, I'm pro Europe, and I didn't buy that reason either.

However, there will probably be a backlash after Brexit, even if all EU ties are cut (even ECHR ones, which were not on the referendum) - mainly due to the Fairy Godmothers of Leave being unable to produce one scrap of the land of milk and honey, fully funded NHS now that we no longer give our money away to Europe and etc.

How long before some sweating tory tries to chivy up some war spirit in the face of short term hardship before he nips abroad for a short break at the expense of some CEO friend of his.

[illuminatus]

Re: eh?

I swear to God, if any one of them tries to conjure up the "Blitz Spirit" I will go nuclear.

And then, in reply, I will ask them how that Blitz Spirit would have worked in 1940 if the people of London had discovered that they were not being bombed by the Luftwaffe, but the RAF, because the central command couldn't work out a plan for where to drop their payloads, and had decided they had to do it somewhere to look decisive, even though half of the government didn't want to drop them at all, and the other half basically wanted to just cull the poor and have done with it.

[The JP]

Re: eh?

@Phil - I'm not sure you have much of clue how customs controls work, nor of the impact of the rules of origin, nor of the phyiscal limitations of Dover, nor the impact of even minor delays on the throughput from customs.

The problem with Brexit is that facts and evidence has long since been replaced by blind belief.

[Mark 85]

@The JP -- Re: eh?

The problem with Brexit is that facts and evidence has long since been replaced by blind belief.

The blind belief now appears on both sides of the aisle but each belief opposes the other. As this becomes more ingrained it's possible that something along the line of riots may occur. Especially if the actual Brexit doesn't fit in with the beliefs. There seems to be a slippery slope that's been trod upon here.

[John Smith 19]

"Especially if the actual Brexit doesn't fit in with the beliefs."

Which particular version of Brexit did you have in mind?

There's so many delusions to choose from.

[arctic_haze]

Re: "Especially if the actual Brexit doesn't fit in with the beliefs."

Let me become a typical voter for a moment:

"I believe in flat Earth, alien abductions and in government conspiracies to spray me with aluminum from planes and to induce autism through immunization shots. Should I support a soft or hard Brexit?"

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Especially if the actual Brexit doesn't fit in with the beliefs."

"I believe in flat Earth, alien abductions and in government conspiracies to spray me with aluminum from planes and to induce autism through immunization shots. Should I support a soft or hard Brexit?"

Oh soft, definitely. You clearly need to be protected from yourself. Remain would be even safer.

[John Smith 19]

"I believe in flat Earth, alien abductions..government conspiracies to spray me with aluminum

and to induce autism through immunization shots. "

"Should I support a soft or hard Brexit?""

Hard brexit of course.

You are a delusional f**kwit.

Hard brexit is the perfect fit for the rest of your delusional belief system.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

I, for one, stuck my head in the sand (or my own arse) and say, in a somwhat muffled voice: it's cozy in here, it's gonna be allright.

p.s. I heard recently that the UK isn't self-sustainable in terms of dairy products (FAKE NEWS?!). I'm sure French farmers (I fart in your general direction!) will be happy to supply what's needed. At WTO + customs rates, but hey, at least we can blame them for being BAD, BAD FRENCHIES...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Customs duties are levied by the importer. They are optional up to a WTO maximum.

The only way we would have to pay import duty on French milk is if the government decided "lets set import duties on foreign milk".

And are you really saying that French farmers will forgo profit to spite us and that there aren't any other countries in the world that will sell us milk?

[graeme leggett]

Re: eh?

You recall previous French intransigence and agricultural based strikes and blockades? British lamb in roadside BBQ, anyone?

In the past, you got the EU to admonish the French and issue fines. The French complain but comply eventually. Under WTO? "bouff" will be the response.

[shawnfromnh]

Re: eh?

Fuck the french. The US would make a fair deal with you for dairy and as much as you needed and at a fair price also.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"The US would make a fair deal with you for dairy and as much as you needed and at a fair price also."

That's not the problem. The problem with the US is all the hormones they put in the cows with no idea of the long term effects.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

You really haven't a clue how world trade and WTO rules work, do you? Why on earth should any of that happen?

No wonder people get scared of Leave when there's such blatant nonsensical remainer FUD around. Project FEAR is alive and well, it seems.

================================================================

Let's see...

UK border services don't know how many customs officers they have, or whether the number is increasing or decreasing, and claim it will take too much money to find out because of the need to search manual records in multiple dispersed locations.

They are working on a truck park for the vehicles delayed crossing in Dover due to customs checks entering the EU, but it won't be ready in time if there is no transition period, in part because the first attempt to do so failed badly enough that they had to start over.

The flow of goods is supposed to be speeded and facilitated by magic software that does not exist and has not been explained in detail. Given the history of implementing large high volume government computer systems, the claim that this could be developed and implemented in under a year seems... questionable. Let's be gentle and say that.

It's been suggested that goods be waved through without inspection to prevent delaying imports... but this leaves a gaping hole in immigration controls, controls that are one of the selling points for the brexit-lovers.

And then there a the lapses of certifications, inspections, and licensing when UK bodies are no longer part of the EU regulatory structure and many existing authorizations lapse at the border going both ways.

Also, a large number of transport drivers in the UK are from the EU, as are a huge proportion of agricultural workers. UK food production may well plummet, and drivers will be in short supply. Pilots and train crews will need to re-certify with appropriate regulatory bodies, and similar issues will probably arise with equipment inspections and certifications. It is not clear that regulatory bodies have sufficient time to test and re-certify the number of people and pieces of equipment involved in a period of less than a year.

Cargo being trans-shipped in continental ports to smaller shallow draft vessels may need to be inspected there, which would add further delays and costs.

Business licenses, insurance, etc. will also have to be reworked.

Anyone who thinks that Brexitday+1 will run smoothly or even sort of well has not thought about the complications and interactions involved.

The issue is not a 'project fear' but rather a 'project denial-of-reality'.

[Wensleydale Cheese]

Re: eh?

"Anyone who thinks that Brexitday+1 will run smoothly or even sort of well has not thought about the complications and interactions involved."

40 years of gradual integration to be replaced with, er, something else, in a much shorter timescale.

It's not going to be simple.

[Schultz]

"Anyone who thinks that Brexitday+1 will run smoothly ..."

Come on Brits, I count on your famously stiff upper lip. Queue up, be patient, and remember that your blood, toils, tears and sweat will eventually build a better world. (I withhold judgement whether that better world will appear within or outside of the EU :).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

And the 'something else' is going to be something thought up[*] by Boris 'fuck business' Johnson and Jacob 'fuck everything since the 18th century' Rees-Mogg. This is going to work so well.

[*] Please don't assume that my use of the term 'thought up' implies these people can actually think, or at least about anything other than their own aggrandisement.

[shawnfromnh]

Re: eh?

I don't know if anyone here has noticed but the EU has been grabbing more and more power from their nations to the Brussels officials and basically instead of making the EU the market powerhouse they were supposed to instead are running immigration and other crap that have nothing to do with business and in many cases are putting the native citizens out of work with non english speaking foreigners that work for a fraction of the wages because they are living on the public dole that the full wage earners and businesses are funding in taxes and driving budgets into the red. Hell that bitch in germany is pushing for as many immigrants as possible into the EU and her own government is about to give her the boot and your government is getting pointers from her which scares the shit out of me. Your government should not be taking orders from some fat german prime minister who seems to have no common sense when it comes to running a country.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"Anyone who thinks that Brexitday+1 will run smoothly or even sort of well has not thought about the complications and interactions involved."

And not forgetting the collapse of the IT industry when everyone's European Computer Driving License expires :-)

[John Smith 19]

The issue is not a 'project fear' but rather a 'project denial-of-reality'.

Yes, that's about the PoV that got this sh**storm started in the first place.

Remain was badly run but Leave basically lied, and went on lying. From who funded them to what the benefits are.

The banjos got well and truly played.

[DoctorPaul]

Re: eh?

Nice to see a post from someone who seems to know what they're talking about.

My stepson worked for years in import/export processing and assures us that Dover will gridlock - no ifs, no buts, it will be a total meltdown.

Think Operation Stack every single day, then double it :-(

[shawnfromnh]

Re: eh?

With all the people out of work I can imagine if business had to they would plan early and get truck drivers and such trained in advance and there are tons of people that would probably work in many of the fields you mentioned if the pay was right. I don't see gloom and doom in your countries future because thats what everyone said with trump changing the trade treaties in the US and we're actually doing better than ever unless you watch CNN "Clinton new network" then you'll see that we are about to collapse when in reality we are doing great and I'm making $3/hr more than before trump at a more enjoyable job also and I only see it getting better. So I would ignor what the gloomers are saying and believe that you have a great country and it at least not france with all their problems and things only getting worse.

[Dan 55]

Re: eh?

According to WTO rules, goods must be checked at ports of entry and tariffs must be applied. The UK at the moment just doesn't have the capacity to do that with the amount of goods that come from Europe. If we assume the UK does get the capacity, JIT supply chains would be screwed anyway.

[TheVogon]

Re: eh?

"According to WTO rules, goods must be checked at ports of entry and tariffs must be applied"

That doesnt mean you have to physically inspect every shipment. Just like now.

[Warm Braw]

Re: eh?

That doesnt mean you have to physically inspect every shipment

Even if we inspected no shipments, there would be inspections on the other side of the Channel - and for example, the French do not have (as far as I'm aware) inspection facilities for agricultural products at Calais, so those exports would have to be routed to other ports and join the queue with other non-EU shipments. There aren't two separate pools of drivers moving goods out of the country and into it - it doesn't really matter where the delays are, once drivers are stuck in a queue they (and their vehicles) aren't available for transport in the other direction.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

"once drivers are stuck in a queue they (and their vehicles) aren't available for transport in the other direction."

Of course the quarter of all transport workers who are migrants (as are 25% of transport support workers doing warehousing, etc) may be otherwise unavailable, possibly permanently.

With more than 2 million non-UK EU workers as of 2015, a number of sectors could be very severely impacted including transport, food and beverage service, construction, health care, and agriculture.

[JohnMurray]

Re: eh?

Has anyone though of how the trucks stacked waiting are going to be fed/fuelled/ and how the drivers hygiene needs are going to be met?

It's going to be one smelly motorway, quite soon...

[TheVogon]

Re: eh?

"a number of sectors could be very severely impacted including transport, food and beverage service, construction, health care, and agriculture."

You mean they will have to pay market wages for a change to attract employees? Shocking!

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: eh?

once drivers are stuck in a queue they (and their vehicles) aren't available for transport in the other direction

And, almost as important, quite a bit of what we export is quite perishable. Which won't be improved by sitting in a lorry queue for two days at 30C..

[Alan Brown]

Re: eh?

" If we assume the UK does get the capacity, JIT supply chains would be screwed anyway."

We should assume that anything relying on JIT manufactiring is going to pack up and leave - and it will take any local suppliers with it, or find new ones on the mainland.

That's not Project Fear, that's pragmatic multinational business decision making - and it's already been going on for some time.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"We should assume that anything relying on JIT manufactiring is going to pack up and leave - and it will take any local suppliers with it, or find new ones on the mainland."

JIT manufacturing doesn't need to leave the UK just because the time scales may change. They just factor in the time it takes to get stuff from one place to another. To some extent, it may increase costs since in effect, capital will be tied up for longer as goods in transit. But so long as the goods get to the destination "Just In Time", why does matter if said goods took 2 hours or 2 days to get there?

There may be impacts on fresh goods and some others, probably on many JIT systems initially, but that's what forward planning is about. And all of the this is assuming a worst case, hard "no deal" Brexit, something neither the UK nor the EU wants. The UK may be prepared to walk away from the table, but that doesn't mean they will have to if a good enough deal is reached.

[Roland6]

Re: eh?

According to WTO rules, goods must be checked at ports of entry and tariffs must be applied. The UK at the moment just doesn't have the capacity to do that with the amount of goods that come from Europe.

Post-Brexit ALL UK trade - yes that is both EU and non-EU trade will be subject to WTO rules - something being missed by many, including I suspect the leading Brexiteers in the Conservative party...

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"Post-no deal-Brexit if it happens ALL UK trade - yes that is both EU and non-EU trade will be subject to WTO rules - something being missed by many, including I suspect the leading Brexiteers in the Conservative party..."

FTFY - The whole point of the negotiations is to avoid a "no deal" Brexit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

The whole point of the negotiations is to avoid a "no deal" Brexit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Funny, it looks more like the point of negotiations from the UK side is to keep repeating an impossible wish list in hopes that the other side will have a moment of collective insanity and agree, while completely ignoring the realities being pointed out by the EU.

[John Smith 19]

FTFY - The whole point of the negotiations is to avoid a "no deal" Brexit

But..

<gollum>

We wants it

We needs it

We must have hard Brexit (whatever that actually means).

</gollum>

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: eh?

including I suspect the leading Brexiteers in the Conservative party

Oh I dunno - there must be a reason why Reece-Mogg's finance company has shifted a lot of their money to European stocks..

Can you spell "hypocrite"? I can..

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: eh?

Don't be silly.

JIT never worked when there was any sort of distance between factories / suppliers and customers.

The truth is that newer models will take in to account the risk introduced by the logistics of shipping. And then recommend how many days of supplies to keep on hand.

Big Data at work. ;-)

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"JIT never worked when there was any sort of distance between factories / suppliers and customers."

JIT isn't about distance, it's about time, hence the expansion of JIT into Just In Time. It's doesn't matter where the stuff comes from so long as it gets from source to destination "Just In Time". The major selling point of JIT is that goods are not stockpiled, costing money instead of earning money, sitting in a warehouse.

Back when Ferrybridge power station was still burning coal, they switched a load of coal deliveries back to the canal. They didn't care that the coal took a day instead of an hour or two to get from Immingham docks, it still got there when it was needed. (yes, not a great example, since they also had a mountain of stock-piled coal too.)

[Message From A Self-Destructing Turnip]

Re: eh?

'The truth is that newer models will take in to account the risk introduced by the logistics of shipping. And then recommend how many days of supplies to keep on hand.'

Yeah, we can just pile the additional stock under a tarpaulin in the staff car park, and the production staff can walk to work. Leave it to the bean counters to work out how to pay for it all.

Big reality at work. ;-)

[J.G.Harston]

Re: eh?

WTO does *NOT* insist that tarrifs must be applied. The only insist that if we ***CHOOSE*** to apply tariffs that they be no higher than 5%. Zero is no higher than 5. Zero is fully allowable and encouraged by WTO rules. Seeing as some EU tariffs are currently 60%+ WTO rules would actually mean us being forced to ****REDUCE**** tariffs.

[Roland6]

Re: eh?

>Zero is fully allowable and encouraged by WTO rules. Seeing as some EU tariffs are currently 60%+ WTO rules would actually mean us being forced to ****REDUCE**** tariffs.

Tariffs for intra-EU trade are zero. So for those products that attract a 60%+ tariff, we have to ask two questions, firstly what is the EU/Single Market's level of self-sufficiency and secondly to what level the producer is subsidising their product ie. are they dumping it on the world market.

So rather than simply point and shout about how terrible some unspecified tariff is, I suggest you do a little digging first. I'm sure you wouldn't object to their being a 60%+ tariff on foreign workers if it meant employing you was cheaper than employing them. Remember one of the reasons British Leyland survived for so long was because it was cheaper for the government to keep its workers in jobs and thus moving money around the system than it was to close it down...

[Flocke Kroes]

Re: Project FEAR

There is genuine reason for fear. Pretend there are thousands of possible good Brexit deals. I am afraid that the UK government are too clueless to negotiate any of them.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

The £/USD exchange rate drops to £1 == $0.50 (or worse)

Then people won't ship us Oil because we can't pay for it.

This is the sort of scenario Amazon are working on.

All I can say is,

Amazon, go HOME but pay your TAXES First. We can exist without you. You are NOT wanted.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@AC ... Re: eh?

Seriously?

Look the worse case would be 1 GBP to 1 USD.

You will get oil because you can pay for it. You also have Oil production off your coasts.

So I suggest you get back to reality and switch to decaf.

I think you need to look at the US during the Carter administration. That's your worst case.

If the US could survive... so too will the UK.

[JohnMurray]

Re: @AC ... eh?

Because we have a reduced refinery capacity now....we import over 10 million tonnes of oil products into the UK each year, and it's increasing.

[Mooseman]

Re: @AC ... eh?

"Look the worse case would be 1 GBP to 1 USD.

You will get oil because you can pay for it. You also have Oil production off your coasts.

So I suggest you get back to reality and switch to decaf.

I think you need to look at the US during the Carter administration. That's your worst case.

If the US could survive... so too will the UK."

We get oil because we can pay for it but at higher cost. We have dwindling oil off our coast, the dividend from the 1970s bonanza was squandered by successive UK governments ( look at Norway for a better idea) The US under Carter is comparable how exactly? The US survived because it has massive resources, propped up its steel and mining industries and imposed trade tarrifs on everything imported.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @AC ... eh?

"The US survived because it has massive resources, propped up its steel and mining industries and imposed trade tarrifs on everything imported"

More because they used their industrially generated wealth and banking system profits to buy up much of the wealth producing enterprises around the world... and then by lending money to anyone who still had enough wealth to make it profitable.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@Mooseman Re: @AC ... eh?

Look at the inflation and the oil and gas shortage. Yes the US had resources but relied on imports because it was cheaper to get the import than it was to drill at home.

The point is that you will have bumps and inflation.

You will have civil unrest because people want free things even though you can't afford to continue to provide them.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: @AC ... eh?

You will get oil because you can pay for it. You also have Oil production off your coasts.

Yes - you can pay for it. But it's going to cost a whole lot more. Which means fuel prices will go up - and the elderly and vulnerable who currently have a struggle to heat their houses come winter will be worse off.

As to oil production off the coast - once Scotland leaves the UK they won't be off *our* coast..

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @AC ... eh?

As to oil production off the coast - once Scotland leaves the UK they won't be off *our* coast.

Don't be so sure. Sea boundaries are drawn perpendicular to the coast, and if you take the current England/Scotland border a surprising amount of the N. Sea oil/gas fields are in English waters.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: @AC ... eh?

"Don't be so sure. Sea boundaries are drawn perpendicular to the coast, and if you take the current England/Scotland border a surprising amount of the N. Sea oil/gas fields are in English waters."

FWIW, there's no specific, accepted, way of drawing the border out to see. Your way is one. Another is to take the general direction of the border between the two countries and extend that out to sea. Which, coincidently, gives England an even bigger share of North Sea oil :-)

[Mooseman]

Re: eh?

"Amazon, go HOME but pay your TAXES First. We can exist without you. You are NOT wanted"

Yeah, Amazon and all you companies that set up here with generous tax break incentives from the government, go home because the popular press has realised you're not paying full whack on taxes. Go home and throw thousands of workers on the scrap heap. Go home and set up a lucrative business in other countries, probably in Europe from where you can sell us the stuff we want from you at higher rates than before.

Go home but please for the love of god don't tell anyone how much money a very few, very rich people have squirrelled away in offshore accounts (duke of Westminster anyone?) so we can keep bleating on about you rather than looking at the rotten tax avoidance system.

Idiot.

[enormous c word]

Re: eh?

True - Amazon ship vast amounts of individual items all over the world - they will be hit (and they wont like it) but as you say - they avoid TAXes and dont contribute - so are really hurting the UK economy as they have an unfair competitive advantage with High Street retailers (or any organisation that pays its fair share).

[shawnfromnh]

Re: eh?

You are absolutely right. Amazon "Bezos" is just a front for the CIA and the globalist that hate countries taking their own sovereignty back and again the NWO. You have the right idea by not listening to amazon, twitter, facebook, or google because they all want everyone under one government were they pay the leaders off to make the rules work for them and their associates.

[Gio Ciampa]

Re: eh?

"Amazon, go HOME but pay your TAXES First. We can exist without you. You are NOT wanted."

That's the real reason for claiming there'll be civil unrest... they're trying to avoid the UK being able to (finally) put a stop to their Triple-Irish-Dutch-IsleOfMan-Sandwich (or whatever their tax scam is called these days)

[Loud Speaker]

Re: eh?

Anyone who has worked in distribution (See Amazon) is well placed to observe how the UK distribution industry is so delicately balanced that more than one banana skin on the M25 in the same quarter could trigger mass starvation if it is the wrong kind of banana.

[martinusher]

Re: eh?

>Why on earth should any of that happen?

I don't expect food and fuel to get scarce but they might get rather more expensive (which for many people is effectively the same thing).

The reason why this might happen is that the supply lines will get constricted as Customs get re-established but without the proper infrastructure to implement those Customs. The government could help out here by declaring the UK a free-trade (customs-free) zone but there would still be a bit of a bottleneck for goods leaving the country.

[John Smith 19]

"I don't expect food and fuel to get scarce but they might get rather more expensive ("

To folks like Rees Mogg this is something of a bonus.

How dare the plebs clutter up roads with their inferior working class vehicles.

BTW JRM is also a fan of the zero hours contract.

A well spoken ba***rd is still a ba***rd

Rees-Mogg may not reach match the legal definition of owe, but his behavior certainly does.

[shawnfromnh]

Re: eh?

Matters where you send them when shipping. To the US then they are inspected when they reach the US. If its the EU and they give you a hard time then fuck them and tell them to kiss your ass you can do better without the bullshit. You guys just need a real man in office that isn't a pussy and you can get your way and like Trump they will line up to kiss your asses instead when your leader tells them to fuck themselves we have other options.

[Casca]

Re: eh?

Ah, an american. How nice. No go and stay on your side och the Atlantic. We have enough with orange monkey tweeting.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

There's no doubt that trade is completely possible under WTO rules (no-one economically literate seems to think we'll do as well as we do under the current rules, but we would kot starve).

But that's not the problem: the problem is the transition from the current system to the new one which, in the case of a no-deal brexit, will be abrupt and largely unprepared for. That kind of chaos is moderately likely to be pretty bad:

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Actually anyone remotely economically literate thinks that with the right policies (and that isn't a given) Britain would do considerably better out of the EU.

It is only a significantly funded fear campaign that alleges any different.

[jmch]

Re: eh?

"You really haven't a clue how world trade and WTO rules work, do you? Why on earth should any of that happen?"

World trade under WTO rules is the bare minimum framework. It means trade can happen but none of it is free of customs controls, tariffs etc. UK can of course waive the right to slap import duties on essentials such as food and fuel, at least in the beginning but I doubt it could afford to do so long-term. Almost certainly every other country that the UK wants to export to with which it will deal by WTO rules will slap import tariffs on them, not to mention goods being held up for customs inspections and added paperwork.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

World trade under WTO rules is the bare minimum framework. It means trade can happen but none of it is free of customs controls, tariffs etc.

You need to do some reading. It may surprise you to leard that the World Trade Organization's remit is to promote world trade, and minimize tariff barriers, despite the Project Fear FUD that it is a bogeyman designed to make trade difficult. The default vaues are not intended to be punitive, but to allow trade while avoiding protectionism, and they are 0% on many items. Certainly they may not be as flexible as free trade, but if one of your trading partners refuses to negotiate a mutually-beneficial free trade agreement the WTO rules will allow reasonably painless trade to continue during negotiations.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Buit free trade works better than unfree trade, and Britain can be a lot freer out of the EU. Britain would in fact be mad to "slap import duties on food and fuel" - why would it want to do so. You do realize do you not that such duties are paid by the consumers in the importing country. So why tax your consumers even more ? That other countries put tariffs on your exports isn't a reason to follow suit.

So other countries will, in your opinion, slap on tariffs and impose none tariff barriers. So you believe in giving way to threats ? And there are a number of countries that would love to be able to export to and import from Britain in a tariff free environment.

It just beggars belief how ignorant of economics most remainers are, unless you understand that at least some of them aren't but they do believe that the fear campaign must go on until they can get a referendum that they win - THEN that's it, no more referendums.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"So why tax your consumers even more ?"

Because that's what government does? It's the "go to" solution whenever there's a perceived problem (just so long as they can say they reduced income tax or increased the tax free allowance)

[Fonant]

Re: eh?

The UK currently belongs to the WTO as an EU member state. As such quotas are shared between the UK and other EU states.

When we leave the EU we will need to:

1) Join the WTO as the UK, not as an EU member state.

2) Work out / negotiate the re-allocation of quotas we used to benefit from as being part of the EU.

The first one is relatively easy, the second a complete nightmare. Not least because countries exporting to the EU can change which EU member state they send goods to over time without any problems with quotas. When the UK is separate, switching delivery from an EU state to the UK will require separate quota calculations.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

God damnit, the WTO does not mandate quotas. You just made that up ! Britain can allow in as much of anything that it chooses to. Why the F*** do you insist that Britain must cripple itself by imposing tariffs, quotas and other restrictive practices ?

Other countries can impose quotas and restrictions on their imports under some circumstances under the WTO, but more fool them.

[TVU]

Re: eh?

"No wonder people get scared of Leave when there's such blatant nonsensical remainer FUD around. Project FEAR is alive and well, it seems"

The blatant falsehoods and denials are only coming from one side - Leave. The bosses of Airbus, Nissan, BMW, Honda, etc. have made it crystal clear that they want frictionless trade, i.e. soft Brexit, and anything more than that, such a hard Brexit or crash out, means that they will be relocating to within the EU and regional governments in France and Belgium will welcome those jobs and new factories with open arms.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Airbus, Nissan, BMW, Honda, etc.

Ah "etc.", well, who does that cover? Wetherspoon, Next, Reebok, JCB, Dyson, Dixons, etc? No, they all think Leave is better.

relocating to within the EU and regional governments in France and Belgium will welcome those jobs and new factories with open arms.

I suspect it will be their wallets they'll have to open, not their arms.

The UK makes 1.5m cars per year, and buys 1.3m new cars. Those manufacturers may move production around to suit the target markets (old and new), but they won't pull out. There's plenty of scope for trade to continue, unless the EU ramps up its protectionsim even more.

[strum]

Re: eh?

>1/ Hard Brexit: Civil unrest as food and gas become scarce

>You really haven't a clue how world trade and WTO rules work, do you? Why on earth should any of that happen?

You really haven't a clue how trade works, do you? Given a 'No deal' exit, there would no trading terms available - for anything. No mechanism for resolving disputes, no customs-clearing offices, no nothing.

The WTO isn't going to deliver any of that - not for months, maybe years (and it will be our self-destructive government which has to do that work).

No society is further than three meals away from revolution. Assuming that everything will just work itself out is one of the most dangerous responses possible.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Not like the government is stock piling food or anything.

Ration books. Blitz spirit. That’s what they voted for.

[701arvn]

Re: eh?

http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128

LOL

Surely those in parliament calling for a no deal and reverting to WTO tariffs couldn't be hedging in the hope of making a killing? Surely they must know the truth as even the leave campaign say that's nonsense.

We couldn't be that stupid could we?

[NerryTutkins]

Re: eh?

Since the 'leave' vote was skewed towards the over 60s, it's questionable what level of civil unrest they'll be able to cause. Perhaps tutting even more loudly than normal when someone speaking a foreign language or who looks a bit dark gets on the bus?

[Teiwaz]

Re: eh?

Since the 'leave' vote was skewed towards the over 60s

Amusing, but the over 60's grew up in that environment (I assume, I'm from N.I, even the Vietnamese boat people cleared out when settled there ( could well have gone back to Asia were people were sane) - not much language, but you could sit on the bus and try to guess who was Catholic and who was Protestant from dress and manner).

[illuminatus]

Re: eh?

Though of course those over 75, who actually had memories of the War, or had even fought tin it, were rather less inclined to vote Leave, apparently, from psephological analyses I've seen. I basically seems that here were age in the age-old conundrum. A generation effectively rebelling against what heir parents did and believed. This is simply teenage rebellion deferred.

[Wellyboot]

Re: eh?

Over 60s - They'll be the one with pop's old war trophies in the attic & who know how to make lots of interesting things without looking it up on the internet first to tip off plod.

Don't dismiss the devious old buggers ability to be downright awkward and get a favourable press.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@Wellyboot Re: eh?

Its the over 60s that understand why there's a need to get out of the EU.

They don't just google to find some revisionist's version of history, but remember it because they lived it.

Sure they can be crafty because they grew up not having the latest gadget and the ability to point and click and get a new gadget in 2 days delivered to their front doorstep.

Sorry to the younger crowd, but when you can't cover the checks you write, you need to know when to say when and work towards a better tomorrow.

The truth is that Amazon wants the UK / EU trade deal done before a UK / US deal. Don't believe the FUD. And force Amazon to be honest and pay their fair shareof taxes in every country they do business.

[Tom Paine]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

Isn't it interesting how many of the Leave comments on this thread are written in something that is almost, but not quite, perfect colloquial English?

No, I'm not telling you what you got wrong. But you gave yourself away.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

No, I'm not telling you what you got wrong. But you gave yourself away.

Well, that's what we want you to think, anyway.

[Wellyboot]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

@Tom Paine

Pointing out that the over 60's shouldn't be underestimated isn't a Leave comment, just personal observation of an age group with a lot of life experience. The last century has produced the over 90's with vivid memories of WW2 events and UK under 20's with no idea (luckily) of what a serious national emergency feels like (or how to use Dewey Decimal for that matter).

>>We don't say "pop" in British English usage.<< I (and many others) do and I am British English by birth - see colloquial below.

>>almost, but not quite, perfect colloquial English?<< 'Colloquial -> (of language) used in ordinary or familiar conversation; not formal or literary.' - Not formal implies you can't have perfect colloquial English so there's nothing to get wrong - t'is but the vernacular I write & speak.

>>But you gave yourself away<< as what? Please tell.

I was taught that casting aspersions is proof that the proponent has no intellectual, ethical or factual basis on which to form a compelling case and has therefore failed in the argument that they wished to further.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

but when you can't cover the checks you write

You mean, like the UK did in the 1950s? I believe that's exactly what they did - going cap in hand to the IMF on the basis that the Yanks had pulled the rug from under them and the UK couldn't afford to pay?

Something which lead to the realisation that the UK needed closer links to Europe. After all, even Maggie wanted to join the EU - she just wanted it on *her* terms. Which she got. Which we've thrown away since any attempt to rejoin post-Brexit assuredly won't have the same terms.

Welcome back to the 1950s - where our fiscal and trade policy will be dependent on an increasingly isolationist US.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

After all, even Maggie wanted to join the EU - she just wanted it on *her* terms.

No, she didnt. She wanted to remain in the EEC, but she was gone before Major signed us up to the EU.

[Roland6]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

>After all, even Maggie wanted to join the EU - she just wanted it on *her* terms.

Err no, she didn't want to join the EU, she did, however, want the Single Market and to protect British/UK interests by having a seat at the policymaking table, which meant having to join the EU; which as you noted was on her terms. I'm not aware of Major (once PM) making any significant contribution to the relevant treaties other than signing them...

[strum]

Re: @Wellyboot eh?

>They don't just google to find some revisionist's version of history, but remember it because they lived it.

Yes - I remember the basket case that was the UK in the 70s. I remember the first referendum (I voted 'No'). I remember how our pols fought tooth and nail to broaden the EU's vision, to include the service we had come to rely on. I remember every time some grandstanding pol blamed the EU for his own party's failings. I remember how the ECHR & ECJ gave us rights and protections our own parliament and courts wouldn't.

And, yes, I will remember the treachery of those who lied their way into a narrow 'Leave' vote (which did not contain any comments on CU, SM, EEA or EFTA).

Yes. We remember.

[John Smith 19]

I remember every time some grandstanding pol blamed the EU for his own party's failings.

And you can bet will continue to do so.

The EU's main use to the UK political class was someone to blame for them having to do what was the right thing anyway, but they didn't have the spine to do themselves.

[Tom Paine]

Re: eh?

"Pop's old war trophies", you say? We don't say "pop" in British English usage.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

"Pop's old war trophies", you say? We don't say "pop" in British English usage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Odd, that's the term we used to refer to my (British born) mother's British father, which was consistent among my aunts and uncles (all older, born and raised, initially, in England).

Of course, British English is far more fragmented and ideosyncratic on a geographical (and probably class) basis than most languages, so 'British English' in your terms may refer to the linguistic habits of a tiny part of the population.

I understand that you can go 150 km in England and find a very different different dialect from your starting point. That's always seemed a bit peculiar to me - I can fly 3,000 km and the biggest obvious difference is a change in the relative frequency of terms used to refer to carbonated soft drinks.... and whether a 'regular' coffee is a size, or a specific ratio of cream and sugar.

[John Smith 19]

"That's always seemed a bit peculiar to me "

US homogenized culture perhaps?

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: eh?

"I understand that you can go 150 km in England and find a very different different dialect from your starting point. "

Hah! Get into the mining areas and you can go a mile down the road to the next pit village and struggle to understand the dialect.

(not so much now, thanks to TV, pit closures and all the older miners dying off though!)

[sclg]

Re: eh?

As a 67 year old with a functioning brain, I'd just like to add that not ALL over-60 voted leave!

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@scig Re: eh?

I bet you lived your live like the 'Young Ones' ;-)

[Robin]

Re: eh?

"As a 67 year old with a functioning brain, I'd just like to add that not ALL over-60 voted leave!"

Here... have your 67th thumbs up :-)

[strum]

Re: eh?

Me too. (on all counts)

[Peter Danckwerts]

Re: eh?

The only people who might riot are the younger Remainers who object to Brexit – oh, but they're the ones who couldn't even get up the energy to vote. Peace will reign.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

You're thinking of the over 80s. I'm 64 and I don't tut, I curse. Plus I speak two foreign languages and I don't use buses.

Personally I'm quite peaceful, but there are plenty of blokes my age you really wouldn't want to tangle with.

And by the way, older people didn't vote leave just out of spite. Most of them have grandchildren whose futures they care about, and they want the grandchildren to live in the free, self-determining, self-respecting country Britain used to be. Surprisingly enough, there was life before the 'eu' (or ec, eec, common market - in reverse order). We over 60s have watched the carefully orchestrated progress from trading arrangement (which is good) to burgeoning superstate on the quiet (which is bad). The name changes were surreptitious and sneaky. Now a generation of children have been born into the 'eu' and have been brainwashed into thinking it has a right to supercede their own elected government. All exactly according to the plan, even back in the days of the 'common market', when our lying Prime Minister assured us frequently that this situation would never arise. (He's on record far later saying that sovereignty was "always going to be compromised, that was obvious" - despite repeatedly assuring the public at the time that such was not the case).

[TheMeerkat]

Re: eh?

Have not we already had promises of economic collapse next day after the referendum if the results were “wrong”? The promises that never realised?

[werdsmith]

Re: eh?

No, there were no such promises, this is bullshit that people have made up to try and make a point. There was a bit of a knock on the pound vs Euro though.

Most people didn't understand that he result of the vote would not be enacted for years (after a general election it is instant after all).

But any negative consequences of brexit will be manifested in the years following the actual exit date and the new deal.

[strum]

Re: eh?

>Have not we already had promises of economic collapse next day after the referendum if the results were “wrong”?

No. Next lie, please.

[codejunky]

Re: eh?

@ strum

"No. Next lie, please."

Actually it is you who is wrong. Apparently we were gonna have a recession the day after the result if we brexit. Then it was changed to 'we didnt submit article 50 as expected', which we still didnt have recession after doing. Now its a nebulous after brexit kinda thing. Aka keep predicting until the business cycle reaches a recession and then claim victory.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Spot on with these options.

I just wish they'd sort it out as I've yet to see any plan apart from Conservative in-fighting and lots of the Brexit supporting MPs (Jacob Rees Mogg, Boris Johnson) criticising but not coming up with an alternative plan (or providing it when they had the chance as it's their party and their job).

It's gone beyond a piss up in a brewery now. Can we just vote the current government out in a vote of no confidence?

[DuncanLarge]

Re: eh?

"1/ Hard Brexit: Civil unrest as food and gas become scarce"

Yeah, I'm sure. Food might be a bit more expensive. Most of the gas comes from russia anyway and brexit wont affect that. We can also switch to wood burning stoves .

"2/ Soft Brexit: Civil unrest, as it's not want Brexiters wanted, and didn't understand our reliance on EU trace"

We are British. Our civil unrest needs a lot of motivation to get to what you are imagining. We will mostly duke it out amongst ourselves by calling into LBC and Talk Radio. Those with good old typewriters will send letters that have more weight than a inkjet printed one. God help the recipients if someone sends a letter handwritten in pen!

"3/ No Deal: See 1/"

See comments for 1

"4/ Second Referendum, See 2/"

See comments for 2 but add: The result of the 2nd referendum will reflect the state of mind of everyone who is fed up of the crap management of brexit. If the result is to stay or leave it will be a large margin and not be generally politically motivated even though the winning side will think so.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: eh?

We can also switch to wood burning stoves

Except for two little annoying facts - a) we don't have enough wood to do that unless you start cutting down the remaining forests and b) that would cause a horrendous pollution problem (especially in conurbations).

Other than that a perfect plan! I suppose we could always import wood from the EU..

[enormous c word]

Re: eh?

Food and gas become scarce? What about the plague of locusts, followed by the Zombie apocalypse. Perhaps you're concerned that the EU will limit the air that we breathe so we have to become self-sufficient there too.

Honestly, hardline Remoaners will make up any garbage to make a point (and more worryingly - are actually desperate for the worst to happen just so they can be proven right). We were promised immediate economic collapse in the event of a vote to leave by 'well-respected' academic financial analysts. What happened? Almost nothing. Will we get a free-trade-deal that benefits the UK to the detriment of the EU member states? I seriously doubt it. Will your Zombie Apocalypse happen shortly after that? Umm! - nope!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Food and gas become scarce? What about the plague of locusts, followed by the Zombie apocalypse. Perhaps you're concerned that the EU will limit the air that we breathe so we have to become self-sufficient there too.

===================================================================

Umm... you do know you are on an island, right?

One that is not self-sufficient in most resources?

There is a reason that the trans-Atlantic convoys were England's jugular in the second world war. The war could not be won in the North Atlantic - but it was nearly lost there.

[TheVogon]

Re: eh?

The only civil unrest will be if the celebration parties get out of hand. This is exactly what the majority of voters voted for.

[diodesign]

Re: Vogon

"This is exactly what the majority of voters voted for."

17.5m v 16m is not exactly a majority anyone should be celebrating. I'm thinking of the other C word.

Compromising.

C.

[TheVogon]

Re: Vogon

"17.5m v 16m is not exactly a majority anyone should be celebrating"

Just about everyone I know did.

[diodesign]

Re: Vogon

"Just about everyone I know did."

Just about everyone I know didn't - or if they did, are now not sure what they voted for.

One pro-Brexit British chap I bumped into, in Texas of all places, didn't even know the referendum was non-binding and advisory.

(Speaking personally)

C.

[Mark 85]

Re: Vogon

One pro-Brexit British chap I bumped into, in Texas of all places, didn't even know the referendum was non-binding and advisory.

Given all the fire and brimstone surrounding this, any chance that government will just say "nope.. not gonna' do it"? Politicians like to be re-elected and hate admitting they were wrong.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Vogon

"Politicians like to be re-elected and hate admitting they were wrong."

Hence the confusion at the highest levels WRT to Brexit. How do you take the UK out of the EU on the basis of a slim majority and not alienate the almost half of the voters who didn't want to leave? Especially when both leave and remain voters are from all parts of the political spectrum.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@John Brown ... Re: Vogon

Doesn't matter. You held an election and the majority of the UK want to leave the EU.

Kinda reminds me of the Colonies across the pond who did the same thing over 200 years ago (242 to be closer to the actual number of years.) The phrase 'taxation without representation' comes to mind, only I think today it would be having a country ... the UK , taking orders from people who live in another country.

Will there be political chaos? Sure. You Brits have just as bad of a swamp and politicians as we Yanks do.

But there is hope that you will survive...

[Mooseman]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

"Doesn't matter. You held an election and the majority of the UK want to leave the EU."

No, we didn't have an election. we have a referendum which is basically an opinion poll. the question on the polling paper was simple - do you think Britain should be part of the European union? that was it. no, "how the hell are you going to solve the NI border issue?" no "ok how will we manage with no trade deals?" no "what will we do when the pound plummets?"

this is nothing like the American revolution, if you think it is you need to read your own history a but better

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

No, we didn't have an election. we have a referendum which is basically an opinion poll.

We did have an election, which despite the most monumentally stupid manifesto plans Theresa May still managed (just) to win. In fact, the pro-Brext parties gained vote share, and the pro-Leave ones lost it.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

In fact, the pro-Brext parties gained vote share, and the pro-Leave ones lost it.

Oops. I mean "Pro-Remain ones lost it", of course, sorry.

[Steve Gill]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

Only because Labour was redefined as pro-Leave because of Corbyn's personal views after months of courting the pro-Remain voters - the majority of Labour members and activists were (and still are) pro-Remain.

[codejunky]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

@ Steve Gill

"Only because Labour was redefined as pro-Leave because of Corbyn's personal views after months of courting the pro-Remain voters - the majority of Labour members and activists were (and still are) pro-Remain."

Who is that guy leading labour again? Oh yeah you said it Corbyn. And he is for leave, his policies are for leave so it doesnt matter what the members and activists want if they are backing the pro-leave party.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

"No, we didn't have an election. we have a referendum which is basically an opinion poll."

Actually, I didn't say that, you are mis-quoting.

"We did have an election, which despite the most monumentally stupid manifesto plans Theresa May still managed (just) to win. In fact, the pro-Brext parties gained vote share, and the pro-Leave ones lost it."

Theresa May didn't "win" the election, it was almost a hung Parliament, at best taking a risk with a minority government, but she found the mythical money tree she said didn't exist and bought off the DUP to retain a majority.

[&rew]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

Mr Gumby,

I take it then, that you would be perfectly happy for, say, California or Texas to secede from the UNION, if they disagreed with the policies set in Washington? Even though they have their own elected representatives having their voices heard in government, and have a hand in drafting all the laws that govern all the citizens of the UNION? Can you imagine the chaos of such a move?

Thank you for your consideration.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

I take it then, that you would be perfectly happy for, say, California or Texas to secede from the UNION, if they disagreed with the policies set in Washington?

Google "Yes, California" to see how that Calexit campaign is going...

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

the UK , taking orders from people who live in another country

We've just replaced a (relatively) sane overlord (Europe) with an insane orange cheeto one..

[strum]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

> You held an election and the majority of the UK want to leave the EU.

FFS! It wasn't an election!

[codejunky]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

@ strum

"FFS! It wasn't an election!"

There was an election. After the referendum. May pushed it forward and people voted for the parties of leave not remain.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

"May pushed it forward and people voted for the parties of leave not remain."

Apart from UKIP, most political parties were split over leave/remain, certainly the Tories and Labour, so which were the "leave" parties?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

Apart from UKIP, most political parties were split over leave/remain, certainly the Tories and Labour, so which were the "leave" parties?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given that it took two years of negotiating, maneuvering, backstabbing, lying, and manipulating for the Tories to prove that they still can't agree on leave/remain/crash, I'm pretty sure party lines are not a good indicator of Brexit position... as reinforced by similar internal arguments among Labour party members, most of whose MPs supported remain.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

so which were the "leave" parties?

The parties with "support Brexit" in their election manifestos? So not the SNP & LibDems (and Plaid Cymru?), but that's about it.

[Steve Gill]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

As nobody reads election manifestos and none of the parties other than UKIP pushed leaving as a policy we're still in grey area

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

"As nobody reads election manifestos "

That's your excuse for not knowing who supported leave and who supported remain? Seriously?

[Roland6]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

>There was an election. After the referendum. May pushed it forward and people voted for the parties of leave not remain.

Given the choice on offer, I disagree; remember the party of Leave was UKIP...

The Conservative policy u-turn was more about opportunism and hanging on to power; everyone knew the Conservatives were (and still are) internally divided, as were (and are) Labour. The LibDems for various reasons arising from the Coalition weren't really contenders.

So I suggest people actually voted for some form of compromise around the status quo...

[codejunky]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

@ Roland6

"Given the choice on offer, I disagree; remember the party of Leave was UKIP..."

That doesnt work does it. UKIP were the party of getting the referendum, it was done, they had won. Tory was the party of leave, Labour under Corbyn is the party of leave and the only real option for remain was libs who unequivocally stated they would ignore the brexit referendum.

Compare that to the previous election where UKIP was the party of leave, lib/lab were remain and tory offered a referendum. Yet again it was the non-remain parties who won.

"The Conservative policy u-turn was more about opportunism and hanging on to power"

I doubt many people would argue. So what? The reason they did so was because there was enough support for it at the electorate level that it mattered! Enough of the country wanted a choice.

"So I suggest people actually voted for some form of compromise around the status quo..."

Everyone seems to have their own interpretation of how to lie. A referendum in or out. We voted out. Out is the answer. It is as simple as out is the result. Out won. Out is the democratically selected option. Anything else is a sore loser.

If next election you want the country to apply for EU membership then vote for a party that offers it. But to 'misunderstand' the referendum and elections is to lie. Even labour offered referendum over the EU to cling to power, and of course they lied.

[Roland6]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

@codejunky

>That doesnt work does it.

Neither does your stance! Because post-referendum UKIP were the only party who were unequivocal on Leave.

>UKIP were the party of getting the referendum, it was done, they had won.

Yes, UKIP did a fine job of getting the referendum and achieving its primary objective of leaving a steaming mess of Westminster's own creation for Westminster to sort out - a state of affairs I'm not unhappy about...

However, post-referendum UKIP did define themselves as the only Brexit can-do party. I suggest if you wanted a Ronseal style of Brexit then your only option was to vote UKIP.

The Conservatives, as you in your many posts have stated, were "part-of-the-establishment" (that supported the UK in the EU) and so their true commitment to Leave was and still is, open to question. With many (including yourself) expecting them to totally fudge it and remain in the EU.

The Labour party, whilst finally committing to Leave, had to very obviously be dragged to that position with obvious discontent. As Labour aren't in power, we don't don't know how committed the party really is the Leave and the true extent to which Corbyn really believes in Leave, particularly given how many of his staunch Socialist values he has dropped as he has rolled over and supported the Conservatives.

From the analysis done at the time, to suggest that everyone who voted for Conservatives/Labour were pro-Leave is a total misrepresentation of reality. However, it does seem that those who had previously voted UKIP, reverted to type and voted for Conservative/Labour.

Which brings us back to the question - why did people vote Conservative/Labour with their questionable newly found commitment to Leave and not UKIP, and just what sort of Brexit were they expecting these parties to deliver...

[codejunky]

Re: @John Brown ... Vogon

@ Roland6

"Neither does your stance! Because post-referendum UKIP were the only party who were unequivocal on Leave."

And the tories. They have a remainer in charge and still the direction is brexit. And Labour who would not be able to turn the UK into a socialist paradise like Venezuela while in the EU. In fact the only party offering to remain/scrap the referendum was the libs (and possibly some minor parties).

"However, post-referendum UKIP did define themselves as the only Brexit can-do party"

Farages UKIP were the only ones with a plan to leave. That says more about the awful stitch up rigged vote that even after direct threats against the population still returned a definitive vote of leave. The tories are in charge it is their problem for trying to be the knock off UKIP.

"and so their true commitment to Leave was and still is, open to question."

So? This is a very weak argument for them to go back on their word. A serious grasping at straws that they are untrustworthy so should do what you want and not what they were voted for in 2 elections and a referendum.

"The Labour party, whilst finally committing to Leave, had to very obviously be dragged to that position with obvious discontent."

Yes. Their leader is for leave. Their leadership is for leave. They are a party of leave as they need to implement their policies. Admitting it publicly would have sunk their votes a bit but if people choose to believe they are a party for remain against all evidence it is their delusion.

"From the analysis done at the time, to suggest that everyone who voted for Conservatives/Labour were pro-Leave is a total misrepresentation of reality"

You are correct! Voting for parties in elections is to vote on their policies. So we had this thing called a referendum, it was quite popular and well known. And people voted in or out. Out won. This is not a point of contention, this is not in question, not fuzzy, not a grey area it is simple as. Are you saying you do not understand the result of 2 elections and 1 referendum? I credit you with the sense to understand them and therefore understand we voted to leave the EU (it really isnt complicated).

"Which brings us back to the question - why did people vote Conservative/Labour with their questionable newly found commitment to Leave and not UKIP, and just what sort of Brexit were they expecting these parties to deliver..."

They voted for leave. Which is to leave the EU. Get out of the EU. Stop participating in the EU. And the EU have made it even clearer, that there is no half in half out. So it is out, leave, exit.

[John Smith 19]

May pushed it forward and people voted for the parties of leave not remain.

And yet the one seat UKIP contested with the highest Leave vote in the UK was utterly destroyed.

Which was what having the Referendum was all about.

Kippers. Smoked.

[John Smith 19]

You held an election and the majority of the UK want to leave the EU.

No.

Elections mean you get to change you mind in 5,6,7 or 8 years (depending on the country).

Like the US can get rid of Trunp, if they are so minded.

Referendum is like Trump sworn in as President-for-life.

I'd guess most Americans would be a bit unhappy with that.

[bombastic bob]

Re: Vogon

"Hence the confusion at the highest levels WRT to Brexit"

I agree with a lot of what I'm reading so far, things like produce sent to France, or JIT manufacturing deliveries affected by new inspection requirements. Many of your concerns are valid, for sure (the doom/gloom FUD however, isn't). Politicians need to get off of their collective asses and get some work done to keep negative effects down to a minimum.

So, how about a 'Brexit' that actuall ADDRESSES these concerns in a sane manner before 'Brexit Day'?

OK that would make too much sense for politicians. But I think the USA is already working on forming proper trade deals with UK (at least, that's the perception). EU should be doing something similar. (or they COULD address the reasons why 50.1% or so of UK voters chose 'leave' but that would make too much sense as well, wouldn't it?)

Anyway, it's "change" so you should EMBRACE it, right? [I know _I_ am expected to embrace 'change' when it's the OTHER way...]

[Ken Moorhouse]

Re: Politicians need ... get some work done to keep negative effects down to a minimum.

That's the worrying thing. The negative things will happen and then reactively dealt with. In the old days of Bristow we used to joke about the Civil Service's love of "everything in triplicate". For the foreseeable future we are going to see policies in triplicate - not exact copies, but varieties that are dictated by the specific Brexit flavour taken, and if (as likely) it is an intermediate flavour, everyone will be "winging it" whilst keeping fingers crossed.

The trouble with the USA is that official policy seems to be dictated by what emanates from POTUS' mouth at a particular moment in time, as demonstrated (for example) by comments made by Trump prior to meeting May, then retracted upon her visit.

Ireland is the main reason why Brexit is so difficult. Ireland gives us the perfect reason to say let's scrap the whole idea of Brexit on the basis that the electorate weren't properly informed about this problem prior to the referendum. Let's reconvene this whole question once the long-term direction of Ireland is crystallised - there is still work to do and Brexit is interfering with that work. Treat this as a dry run if you wish. An abrupt rupture at this juncture could open old wounds... maybe this is what that Amazon guy was alluding to.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

EU should be doing something similar. (or they COULD address the reasons why 50.1% or so of UK voters chose 'leave' but that would make too much sense as well, wouldn't it?)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It only makes sense if you assume that the purpose of the EU is to keep the UK people happy. That is actually the concern of UK politicians.

The EU has its own needs and priorities, which, logically, it puts first.

Once the UK decides that it can't play well with others, then it owns its own problems, and the idea that it expects other people to drop everything else to coddle the UK is bizarrely unrealistic.

[smot]

Re: Vogon

"non-binding and advisory"

Well said!

And voted for by 17.4 million out of an electorate of 46.5 million. Hardly a majority of any sort.

[TheVogon]

Re: Vogon

"Hardly a majority of any sort."

It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election. If you dont vote, your opinion doesnt count.

And if the rest had voted it would have been an even larger majority for Brexit.

[Geekpride]

Re: Vogon

"a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election". Except we now know Leave broke the law to win. Winning by cheating doesn't count.

[Wincerind]

Re: Vogon

Yes, apparently the £9.3 million of taxpayers money splaffed on a pro remain leaflet doesn't count towards remain cheating.

[AlanS]

Re: Vogon

"Winning by cheating doesn't count." We also know that Remain broke the law and still lost.

[FrozenShamrock]

Re: Vogon

Welcome to the wonderful world of capitalist democracy where winning by any means is good enough.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

Wut !? Remain broke the law, and now wants to use the old EU tactic, if at first you lose the vote, make threats and keeping taking new votes (and making new threats) until you get the result you want. THEN it is all over and no new votes allowed.

Democratic in the same way the the "German Democratic Republic" was democratic.

[Steve Gill]

Re: Vogon

Eh?

Leave broke the law and have been referred to the police for it.

There is credible evidence that the Leave campaign not only broke election law but also committed treason.

Where do you get the idea that Remain broke the law?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election. If you dont vote, your opinion doesnt count."

Of course it was not an election, it was a supposedly non-binding exercise in large sample opinion polling.

This is also why any referendum without mandatory 100% participation does not make drastic changes to national or supranational institutions on a 50% of the vote + 1 basis.

Furthermore, the Brexit Bunch seem to think that not only did people vote for leaving the EU, but they also voted for a whole bunch of more extreme policies that were not asked about in the referendum.... on the basis of Brexit promises so divorced from the reality that could be delivered, that they would, in a commercial transaction, certainly justify prosecution for fraud, misrepresentation, and breach of contract.

[Roland6]

Re: Vogon

>It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election.

It wasn't an election, if it were, we would get a chance to vote again in a couple of years...

[TheVogon]

Re: Vogon

"It wasn't an election, if it were, we would get a chance to vote again in a couple of years..."

Maybe you will. But just like any other election that will be after the vote from the previous election has been implemented.

[jmch]

Re: Vogon

"It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election. If you dont vote, your opinion doesnt count."

Unfortunately "f you dont vote, your opinion doesnt count" is the way that elections / referendums are currently run. I have long held that voting should be mandatory, with a "none of the above" option that is a meaningful choice ie if "none of the above" wins a majority, a new election should be called with previous candidates barred from running, or in the case of a referendum, to be re-held with a clearer or more meaningful question.

"And if the rest had voted it would have been an even larger majority for Brexit."

That is complete speculation on your part, and whether the abstainers would have voted remain or leave is, by now, a completely moot point.

For what it's worth (and saying this as a non-Brit citizen or resident and with no personal agenda), I think the UK political class totally screwed the whole Brexit thing up, from Cameron calling the referendum in the first place, to the way there was no clear information about consequences of leaving, from the leavers jumping like rats off a sinking ship the moment they realised someone had to actually work on the details of leaving to the triggering article 52 immediately (and having to negotiate with a ticking time bomb in your hand) rather than negotiate first and trigger the article later... it was one giant clusterfuck, and whatever the outcome it's difficult to see it being any better than the status quo.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

with a "none of the above" option that is a meaningful choice ie if "none of the above" wins a majority, a new election should be called with previous candidates barred from running

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Close, but a better and fairer version would be that if 'none of the above' wins, the position in question is left vacant for the term, and its powers are not exercised.

If sufficient positions in a body are left vacant, and quorum becomes impossible, then that body is suspended until such time as a quorum is elected, and its powers are not exercised.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

Close, but a better and fairer version would be that if 'none of the above' wins, the position in question is left vacant for the term, and its powers are not exercised.

If sufficient positions in a body are left vacant, and quorum becomes impossible, then that body is suspended until such time as a quorum is elected, and its powers are not exercised.

I love this idea. Turnout in EU elections has been below 50% since 1999, so with this rule the EU would have been suspended for the past 20 years!

[Mooseman]

Re: Vogon

"And if the rest had voted it would have been an even larger majority for Brexit."

that's about as intelligent as "if the ball had gone in the net it would have been a goal"

You have absolutely no idea how everyone would have voted. Stop bleating out ukip propaganda please - I know people who voted leave and without exception it was based on either some crap they were told by a bloke in the pub, or some equally stupid crap peddled by the leave campaign.

My biggest confusion about the whole thing (other than "how can you be so gullible?") is why the remain campaign was so singularly ineffective at rebuffing the obvious lies of the leave camp - lies that were admitted to the morning after the bloody referendum and yet you brexiteers cling to them like some desperate fantasy. Immigration? Wont change a jot apart from having fewer EU nationals and more Asian ones. Save the NHS with the brexit dividend? Oh wait, there isn't one. We hold all the cards, they need us more than we need them, the easiest trade deals in history.......still waiting for any of that to happen

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Vogon

Stop bleating out ukip propaganda please - I know people who voted leave and without exception it was based on either some crap they were told by a bloke in the pub, or some equally stupid crap peddled by the leave campaign.

But an opinion based on "I know people" is by its very nature self-selecting. It represents the people in your social circle, who are likely to share your overall outlook, even if they disagree on a precise direction.

You can't possibly extrapolate that to cover the views of the far larger group of people that you don't know

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"You have absolutely no idea how everyone would have voted"

There were way more than enough votes to predict that. And we already know that the non voters were statistically more likely to have voted for Brexit.

[TVU]

Re: Vogon

"It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election. If you dont vote, your opinion doesnt count.

And if the rest had voted it would have been an even larger majority for Brexit"

The side that you support could only win by telling outrageous lies and by wilfully breaking spending laws. Those degenerate acts are the corruption of democracy.

[FrozenShamrock]

Re: Vogon

"It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election" - unless of course you live in the US where the majority doesn't win overall.

"If you dont vote, your opinion doesnt count." - very true and everyone who is eligible to vote needs to keep this in mind before they protest

"And if the rest had voted it would have been an even larger majority for Brexit." - completely unknowable so you really shouldn't make the claim. You may very well be correct, or you may be completely wrong; but, either way it doesn't matter.

[ajsmith9870]

Re: Vogon

"It was a majority of voters just like wins any other democratic election."

Unless your particular democracy uses FPTP or an Electoral College system to choose it's leaders :-)

[TheVogon]

Re: Vogon

"Unless your particular democracy uses FPTP"

Those are still individual elections where the majority of voters wins.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"And if the rest had voted it would have been an even larger majority for Brexit"

Well, no. People having the chance to vote and not suggests they're pretty happy with the status quo. Or, at least, happy enough to not bother finding a local school and putting a cross in a box.

Obviously for some people this would have been next to impossible- if they were abroad or suchlike- but for most of them, they were so utterly incensed by the EU that they couldn't be bothered voting against it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

It's well know that brexit and social circles are well linked. I work in tech engineering, chock full of young smart people, it's it's rare to find a brexit voter. If I walk into the golden lion when the footy is on, or pop down wetherspoons during the daytime when it's full of purple rinsers, it would be hard to find someone that voted remain.

[LucreLout]

Re: Vogon

One pro-Brexit British chap I bumped into, in Texas of all places, didn't even know the referendum was non-binding and advisory.

Try not delivering it and see how non-binding it is. Sorry, but the referendum is binding, because representative democracy cannot survive if it is not delivered. And you don't really think the torughers in the commons/lords are going to go get a real job, do you?

[Roland6]

Re: Vogon

>Try not delivering it and see how non-binding it is. Sorry, but the referendum is binding, because representative democracy cannot survive if it is not delivered.

More "project fear" speak!

Representative democracy will do just fine, I suspect it may even thrive! people won't be so happy about leaving the politicians to just get on with stuff and so may actually engage with politics and turnout and vote.

However, whether the current incarnation of the Conservative party survives is another matter; personally, my money is on it imploding.

As for non-delivery, this happens all the time, yes the rabble-rousers and their crowd won't be happy there hasn't been a lynching, but once the show is over and there is nothing left to see, the crowd will disperse and the rabble-rouser will take a break...

The Brexit you voted for in the referendum, was for a direction of travel, with the actual details being decided by the government, who were totally free to define Brexit: Brexit means Brexit. .

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: Vogon

current incarnation of the Conservative party survives is another matter; personally, my money is on it imploding

I could quite easily see a substantial fraction of the Remain Conservative party defecting to the Lib Dems (or creating a new centre-right party that the Lib Dems then merge with) which would then attract some of the more moderate Labour Remainers.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Vogon

I could quite easily see a substantial fraction of the Remain Conservative party defecting to the Lib Dems (or creating a new centre-right party that the Lib Dems then merge with) which would then attract some of the more moderate Labour Remainers.

You mean like the way the SDP was created? "Go back to your constituencies, and prepare for government!". Yes, well, that was a roaring success.

[strum]

Re: Vogon

> representative democracy cannot survive if it is not delivered

You don't seem to understand what 'representative democracy' means. It means you elect politicians to represent your interests (as they see fit). You do not elect delegates.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"the referendum is binding, because representative democracy cannot survive if it is not delivered"

Quite wrong, because most definitions of representative democracy involve *delegating* decisions to elected representatives, not using them as sock puppets for opinion polls.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"the referendum was non-binding and advisory."

He was possibly confused by David Cameron's statements during the campaign that if there was a vote to leave then he'd be send the article 50 "we're leaving" letter first thing the next morning.

[DavCrav]

Re: Vogon

""17.5m v 16m is not exactly a majority anyone should be celebrating"

Just about everyone I know did."

Just about everyone I know voted Remain. But they I mostly know educated people, PhD level or above, and if you go and check the data you'll find that lack of education is highly correlated to Leave sentiment. Ideas that correlate negatively with education level are usually not good ones.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

Thing is, ask enough people and you'll get all sorts of anomalies regarding that sort of thing. I'm now 60, and I know of several people who voted leave, every single one of them under 40. several with degrees, and one a company director. Hardly uneducated, but possibly atypical due to the vagaries of chance regarding whom I happen to know.

I, with a postal vote, and NOT following the news bar once in a blue moon, voted in blissful ignorance of the nature of the public debate on the matter, and did so (stupidly) in momentary annoyance at some remarks of a German politician. My concern regarding the EU was that all that politicians seemed to think about when it came to the matter of immigration was the economic impact. Not one seemed to be thinking about the social impact of parts of countries experiencing relatively swift influxes of poorly-integrated non-natives. When the cultures of those non-natives are too different to the local one, friction ensues (and please note, I'm not simply talking about what are generally (and incorrectly) seen as faith-based cultural differences).

I think the EU is a great idea that's been poorly implemented. I don't give a damn what country someone was born in, or what colour or faith they are, so long as they respect local laws and society. In particular, that they respect womens position in law in the UK - that we are not chattels and do not have to do what men tell us to, that we are free to marry whom we please and dress as we please here. Also that being gay isn't a crime in this country

I'd hazard a guess that the majority of immigrants to the UK get that. But some do not, and it's disturbing when one encounters women who've lived here for many years who can barely put a sentence together in English, or women who've run away from their families to escape an arranged marriage. It's damned annoying to experience being spoken to as if a whore by a guy of Asian descent because I had bare arms and an uncovered head one summer (and I overheat easily!), and a few months later have an eastern European guy angrily demand to know why I was wearing a headscarf (because it's freezing cold and I get migraine if my ears get too cold, prick!) - as to him, any woman covering her hair must be Muslim (which in his mind is only ever bad thing. Cretin!).

So my anger at untrammeled immigration was that there hasn't been sufficient effort - with associated costs - in ensuring that immigrants to the UK understand the native culture, respect it, and are willing to adhere to its laws and social norms. So no harassing women in the street for not adhering t some other cultures norms, no arranged marriages unless those to be married BOTH agree of their own free will, and CERTAINLY no female genital mutilation (nor male come to that), and if you don't like gay men and women, that's fine, just don't harass them and don't have sex with them, that's all.

The various Governments for decades haven't put enough effort into integrating immigrants, and companies typically don't give a damn about social issues so long as the labour is cheap. Well, IMO companies should be made to pay the social costs of the untrammeled migration that is so economically good for them..

Part of the problem, of course, is the sociopathic notion that people exist for the benefit of companies, when it ought to be the other way around. But that's a whole 'nother argument.

Anyway, so yes, with my postal vote, in a moment of anger and blissfully unaware of the public screaming-match that was going on on the subject, I voted to leave the EU, never imagining either that

(a) the leave vote would get anywhere near winning or that

(b) David Cameron was stupid enough to hold such a referendum without an already thought-out plan to deal with either of the possible outcomes or that

(c) if the purely advisory referendum resulted in a Leave victory, that the collectively dunderheaded Tories would then treat the thing as if it were legally binding and carved on stone like divine writ. And those young pro-Brexit voters I spoke of - felt pretty much the same as me, it turned out, when I spoke to them, and included amongst them people of widely varying ethnicities, countries and cultures of origin. In short, some of them were immigrants who appreciated our laws and culture and were as concerned about those who do not as I was and am.

Now, personally, when, about a week before the main vote took place, I became aware of the way the public discussion was being mishandled, I was apalled. I don't think I've ever encountered such cheerfully dishonest and abusive political campaigning on either side. But folk I spoke to, whether in favour of leaving or not, seemed generally rational and could make good arguments for their stances., it's just that their perceptions of what were the problems and plusses of the EU and how fixable the problems might be varied.

Yes, both side had lunatic fringes - that's a staple of all political campaigns. But to have a Government behave so ill-advisedly on the unexpected result that they were not prepared for of a non-binding referendum?! And to carry on doing so despite the clear stupidity of doing so and evidence of foreign interference in the pre-referendum campaign, no less!?

One thing Remainers have absolutely right - you can't change the system if you're not in it. The referendum result should've been a signal to HM Govt - and their counterparts in Europe - that there needed to be serious consultations with the populace of Europe, NOT the companies operating therein (who get way too much attention from politicians anyway), of what aspects of the way the EU is run that they did not like - and then serious consideration of how best to tackle those problems, followed by pragmatic action thereon based on the realities of the world rather than on anyones Utopian dreams.

Then again, maybe expecting politicians to behave rationally and in the interest of the populace they are supposed to represent is MY Utopian dream... sigh...

[Mooseman]

Re: Vogon

"it's disturbing when one encounters women who've lived here for many years who can barely put a sentence together in English, or women who've run away from their families to escape an arranged marriage. It's damned annoying to experience being spoken to as if a whore by a guy of Asian descent because I had bare arms and an uncovered head one summer"

So, you don't like foreigners then? Tell me, how will limiting EU migrants limit the number of Asians coming to Britain, especially when one of the key demands of the Indian government is that we take MORE migrants in exchange for improved trade deals?

I assume your ire is equally aimed at ex pat brits living in the costa del sol who don't speak a word of Spanish and live in their little piece of Essex in the sun?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"it's disturbing when one encounters women who've lived here for many years who can barely put a sentence together in English"

Of course, your random continental EU citizen is far more likely to speak passable English (often among 3 or 4 languages spoken) than a random UK born and bred citizen is likely to speak *any* single continental language passably well.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

Of course, your random continental EU citizen is far more likely to speak passable English (often among 3 or 4 languages spoken) than a random UK born and bred citizen is likely to speak *any* single continental language passably well.

Which shows nothing except that English is the most important language to know for international communications. Children in almost all countries get taught English in school, but what equivalently-useful second language would you suggest be taught in UK schools? Mandarin?

Those of us Brits who need to learn a foreign language can do so as well as anyone, not doing so is a sign of lack of need, not lack of ability.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

Mooseman, your slight of me is ludicously laughable. There is nothing in anything I said in my post to indicate that I do not like foreigners.

Neither did I say anything about limiting numbers of immigrantss, let alone Asian ones.

The one thing that you are correct on is that I do think it's unutterably rude to live in a country and refuse to try to speak its language. But we both know there's important differences between UK ex-pats in Spain and women from cultures where they are positively dissuaded by relatives from engaging with the colture they are surrounded by.

And, I'd remind you, I think the EU is a GOOD idea - as I stated. And I said that I stupidly voted in anger over something a German politician had said - io spell it out for you, I voted Leave due to something I;d heard a German politician say on the DWTV site, and on the spur of the moment voted Leave, then regretted it.

In short, you've done exactly what so many people seem to have done over that wretched referendum (which should never have taken place IMO), ie: decided on a caricature for everyone that voted one or other way, assumed it applies to everyone, then just slung mud irrespective of anything else.

It's exactly your kind of attitude to political debate that causes me to not want to engage in it much; because so few over here are willing to look at facts and see ALL the potential problems without making egregrious personal attacks on those who may feel things stack up differently, instead of calmily arguing/discussing the matter.

Personally, I prefer to try to get on with people around me. Any idiot can make enemies - it takes effort to make friends.

[TheVogon]

Re: Vogon

"especially when one of the key demands of the Indian government is that we take MORE migrants in exchange for improved trade deals?"

Easy. Go for the UAE / Bermuda model where you never get residency rights and have to leave as soon as you don't have a job that is sponsoring you.

[John Smith 19]

"One thing Remainers have absolutely right - you can't change the system if you're not in it."

Good to know.

But you thought you'd play a merry little prank (along with f**k knows how many like you) and "show" the EU how you felt.

Ho ho ho.

But politics has consequences.

I hope you'll keep smiling as this almighty clusterf**k (which you are partly responsible for) really starts to bite.

BTW, most of what you're talking about only involves the EU peripherally

How national governments resolve national problems (and most of what you've bi**hed about are national problems) are down to the people the voters elect to run the their nations governments.

IOW most of what your complaining about should be piled at the doors of the Home Office.

Otherwise known as the UK Designated "Centre for Evil."

Do you feel you played like a banjo? You should

[John Smith 19]

Anyway, so yes, with my postal vote, in a moment of anger

Do you actually live in the UK?

Or did you just decide to drop everyone else down the sh**ter because someone bad mouthed you and your unthinking reflex action was not (as it should have been) blame your local government but "Blame the furriners" ?

Maybe one day your maturity will match your age.*

*But I won't be counting those days. I don't think you have enough left.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"Ideas that correlate negatively with education level are usually not good ones."

Don't lots of educated people vote Labour? The country is still picking itself up for the mess they left last time round.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

"The country is still picking itself up for the mess they left last every time round."

FTFY

[Alien8n]

Re: Vogon

"Don't lots of educated people vote Labour? The country is still picking itself up for the mess they left last time round."

Actually they did a pretty good job considering. Not that I would ever vote for Blair, they're were pretty much just a paler shade of blue. The "mess" as you call it was actually a result of the collapse of the US sub-prime market and the resultant collapse of the world banking sector.

What's more interesting is that the current lot sold austerity on the promise that they'd eliminate national debt. Instead they've dramatically increased national debt while simultaneously making every person in the UK worse off except for the top 1%. The exact reverse of what happened in the rest of the EU's more socialist leaning countries.

And as for Brexit, the best idea we have for where the UK will be post-Brexit is actually 1970's Britain. So pretty much we're screwed, with Labour and Conservative governments flip-flopping between each other and inflation reaching dizzying heights again. Fuel prices sky rocketing. But at least I'll be able to afford a house again...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Vogon

Educated does NOT mean intelligent. Anyway, some dork on the internet claiming all his "friends" are PhD's is laughable.

Quite why people want a bunch of unelected bureaucrat's in Brussels telling what time of the day they can even take a shit puzzles me. Britain can get along fine without the EU, and any problems are likely to be deliberately caused by the EU bureaucracy to "punish" Britain for having the temerity to leave.

Just the sort of vindictive people most of the posters seem to want to suck up to.

[Alien8n]

Re: Vogon

"Quite why people want a bunch of unelected bureaucrat's in Brussels telling what time of the day they can even take a shit puzzles me. Britain can get along fine without the EU, and any problems are likely to be deliberately caused by the EU bureaucracy to "punish" Britain for having the temerity to leave."

Much the same as our own government. The Conservatives have a long history of punishing the public for having the temerity of voting Labour. That's the real purpose of austerity and the demonization of the unemployed, sick and disabled. It's that or they really are even more economically incompetent than even Labour.

[shawnfromnh]

Re: Vogon

All the educated people in my country like the liberal college professors are basically retards and turning college millenials into the same retards they are with teaching them that feelings are appropriate tool to base a debate on instead of logic and facts. I am so glad I never went into college because I might have been brainwashed by some over drugged hippie now professor that thinks John Lennon and a bunch of Hippies from the 60's knew how the world should be. In reality anyone taking there life decisions from anyone that used a ton of drugs and is a musician is a moron since being an actor or musician does not make you an authority on anything other than music drugs and whores "groupies". Hell I take my politics seriously and voted for ROss Perot back in the 90's but people are to stupid to understand the man and financial systems so they voted clinton because of his saxiphone and using short catch phrases that stupid people like because of their short attention spans and low IQ's. His wife Hack em up Hillary would have been a disaster for the world or worse yet socialist Bernie Sanders would have run the entire world into a global recession that we wouldn't come back from but they don't want us to so everyone would be dependent on the government forever globally a 1984 in the making.

[Mooseman]

Re: Vogon

"Just about everyone I know did."

I suspect that's because you associate with the kind of people who think brexit is a good idea

[Chris Parsons]

Re: Vogon

Possibly one of the stupidest comments ever. Well done.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@diodesign ... Re: Vogon

I'm sorry, but last time I checked... greater than 50% is a majority.

17.5 / (17.5 + 16) = 52.24%

Sounds like a majority to me.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: @diodesign ... Vogon

"I'm sorry, but last time I checked... greater than 50% is a majority."

If you are going to be pedantic and use a very specific and limited definition of a word, why did you start your sentence with "I'm sorry..." when clearly you are not not sorry and not apologising?

[LucreLout]

Re: Vogon

17.5m v 16m is not exactly a majority anyone should be celebrating. I'm thinking of the other C word.

Compromising.

Giving the losers what they want at the expense of the winners isn't a compromise, and it isn't democracy. Sorry, it just isn't.

Brexit won't go away, new referendum, stay in by other devious means, whatever. It won't go away - next time there'll just be an in or out today no deal ultra hard brexit option, to prevent remainers trying to steal it after the fact.

There's no version of the future where the UK stays in Europe or even close to it, without substantial reform of the rEU. You can't unite a country by ignoring democracy, whether you agree with the result or not.

[jmch]

Re: Vogon

"Brexit won't go away, new referendum, stay in by other devious means, whatever. It won't go away - next time there'll just be an in or out today no deal ultra hard brexit option, to prevent remainers trying to steal it after the fact.

There's no version of the future where the UK stays in Europe or even close to it, without substantial reform of the rEU. You can't unite a country by ignoring democracy, whether you agree with the result or not."

I'm interested to know why a new referendum, after the terms of exit are more clearly known, is not acceptable? If the people who support Brexit really believe that it will be beneficial whatever the terms they would just get a renewed, or even bigger, mandate.

I don't subscribe to the idea that once a referendum has been had, then the issue is settled for all time, that is basically a dictatorship of the past to the present (or, if you will, of the old to the young). If elections are held every 4-5 years and can even be held after a couple of years if there is no continuing support for the governments agenda, I don't see why a new referendum should not be held if there is no continuing support for the exit agenda (which seems to be the case given that the new elections post-Brexit returned the Tories with a much-reduced majority, with UKIP also taking a big hit.)

And if a new referendum gives a different result, that wouldn't be "remainers trying to steal it after the fact.", it would be voters changing their minds based on a better understanding of the consequences of either choice. It's what adults do.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Vogon

I'm interested to know why a new referendum, after the terms of exit are more clearly known, is not acceptable?

Well, my opinion (for what it's worth) is that it wouldn't ncessarily solve anything. If it produced a 75% vote either way it might be useful, but there's little chance of that. Another 52% for Leave wouldn't change anything, 52% vote for Remain would just lead to requests for another referendum next year. That sort of volte-face every year would be a disastrous situation, eventually we'd have an election where the party that promised NOT to have another referendum would win!

I don't subscribe to the idea that once a referendum has been had, then the issue is settled for all time,

"all time", no, but how long do you wait? It obviously varies with the situation. You can reasonably shop in Tesco today, and swap to Sainsbury tomorrow, but you aren't going to change, say, your broadband or phone provider every week, it would cost a fortune and be far too disruptive. It's 25 years since we were pushed into the EU without a vote, does every 25 years seem like a reasonable gap? Every 10? 50?

By and large the people who lose want another vote as soon as they think they'll win, which is understandable but hardly practical.

[TVU]

Re: Vogon

"There's no version of the future where the UK stays in Europe or even close to it, without substantial reform of the rEU. You can't unite a country by ignoring democracy, whether you agree with the result or not"

Democracy is not both lying your way to victory and corrupting democracy by blatantly disobeying spending laws. That is crookery.

[&rew]

Re: Vogon

I will happily agree that some form of democracy is good.

However, I am of the opinion that leaders of a democracy should be able to make decisions for the best of the country, even if that decision is unpopular. Australia's government brought in new gun controls, against the majority feeling of the populace, but the majority now agree that it was a good thing.

If a company CEO thinks that sweeping changes to how the business is to be run need to be made, do they go around asking all the cleaners, drivers, machinists, typists, secretaries and so forth what their opinions are?

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Vogon

I am of the opinion that leaders of a democracy should be able to make decisions for the best of the country, even if that decision is unpopular.

All democratic governments are free to do that. In the full knowledge that they will eventually face an election, of course.

If a company CEO thinks that sweeping changes to how the business is to be run need to be made, do they go around asking all the cleaners, drivers, machinists, typists, secretaries and so forth what their opinions are?

Some do, through unions or works councils. More often they'll ask the shareholders.

[strum]

Re: Vogon

>Giving the losers what they want at the expense of the winners isn't a compromise, and it isn't democracy. Sorry, it just isn't.

Without compromise, democracy is doomed. Instead, you have a tyranny of the (temporary) majority, which requires violence to resolve.

[TVU]

Re: Vogon

"17.5m v 16m is not exactly a majority anyone should be celebrating. I'm thinking of the other C word"

Furthermore, not only was that marginal win was based on egregious lies, such as the NHS promise, and racist lies, like all 70 million Turks would be coming to the UK, it now turns out that the official Leave campaign deliberately broke spending laws in order to win. Leave supporters therefore do not, and never will, occupy the moral high ground.

[TheVogon]

Re: Vogon

"such as the NHS promise"

There was no promise. All was stated was that we send 350 million a week to the EU (which is true) and the question was asked why not spend it on the NHS instead?

That there would be many other costs to be met on leaving the EU is not in question and I think the vast majority of voters would have realised that.

[Roland6]

Re: Vogon

>All was stated was that we send 350 million a week to the EU (which is true)

Err no a total lie! The UK doesn't pay the EU weekly... Also if you had read the background papers on UK payments to the EU you would also know that the 350 million figure is a figure calculated (by amateurs with little understanding of either maths or finance - just because N.Farage was a merchant banker in a previous life doesn't mean he was numerate) and does not appear anywhere in the UK-EU transaction log.

[P. Lee]

Re: Vogon

What makes you think compromise is possible?

I don't see how the eu could compromise. If they did, everyone would vote to leave to get a better deal.

The EU doesn't want to be an association of nations, it wants to be one nation. It's in the eu charter - "ever closer union." A successful brexit will be a political disaster for them - something along the lines of Texas seceding from the US, except that the eu is far shakier. Most of the countries have fought each other for many hundreds of years. No one thinks of themselves as European first and Greek or Spanish second and they have no real interest in helping each other.

I don't think either side should expect a deal that goes beyond an agreed transition to WTO rules.

And "Brexit means Nothing" May needs to go if we aren't going to spend tmore ime messing around.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

"This is exactly what the majority of voters voted for."

===========================================

That may be what the majority of voters who were taken in by the fantasies of the Brexit Bunch did, but given their average age, they are dying off faster than the ones who appreciate the benefits of the EU, while the two year farce we've been watching has educated the more mentally flexible of the original 'leave' voters.

I find it interesting that the massively self-important 'defenders of the will of the people' are terrified by the prospect of asking them a more specific, less easily 'creatively reinterpreted' question now that some of the facts have become apparent.

[LucreLout]

Re: eh?

I find it interesting that the massively self-important 'defenders of the will of the people' are terrified by the prospect of asking them a more specific, less easily 'creatively reinterpreted' question now that some of the facts have become apparent.

No facts have become apparent, other than every single one of Remains economic arguments failed to materialise. Every. Single. One.

I've no problem with a new vote "Out on WTO terms or out on the deal agreed" We've settled the in/out question already, so now the only debate is about how we leave.

[Peter Danckwerts]

Re: eh?

This is the big Remain lie – we should ignore the referendum because those who voted for Brexit are stupid/ignorant/bigots. What they really mean is that they don't like it. It's just an excuse to ignore the will of the people. I agree that the referendum should have been more specific, but whose fault is that? David Cameron's – and he was a Remainer.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: eh?

I find it interesting that the massively self-important 'defenders of the will of the people'

You forgot the essential codicil 'as interpreted by us'.

Especially as every shade of Brixiteer seems to have a different interpretation of what it means.

[John Smith 19]

"every shade of Brixiteer seems to have a different interpretation of what it means."

Correct.

It's like Alien Vs Predator.

Whoever wins the British people lose.

[codejunky]

Re: "every shade of Brixiteer seems to have a different interpretation of what it means."

@ John Smith 19

"It's like Alien Vs Predator.

Whoever wins the British people lose."

And sticking with the franchises remain would be the prisoner in alien3 who gives himself to 'the dragon' (the extended version I believe) or in AvP the sacrificial people who felt honoured giving themselves to start the hunt.

There is a reason they dont get much screen time and instead it goes to those who try to survive

[Roland6]

Re: eh?

>The only civil unrest will be if the celebration parties get out of hand.

Unless you're stockpiling champagne now or have a good supply of home brew, this may be more because of the sugar rush than alcohol induced... :)

[TheVogon]

Re: eh?

"Unless you're stockpiling champagne now"

No need. Thanks to AGW, Kent now makes some of the best sparkling wine in Europe.

[John Smith 19]

"This is exactly what the majority of voters voted for."

13/25 of the people who voted.

It's not exactly a landslide given you're looking at root and branch changes to a legal framework built up over 42 years to be replaced in 2, is it?

Some will call it CMD's biggest achievement.

Other's his biggest failure.

Time will tell.

[arctic_haze]

Re: eh?

"This is exactly what the majority of voters voted for."

Not in Scotland and Northern Ireland and any kind of hard Brexit will facilitate losing both.

[Mooseman]

Re: eh?

"Not in Scotland and Northern Ireland and any kind of hard Brexit will facilitate losing both."

ironically its the areas that benefit most from EU money that voted to leave. When you leave can the southeast come with you please? We didn't vote leave either.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: eh?

Southeast did vote to leave 51.78% to 48.22%. The 3 regions that voted remain were in the lowest 4 turnouts voter percentage wise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016

[TheVogon]

Re: eh?

"Not in Scotland and Northern Ireland and any kind of hard Brexit will facilitate losing both."

The benefits of Brexit just keep coming! Both Scotland and Northern Ireland are a drain on the rest of the country. Scotland for instance has a larger budget deficit than Greece.

[Nick Leaton]

How's Amazon going to work it when the cables to Ireland are turned off?

Tit for tat. Ireland says no flying over Ireland.

UK says no data down the data pipes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would Ireland shut down cables and ban UK overflight? The UK is withdrawing from the EU, not declaring war on it.

I think Brexit is stupid and the people supporting it are going to damage the UK, but the people against it are going too far with the doom and gloom and what if scenarios which will only deepen the divide with the Brexiteers. Things will be bad enough the pro side will see the error of their ways in a few years (even if they will never admit it, or claim they didn't do Brexit "the right way")

[Dan 55]

No country has to let anyone and everyone fly over. The planes must be deemed airworthy, and the UK will have left EASA. Hopefully the UK will managed to get the CAA to do the EASA's job in record time and persuade other countries of this by Brexit day (March 2019 without agreement, a couple of years later with agreement).

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

No country has to let anyone and everyone fly over.

They do if they are members of ICAO. What they don't have to do following Brexit is to allow UK airlines to fly passengers between 2 destinations within Ireland.

[Dan 55]

You seem to have cut off the important part of the post.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's also not clear exactly how they are going to stop anybody flying over.

For a proud member of NATO, Eire doesn't exactly have an airforce to make Russia tremble.

[werdsmith]

They do if they are members of ICAO. What they don't have to do following Brexit is to allow UK airlines to fly passengers between 2 destinations within Ireland.

Or in fact within the EU, however the airliines have been preparing for this. Easyjet have set up a base in Austria and are registering their aircraft there. BA can use the Spanish register and become Spain based.

[Fonant]

Our trip to Amsterdam last month was with Easyjet, and they sent us notice that the flight provider had changed to "Easyjet Europe".

[Anonymous Coward]

BA could rename themselves to AE (Aerolineas Espana) and paint their planes in yellow and red. That will show the remoaners that we are winning back sovereignty!!!

[Mooseman]

"Hopefully the UK will managed to get the CAA to do the EASA's job in record time "

I do know for a fact that the CAA has been planning on a no-deal scenario for some time. Maybe they will work it out before things get stupid. Sorry, more stupid.

[wolfetone]

"Tit for tat. Ireland says no flying over Ireland.

UK says no data down the data pipes."

It's easier to get a data pipe from the EU to Ireland than it is for Theresa May to come up with a good Brexit plan.

[Alan Brown]

"How's Amazon going to work it when the cables to Ireland are turned off?"

That would affect the irish-french and irish-dutch data cables..... how?

[Anonymous Coward]

That would affect the irish-french and irish-dutch data cables..... how?

There aren't any direct (modern) cables that don't go to the UK

There is a project to extend the new USA-Ireland cable to France but it is still in the future.

[arctic_haze]

Ireland will still be a EU country. Cutting cables to it may result in Europe cutting off Britain in retaliation.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Burn down the high st

Simply add blades and spikes and V8 turbos to their delivery trucks

Obtain some bondage gear uniforms for delivery drivers

Instill a slightly more customer focused level of efficiency in their delivery drivers to bring it up to Mad Max 2 levels.

[N2]

Re: Burn down the high st

Think the councils with thier ever increasing rates & over zealous parking wardens have done a fine job.

[Voland's right hand]

The comment has been taken out of context

If I understand the quote correctly, the guy was very specific about this happening a few weeks after D-day if it all goes to shit and if customs collapse. Considering how much stuff is imported he may have a point.

In any case, while people are concentrating on this non-news item, everybody forgot about the real news item which is that Rees Mogg has been making 19% annual (predicted, so far 14% for the first 9 months) profit off companies moving to Ireland due to Brexit via his fund.

https://www.youinvest.co.uk/market-research/FUND:BD6PG56?tab=7&SecurityToken=F00000ZD81]99]1]FXALL$$ALL_1392&Id=F00000ZD81&ClientFund=1&CurrencyId=GBP&ms-redirect-path=/1c6qh1t6k9default.aspx

Corrupt? Moi? Surely not. Just the mother of all insider trading and pump and dump jobs. In fact, not even the mother, grandmother, grandgrandmother, but the whole line of progenitors all the way to the times of William the Conqueror.

He is not the only one. I had to do some unrelated trawling through the company registries in Bulgaria and Romania a few months back and I came across a lot of prominent BrExiteers and their investment vehicles investing like crazy into office real estate there.

I always find it hilarious British politicians complaining about corruption in Eastern Europe and ex-USSR. Sure, they are corrupt as hell. Sure some places are really mob state. However, none of them would even contemplate monetizing grand treason.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: The comment has been taken out of context

"He is not the only one. I had to do some unrelated trawling through the company registries in Bulgaria and Romania a few months back and I came across a lot of prominent BrExiteers and their investment vehicles investing like crazy into office real estate there."

Although I have no doubt you are correct, I'd be prepared to bet that was already happening anyway. They are the new "cheap" places in the EU. But Brexiteers taking advantage of the likely increased rush for properties there is a bit beyond the Pale.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: The comment has been taken out of context

But Brexiteers taking advantage of the likely increased rush for properties there is a bit beyond the Pale.

Not at all. Once they see the UK's ascension to the glorious dawn of Eu-free prosperity, these former soviet republics will be clamoring to leave the Eu and join a new British commonwealth.

Mr Rees-Mogg et al are just the advanced guard, setting up cricket pitches etc

[diodesign]

Re: Voland's right hand

"The comment has been taken out of context"

Er, how? Your summary matches our article and the Times' and the quote – so how exactly was it taken out of context?

C.

[Alien8n]

Re: Voland's right hand

"Er, how? Your summary matches our article and the Times' and the quote – so how exactly was it taken out of context?"

My guess would be the commentards are taking it out of context. Judging by some of the frothing at the mouth seen on these comment threads today he may have a point.

[Roland6]

Re: The comment has been taken out of context

>If I understand the quote correctly, the guy was very specific about this happening a few weeks after D-day if it all goes to shit and if customs collapse. Considering how much stuff is imported he may have a point.

This would ring true, given how little food is stockpiled in the country. It only took a couple of days of storms in the channel a few years back for the fresh food aisles to become empty...

So I would expect with a botched Brexit many essentials to either be rationed or no available within 5~10 days.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The comment has been taken out of context

This would ring true, given how little food is stockpiled in the country. It only took a couple of days of storms in the channel a few years back for the fresh food aisles to become empty...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fresh food? Unlikely to be a priority.

It would make more sense to focus on storeage friendly staples not sensitive to transportation conditions - dried beans, rice, tinned stuff, powdered milk, etc... particularly if fuel and transportation disruptions interfered with electric generation. Cherish your nukes, children.

[Phage]

Re: The comment has been taken out of context

Unfortunately your link is dead. Can you repost that from You Invest ?

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: The comment has been taken out of context

came across a lot of prominent BrExiteers and their investment vehicles investing like crazy into office real estate there

And let's not forget prominent Tory ex-politians now living in France..

[Anonymous Coward]

I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

I have no doubt that there will be a lot of painful adjustments to make on both side of the English/Brexit Channel. However, the idea that there is going to be rioting in the streets a few weeks after a no deal/WTO rules Brexit is the kind of transparently self-centered big business hyperbole that helped Brexit win the referendum in the first place.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Precisely. This is just self-serving Remain FUD trying to scare people into picking the option that is best for the profits of big corporations like Amazon.

People are already upset at the level of control exercised by the EU, they're unlikely to be any more supportive of government by Big Business.

[Wellyboot]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Poor Amazon, losing the 'we pay tax in luxembourg' excuse for not paying any tax on their £1.5bn UK operation.

[et tu, brute?]

Re: Government by Big Business

People are already upset at the level of control exercised by the EU, they're unlikely to be any more supportive of government by Big Business

i.e. business as usual?

People who don't understand that this is exactly what we have in this capitalist "democracy" shouldn't be allowed to vote...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

"People are already upset at the level of control exercised by the EU, they're unlikely to be any more supportive of government by Big Business."

Then why the F*&K do they keep voting torys into power, thats all they F£*King stand for!!!.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Then why the F*&K do they keep voting torys into power, thats all they F£*King stand for!!!.

Because we know the the alternative of Labour would let the unions destroy the economy like they did in the early 70s?

[TheProf]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

"alternative of Labour"

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

[Ben Tasker]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

> Because we know the the alternative of Labour would let the unions destroy the economy like they did in the early 70s?

So instead you vote for Brexit, which even Rees-Mogg now claims will take 50 years to show any economic benefit (with hard economic times until then).

If you're not trolling, you're too damn stupid to vote

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

If you're not trolling, you're too damn stupid to vote

The classic rallying cry of the loser in an election: "I didn't lose, the winners were just too stupid to vote the right way".

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Because we know the the alternative of Labour would let the unions destroy the economy like they did in the early 70s?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course Brexit is a hard act to follow.

A hard left Labour government might be the only way to top the damage done by Brexit.

[Nick Kew]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Project Fear was evident on all those Conservative election leaflets last year.

It was the mugshot of Corbyn, and the prospect of his getting any whiff of power. It worked, to the extent that the Tories didn't get annihilated, as would've happened if they'd faced a credible opposition. It just didn't work as well as May expected.

The brexit risk comes in two parts. One is the logistics of importing enough food to feed us all: we can expect the likes of Tesco, Sainsburys, Lidl, etc to be on top of all the new Red Tape they'll face, but that doesn't help if their trucks are stuck in 100-mile tailbacks. Then add to that our government's inability to agree among themselves what they're trying to do, and no matter how much the EU bend over backwards to accommodate us, nor how well-organised our logistics businesses may be, they'll be up against undefined rules and no fine manual.

As for WTO, the UK may have to get its act together rather more than our government can agree on just to qualify for membership. And then ... will the WTO itself survive if Trump goes to war with it? What will he do if and when WTO rule against him and in favour of any of the countries he's attacked, such as China, the EU, or Canada and Mexico?

[werdsmith]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Project fear is actually a brexiter project. They have cultivated a fear of foreigners.

Mostly nasty angry scowling old gammons who are unhappy with they way life has turned out for them, want something to blame so they can avoid the truth that their problems are all self-inflicted. There are a lot of these people.

What they try to divert from their xenophobia as project fear is actually project pragmatism.

Because all remainers are concerned about is avoiding a chronic economic storm. If that storm is minor or it doesn't happen, then remainers will be quite happy outside EU. Brexiters, however, are reckless and are prepared for people suffer for their outdated tribal concept.

The saving grace is that the people most likely to suffer are the very people who voted for it.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Mostly nasty angry scowling old gammons who are unhappy with they way life has turned out for them, want something to blame so they can avoid the truth that their problems are all self-inflicted. There are a lot of these people.

True, but to characterize all brexiteers as being like that really just shows that you'e in that category of prejudice yourself. Many of us are educated people, living and working in interational environments, and well-able toi understand the economic pros and cons of the EU. Many remainers, as shown by comments here, clearly have no understanding of what the EU actually does, what we have without it, and what it actually makes possible.

Because all remainers are concerned about is avoiding a chronic economic storm.

That I'll grant you, far too many people want to stay in their comfort zone, keep their heads down, and do what they're told. Historically that's always been more visible in mainland Europe than in the UK, cozy mediocrity is always an appealing option when the alernative is hard work.

And make no mistake, post-Brexit there will be a lot of hard work to rebuild. The big difference is that some of us can see far enough ahead to understand that the hard work could be worthwhile, even if remainer schadenfreude and EU vindictiveness makes it harder than it needs to be. Others just prefer to sit back and downvote anyone who actually wants to work for improvements.

[Mooseman]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

"And make no mistake, post-Brexit there will be a lot of hard work to rebuild. The big difference is that some of us can see far enough ahead to understand that the hard work could be worthwhile, even if remainer schadenfreude and EU vindictiveness makes it harder than it needs to be. Others just prefer to sit back and downvote anyone who actually wants to work for improvements."

Great, youre happy to impose economic hardship and possible break up of the union on the nation, largely on those who can least afford it, just to satisfy your 19th century views of plucky brits and dodgy foreigners? Work for improvements? in whose lifetime?

No, the EU isn't a perfect system, I dare you to name one that is - but running away and casting ourselves into an abyss of the unknown is not the action of a rational people. Most people commenting on here don't know how the eu works, you say. funny, most leave voters seem to think that there is a small group of nasty foreign types plotting to control our country at the same time as bribing industry to move abroad so we are ruined while AT THE SAME TIME expecting us to pay into the eu......logic doesn't even begin to enter the building let alone their heads.

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ werdsmith

"Project fear is actually a brexiter project. They have cultivated a fear of foreigners."

Well that doesnt stack up. Giving privilege and priority to the promised land over the world is discriminatory. The fact that people from the EU can easily come here to get a standard job but outside pretty much have to come as students, specific skill or very highly paid. As remain arguments for hiding in the EU seem to be fear of the world, fear of the US bending us over, fear of China bending us over, doing the will of Russia or even fear of the EU's retaliation (those nasty foreigners) and the comment of pulling up the drawbridge or banning foreigners almost always come from remain.

I keep having remain idiots telling me the reason I voted out is because I am against foreigners and one troll who insists I must be racist because he has nothing else to contribute. Yet I want my friends from the US, Europe including the EU, Africa and Asia to be welcomed.

"Mostly nasty angry scowling old gammons"

About time you guys had a name you could settle on that isnt brexiters. Like Eurosceptic I expect I will be using it to remind complainers at the next EU 'issue' debate. I do wonder what remainers marching, shouting, crying, etc see themselves as if we are gammons. Maybe nasty children? Babies? There is already a blimp they could probably get to represent them.

"problems are all self-inflicted"

I assume we are not talking about the EU in multiple crises. And yes self inflicted.

"What they try to divert from their xenophobia as project fear is actually project pragmatism."

You dont think it is pragmatic to abandon a sinking ship? Multiple self inflicted crises and not stable nor competent, but you want to remain? You might notice none of that requires any xenophobia, just the facts.

"Because all remainers are concerned about is avoiding a chronic economic storm"

Is that the last 2 predicted recessions? Neither of which appeared. We brexiters or 'gammons' also want to avoid an economic storm. We want to return the country to normal before the next recession and not be so tightly tied to the EU who has yet to repair their economy after they trashed it last recession.

"Brexiters, however, are reckless and are prepared for people suffer for their outdated tribal concept."

Greece. Italy. Portugal.

[Dr_N]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

codejunky> I keep having remain idiots telling me the reason I voted out is because I am against foreigners and one troll who insists I must be racist because he has nothing else to contribute.

Aww codejunky! No one has called you a racist.

I just say that you played the xenophobia card throughout your posts during and after the brexit campaign.

Just because you use xenophobia and like to whip up hysteria propagating fake stories concerning Turkish hordes about to assail England's green and pleasant lands, doesn't make you a racist, old chap.

You got your wish granted by the brexit pixies. Now go forth and make a success of brexit!

You have all the answers, so show us Project: Unicorns & Rainbows!!!!

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Dr_N

"Aww codejunky! No one has called you a racist."

So you just accuse me of spreading what you consider racism and xenophobia and make comments such as "Don't Panic codejunky. Brexit means:no more brown folk." and yet through all your continued trolling and strong focus on foreigners (and your interpretations) dont think I am a racist. So what was it? Some defence mechanism to keep you from accepting facts that didnt fit with your views?

"I just say that you played the xenophobia card throughout your posts during and after the brexit campaign."

Yes I have been terrible disagreeing with the discrimination against large parts of the world providing productive people to this country to discriminate in favour of the pre-approved EU. A situation which stops one of my friends from moving here without being a student while another came just because she fancied it.

"You got your wish granted by the brexit pixies. Now go forth and make a success of brexit!"

Oh yey have we left! Oh. No. The remainer in charge is still trying to keep us in it.

"You have all the answers, so show us Project: Unicorns & Rainbows!!!!"

I have shown it. I put a spotlight on it and lit it with neon and yet remainers still want it.

[Dr_N]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

codejunky> and yet through all your continued trolling and strong focus on foreigners ...

You can't be a racist. You told us you have non-white friends, right?

(As opposed to the Leave.EU leadership, who I get the feeling really don't like dusky folk.)

But as the immigrant son of an immigrant I just take umbrage with the brexit campaigns whipping up of hysteria against immigrants. Something you took part in. Specifically that doozy of a trumpcard about Turkish hordes that came out the week before the vote.

Still, I guess neither of us will be around to reap your rewards of brexit. (It'll take 50 years, apparently. LOLZ)

Enjoy your brexit.

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Dr_N

"You can't be a racist. You told us you have non-white friends, right?"

I am not 100% certain of that definition of racism but by its extension it does remove the racist label from UKIP for having non-white members I expect.

"But as the immigrant son of an immigrant I just take umbrage with the brexit campaigns whipping up of hysteria against immigrants."

I can understand that. The hysteria against foreigners from both leave and remain bother me. I do find mild annoyance when someone accuses me of being a Russian as an insult as I do have Russian friends. Just as I would be bothered if I was labelled from the US, Africa, Asia etc because I have friends from all over and do not like their identifiers being used as an insult. I can understand claims that brexit and so voting leave could be helping Putin (its idiotic but not insulting the people as a whole).

"Specifically that doozy of a trumpcard about Turkish hordes that came out the week before the vote."

While the reporting may not have been to the liking of some people it was the EU panicking and legitimate reporting of the EU being over a barrel when dealing with Turkey. The main insult being against the usual claim of the EU being big enough to take on the big players while having its arse handed to it by Turkey. And it was a migration issue, which in light of the EU's self inflicted migration crisis has considerable weight.

Remember it is the EU discussing holding camps (compared to prisons) to hold the migrants hopefully beyond EU borders. And of course member countries bribing migrants to go home as well as paying countries to stop their people migrating to the EU.

"Still, I guess neither of us will be around to reap your rewards of brexit. "

Really? It took 30yr projections for remain to claim brexit was a loss under assumptions we would continue acting like we were in the EU. I guess it depends on the definition of reaping rewards. Or if it even happens.

[Dr_N]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

codejunky> I can understand that. The hysteria against foreigners from both leave and remain bother me.

Utter Bollox. Don't try and use the Trumpism of " there's bad folk on both sides!" to justify rampant xenophobia and pandering to xenophobes. Jaysus.

codejunky> I do find mild annoyance when someone accuses me of being a Russian as an insult

Stop posting in the style a Russian Twitter troll then?

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Dr_N

"Utter Bollox. Don't try and use the Trumpism of " there's bad folk on both sides!" to justify rampant xenophobia and pandering to xenophobes. Jaysus."

So its ok if they are supporting your 'side'? Why is such discrimination ok in your opinion? My post is very clear that I am against hysteria against foreigners regardless of a persons brexit view, does that not sound like a good thing?

I accept there are racists on both sides. I dont stand with them. One of my earliest comments after the brexit result was for outward looking leavers and remainers to work together instead of allowing the nationalists, racists and xenophobes to close us off from the world. Is that not a view you can get behind?

"Stop posting in the style a Russian Twitter troll then?"

What style is that? A view different to yours? Or is this back to me being even handed in my views of people?

[Dr_N]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

codejunky>So its ok if they are supporting your 'side'?

Show me the xenophobic remoaners. Or I'm calling, "FAKE NEWS!"

Are your pants on fire? AGAIN?

Or are you trying some of your Russian twitter troll skillz and sophistry by saying that because the EU doesn't grant freedom of movement to everyone on the planet it's RACIST!!!!!!

Enough already. Go make a success of Brexit. In 50 years' time (by ReeSmogg's timescale) maybe it'll be unicorns and rainbows. Who cares. I certainly won't. And if it turns out to be the total clusterfvck I think it'll be, then you can always blame the EU like Jeremy Hunt has just started doing. Masterful.

Toodle Pip

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Dr_N

"Show me the xenophobic remoaners. Or I'm calling, "FAKE NEWS!""

Its a bit hypocritical for you to call my response "Trumpism" when you directly quote Trump himself. The evidence is the first comment of mine in this thread that you replied to (I quote)-

"As remain arguments for hiding in the EU seem to be fear of the world, fear of the US bending us over, fear of China bending us over, doing the will of Russia or even fear of the EU's retaliation (those nasty foreigners) and the comment of pulling up the drawbridge or banning foreigners almost always come from remain."

Are you going to claim you have never found an example of that. If so I suggest you try looking first because I have responded to such more than a few times.

"Or are you trying some of your Russian twitter troll skillz"

Just to ask again (I quote)- "What style is that? A view different to yours? Or is this back to me being even handed in my views of people?". Is claiming I am a Russian troll not proof that you dont have anything else to contribute?

"by saying that because the EU doesn't grant freedom of movement to everyone on the planet it's RACIST!!!!!!"

Did I say that? I call Gremany's invitation to the middle east a terrible mistake and I call the EU accepting it as their problem as a self inflicted migration crisis. But I am talking about some remainers who fear the foreigners outside the EU borders. The fear of the US, China, EU, Russia and someone at one point suggested the world would increase their food prices because they know they could charge what they want. Your repeated claims that I am Russian as if it is some kind of insult doesnt sound great,

"Enough already."

Short of answers, full of the usual trolling? Come back when you have something to contribute to the discussion.

[Dr_N]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

codejunky> Did I say that? I call Gremany's invitation to the middle east a terrible mistake and I call the EU accepting it as their problem as a self inflicted migration crisis.

If you actually just used that type of language I wouldn't have a problem with you.

But you don't do you? More like, "Merkel invited the entire Middle East to come in. BoogahWoogah!!!!! Scary!!!! OMG!"

codejunky>But I am talking about some remainers who fear the foreigners outside the EU borders. The fear of the US, China, EU, Russia

Utter bollocks. And hilarious given your propensity for spreading dramatic, "Dusky Hordes!" type propaganda.

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Dr_N

"If you actually just used that type of language I wouldn't have a problem with you.

But you don't do you? More like, "Merkel invited the entire Middle East to come in. BoogahWoogah!!!!! Scary!!!! OMG!""

Eh? So you have no problem with me using the language I used except for when I say "Merkel invited the entire Middle East to come in" which is in the quote you deem acceptable? And when I mention the factual migration crisis you are usually pretty quick to troll me as pushing racist and xenophobic propaganda. As I said I assume this is some defence mechanism you have against accepting facts.

"Utter bollocks. And hilarious given your propensity for spreading dramatic, "Dusky Hordes!" type propaganda."

Except I dont. So back to my desire to be welcoming to the world and I make no secret of that in my posts, you call that ""Dusky Hordes!" type propaganda.". Yet you refuse to condemn anti-foreigner statements by remain while I condemn them from both sides.

I have noticed that you seem to have dropped the Russian troll stuff you were saying, but I am not doing as it seems to be the last stand of a defeated remainer (not just you but I feel the example should be made). So again why do you insist I am a Russian troll? Is it- "A view different to yours? Or is this back to me being even handed in my views of people?. Is claiming I am a Russian troll not proof that you dont have anything else to contribute?". I follow it up with what do you have against the Russians? I know a lovely Russian couple and have had pleasant interactions with a few more.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

As for WTO, the UK may have to get its act together rather more than our government can agree on just to qualify for membership. And then ... will the WTO itself survive if Trump goes to war with it? What will he do if and when WTO rule against him and in favour of any of the countries he's attacked, such as China, the EU, or Canada and Mexico?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please remember that Trump is working to paralyze the WTO by blocking appointments to vacant WTO positions, which will soon make it impossible for the WTO do actually do anything.

[strum]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

>Because we know the the alternative of Labour would let the unions destroy the economy like they did in the early 70s?

A fine attempt at historical comment. Except that the Tories were in power in the early 70s (Ted Heath & Tony Barber - he of the inflation-fuelling 'Barber Boom').

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

A fine attempt at historical comment. Except that the Tories were in power in the early 70s

My point exactly. They were destroyed by the unions, Labour was installed, and things got even worse (oh, I remember that happy night when Callaghan's government finally fell by one vote). Then Maggie arrived.

[strum]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

>They were destroyed by the unions

Bollocks. They were ousted by the electorate, as the incompetents they were.

To quote the Private Eye cover of the time:

Ted Heath: Who governs Britain?

Electorate: Not you, matey!

>things got even worse

More bollocks. Healey took the hit for Barber's incompetence, and the Tory press clearly did a good job bamboozling you, but there's no way that Labour made things worse.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Tory press clearly did a good job bamboozling you, but there's no way that Labour made things worse.

I didn't need to read the press, I lived through those times. Power cuts and strikes (Unions), my father being laid off (Labour), me getting a better-paid job than he'd ever had (Tory). Labour policies have consistently always ended up with the economy in worse shape by the time they were kicked out. The only time they ever managed more than one term in government was when Tony Bliar was around to drag the party away from the hard left, and we're still paying for the damage he managed to cause.

[TheVogon]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

"Then why the F*&K do they keep voting torys into power"

Because the alternative is far worse!

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ TheVogon

"Because the alternative is far worse!"

I am holding my nose as I say this but I wish I could upvote you more than once for that comment. Not because its you but because they are the lesser of the evils.

[Mooseman]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

"People are already upset at the level of control exercised by the EU, "

No, people are upset at the level of control they have been TOLD the EU holds over them. Not the same thing really is it? these are of course the same people who are quite happy for the government to bypass parliament in implementing deals, new laws, amending existing laws.....take back control? really?

As I always say when someone spews out this nonsense, can you name one EU law that has affected your life in any way, other than those pesky health and safety and workers rights? 87% of our laws don't even MENTION the eu, that's how much control they have over us.

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Mooseman

"can you name one EU law that has affected your life in any way, other than those pesky health and safety and workers rights?"

Hang on did you just discount laws from the EU we are not allowed to mention? Ok.

Increasing energy bills due to climate laws. Our agreed portion of the co2 reduction is above the other members and it is the reason actual power generation was taken offline while expensive and barely working tech was put in its place.

The EU controls our tariffs which makes the rest of the world more expensive (EU's protectionism).

The EU has decided to participate in a trade war with the US, and we are in the EU so we are in trade war.

Low power household electronics.

GDPR.

Recycling targets.

That will do for now.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Increasing energy bills due to climate laws. Our agreed portion of the co2 reduction is above the other members and it is the reason actual power generation was taken offline while expensive and barely working tech was put in its place. Note the use of the word agreed. That was a UK decision, not a European decision, and one we should be proud of.

The EU controls our tariffs which makes the rest of the world more expensive (EU's protectionism). Well - except for the countries the EU has trade agreements with - so just about everywhere

The EU has decided to participate in a trade war with the US, and we are in the EU so we are in trade war. Because Trumpy-wumpy loves us, and he wouldn't hurt our steel manufacturers/car makers/plane builders....

Low power household electronics. Really? That's worth a 50 year recession - a low energy lightbulb?

GDPR. Because? You love junk mail?

Recycling targets. Yes - one I agree with, can't have Brussels bureaucrats forcing ME to put my plastics in a special bin! You wouldn't catch the USA, Canada, Japan or other countries ever trying to impose targets on recycling!

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@AC

"Note the use of the word agreed. That was a UK decision, not a European decision, and one we should be proud of."

Agreed as part of the EU co2 allocation. Proud of? Ha.

"Well - except for the countries the EU has trade agreements with - so just about everywhere"

Except when we leave we can easily get cheaper imports by reducing our tariffs from what the EU applies. So no.

"Because Trumpy-wumpy loves us, and he wouldn't hurt our steel manufacturers/car makers/plane builders...."

This would be the foreigner hating remainer argument. The EU participating in a trade war makes the EU poorer. Junker said as much.

"Really? That's worth a 50 year recession - a low energy lightbulb?"

Are you gonna predict another recession. For far 0 of the 2 predicted remain recessions.

"Because? You love junk mail?"

I dont care. I have a junk folder.

"Yes - one I agree with, can't have Brussels bureaucrats forcing ME to put my plastics in a special bin! You wouldn't catch the USA, Canada, Japan or other countries ever trying to impose targets on recycling!"

Doing something seriously uneconomical. So bad that a fair amount of our exported plastic to be recycled is gonna be burned or buried because it isnt worth doing.

Btw AC you are validating my response to Mooseman who's only request was- 'can you name one EU law that has affected your life in any way, other than those pesky health and safety and workers rights?'. The answer of course being yes.

[Voland's right hand]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Do not forget. It is Raab quoting it.

So what makes you think that it was not carefully isolated out of context and made to sound like Project Fear?

In fact, my bet would be on that.

[Jason Bloomberg]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Raab has been labelling the EU's harsh assessment of hard brexit as "unhelpful". Not wrong mind you. And he is saying he is preparing for all eventualities, including things like food shortages, riots in the streets, and twenty mile tailbacks into Dover if truckers haven't fallen victim to starvation or rampaging mobs, all the while laughing that off as "never going to happen".

I would bet, if he was asked if plans have been made to impose martial law, he would not say no.

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ Marketing Hack

Project fear never stopped. The mental gymnastics to claim doom and gloom have been amazing from before the referendum and continuing. We can all however be happy that the 2 predicted bexit recessions never materialised and that the 3rd is just some worthless nebulous 'it will be in the future after brexit' kinda thing.

[MonkeyCee]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Rioting does seem pretty extreme. Maybe from food shortages, but I would expect that if got anywhere close to that the PTB will sort out the food at least. Riots are Not A Good thing, as it's not actually possible to rule without the consent of the people, and showing up the security services (and their masters) makes this more apparent.

I do think that many people have relaxed into the "we've got until the end of 2020 to actually agree stuff" rather than realising that extension is conditional on carious other deals being reached, notably the Irish border.

I'll also note that the Dutch government is currently issuing sensible advice on what to do, especially being prepared to get your paperwork in before March in case of a no-deal.

They also apparently haven't given their sovereignty either, since they are quite happy to offer residence to anyone who is legally living here, or citizenship if you're willing to do the "become a Dutch person course"* without requiring a sign off from the EU. Turns out they like law abiding tax payers....

* "Don't do what naughty Jan doesn't not do" :D

[Phage]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

Residence ? Do you have a link ?

[Chris 3]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

It's rather like the Y2K bug. There was a *real* prospect of *real* problems if the issues weren't mitigated. Perhaps not a massive risk, but one that needed to be talked about and worked on.

That wasn't Project Fear then, and it isn't Project Fear now. Luckily we sorted out Y2K, hopefully we can do the same with this. But this is more complex because it is political as well as technical.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@Chris 3: @Y2K bug: "That wasn't Project Fear then, and it isn't Project Fear now"

I was very much involved in the Y2K circus and believe me, a *lot* of potential issues were re-coded, peer reviewed, tested and implemented. Every sensible software maker did their due diligence at the time and most, if not all, critical systems were overhauled in time for Y2K. As it happens, this massive task worked out fine. If we only would take climate change as seriously worldwide too...

[Dan 55]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

I don't know about project fear, but have a quick through the EU preparedness notices. It's probably equally useful for UK businesses. Then go back to what you were doing as it's never going to happen, right?

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

I have no doubt that there will be a lot of painful adjustments

I think one of the things that really annoys me is that the people dismissing the effects of the 'painful adjustments'[1] (most of them politicians) are, to a greater or lesser extent, insulated from the effects of Brexit.

So what if food costs 20% more or energy prices rise? The vast wealth they are making from their investment vehicles or non-exec directorships means they are utterly insulated.

It's going to be a rude awakening for the people that voted Brexit on the basis that it will improve things. Especially for those already struggling to cope and I think their is going to be a lot of anger. Sadly, those who got us into this position are also adept at deflecting blame so the parlous situation will always be "someone elses fault" (most likely the big, bad EU for not giving in to every demand we make, even the utterly laughable ones).

To misquote a phrase "war is a democracy since the enemy also gets a vote".

[1] Nice eupanism for "it's going to hurt and a lot of people are going to be a lot worse off".

[codejunky]

Re: I was pro-remain, but this really is "Project Fear" at work.

@ CrazyOldCatMan

"So what if food costs 20% more or energy prices rise?"

Actually food is expected to become cheaper which is to the benefit of everyone in the country. Energy costs are a consequence of the 'green' energy bollocks.

[Unep Eurobats]

Perhaps in a very mild form

Cross reviews on Trustpilot when delivery of a new Kindle is delayed or the price of avocados goes up.

'I was livid I tell you! I only gave them three stars.'

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Perhaps in a very mild form

Wait, the price of guacamole is going up after Brexit??

BURN IT DOWN!!! BURN IT DOWN!!!!!!

[Anonymous C0ward]

Re: Perhaps in a very mild form

Guac is always extra.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

Anyone remember the poll tax riots?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

Anyone remember the poll tax riots?

Oh yes, a few yobs causing trouble for a day or so, 30 years ago. I'd almost forgotten that.

[strum]

Re: I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

>Oh yes, a few yobs causing trouble for a day or so, 30 years ago. I'd almost forgotten that.

The government hadn't. The Poll Tax was abolished, because of those 'yobs'.

[TheVogon]

Re: I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

"The Poll Tax was abolished, because of those 'yobs'."

No it was mostly abolished because the difficulty of getting people to pay it. The proles simply avoided registering.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

Remember them? I was there.

If anyone wants to plunge this country into chaos it is easy enough. A social media organised flash mob of people going into local supermarkets around the country and buying up milk, sugar and bread, will be enough to light the fuse of panic buying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

"Anyone remember the poll tax riots?"

yes ... anyone know what the SWP line on Brexit is as that might be important (actually its probably the same as for most subjects - i.e. "Brexit is a great excuse to print loads of placards, march around central London and smash a few windows if we ghet the chance")

[Anonymous Coward]

SWP line on Brexit

Brexit – A Blow Against Austerity And Neoliberalism

Seems to cover it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: SWP line on Brexit

That link is insightful, what a load of muddled thinking. It’s Brexit itself which is opening the door to unfettered neoliberalism, trade deals with Trump that will decimate our farms and much else not least the environment. All championed by that Eton educated Bullingdon SWP champion Bojo. No wonder no one takes these student union amateur politicians seriously.

[Mooseman]

Re: SWP line on Brexit

"Brexit – A Blow Against Austerity And Neoliberalism"

by allowing the conservatives to press your face into the dirt even more than before. Good job.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: SWP line on Brexit

I'm not claiming to support it.

The referendum was entirely based around Douglas Adams' lizard analogy. Would you rather play the parsnip game with Cameron or Juncker? Not playing is not an option.

[GW7]

"Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

Go back to before the Good Friday agreement and consider if "the troubles" around the Northern Ireland border constitutes prior evidence of civil unrest. It was a very bad situation back then. Is there any evidence or reason to suggest that "no-deal" WON'T send us back there?

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

The NI "Troubles" had their roots in the civil rights excesses practiced by the Stormont government in the 50's and 60's, which predated even the common market, never mind the EU. Trying to link that to possible civil disturbance over having customs posts on a border is a bit of a stretch.

[Teiwaz]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

The NI "Troubles" had their roots in the civil rights excesses practiced by the Stormont government in the 50's and 60's,

That was true of the original - the Border crossing towers are something that the 'local community' there really found oppressive - there is No appetite to return.

A return of the little portacabins the Irish Customs use to have would probably count, even though mostly harmless - seriously no appetite for Authoritarian Stop Checks now they're gone.

N.I. seemes to be doing quite well with no Central government to speak of, but of course all the real decisions were handed over to quangos years ago as the councils were hotbeds of partisan politics.

Place should become an anarcho-cyniclist commune and get it over with.

[GW7]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

I thought that the Good Friday Agreement led to the Provisional IRA putting their arms beyond use. My understanding is that free movement throughout Ireland and Northern Ireland (i.e. no hard border) was one of the key provisions that persuaded them. They basically had that anyhow, as both sides of the border are in the EU.

I really hope they can't be arsed to get started up again if "no deal" brings a return to a hard border and a breach to the agreement. Yeah, maybe they'll just shrug it off, and we'll all breath a sigh of relief. But if the shit hits the fan, it will have been entirely forseeable as to why.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

I thought that the Good Friday Agreement led to the Provisional IRA putting their arms beyond use. My understanding is that free movement throughout Ireland and Northern Ireland (i.e. no hard border) was one of the key provisions that persuaded them.

That's a somewhat naive interpretation. IRA support was aready falling by the end of the 80's, even the people who supported their alleged aims (a United Ireland) were disgusted by their tactics. When the US started to treat them as terrorists instead of freedom fightrs (under a Democrat president, no less) they had to cut their losses. Sinn Fein have been attached to the "ballot box & armalite" strategy since at least the early 80s, and Adams realized it was time to put the armalites away for a while. The look on his face as he agreed to the Good Friday agreement was a picture, like hed been sucking lemons, but he had little choice.

As for free movement, the UK and Ireland have had a common travel area with freedom of residence, work, voting, etc. since the Republic broke away. As a child I remember the pre-troubles border posts, but apart from the need to have a special sticker for the car to show that all tax was apid they were irrelevant for ordinary folks. Less so perhaps for business, but they certainly didn't process every vehicle and even today there are still customs agents who perform spot checks on commercial vehicles.

But if the shit hits the fan, it will have been entirely forseeable as to why.

They've rarely needed an excuse, and they will no doubt find one if they want to, but the current generation who grew up with the recentTroubles are much less likely to let it slide back, especially now that the world as a whole is much more aware of terrorism and it's excuses.

[strum]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

>I really hope they can't be arsed to get started up again if "no deal" brings a return to a hard border and a breach to the agreement.

We can hope. But the GFA didn't remove all the arseholes from the territory. And isolated customs posts are such a juicy target...

[Dan 55]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

You know Ireland joined the EFTA at the same time as the UK in 1960 and joined the EC at the same time as the UK in 1973 partly due to the 'customs posts on a border' problem?

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

You know Ireland joined the EFTA at the same time as the UK

Shush - don't distract the poor dear with actualy facts. They'll get all mixed up with the "350m a week" in it's head..

[Nick Kew]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

The NI "Troubles" had their roots in the civil rights excesses practiced by the Stormont government in the 50's and 60's

Erm, which century? The Stormont Government only came into existence in 1922, as a response to the "troubles".

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

Erm, which century? The Stormont Government only came into existence in 1922, as a response to the "troubles".

The term "the troubles" has been used for multiple periods, I think for most of us today it would be the period from 1968 to the mid-ninetlies, perhaps for some the earlier "troubles' in the 1950s. I doubt if anyone alive today remembers the pre-1922 period.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

Well, for one thing a reconstituted post-Brexit IRA is going to find out that, post-9/11., there is going to be a LOT less enthusiasm for looking the other way while they raise money and buy guns in the U.S.

[TheVogon]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

"there is going to be a LOT less enthusiasm for looking the other way while they raise money and buy guns in the U.S."

Yes, all those buckets 'for the cause' every St Patrick's day disappeared rather rapidly when they found out what comes around goes around on 11/9.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

"there is going to be a LOT less enthusiasm for looking the other way while they raise money and buy guns in the U.S."

I'd like to think so but presumably there's still an Irish-American vote to placate.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

@Doctor Syntax

I think you will find that a shockingly large percentage of the firefighters and cops who died trying to get people out of the World Trade Center had Irish surnames. So that Irish-American vote cuts both ways.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

LOT less enthusiasm for looking the other way while they raise money and buy guns in the U.S

It wasn't so much a case of "looking the other way" as "enthusiastically supporting". And I don't imagine that conditions have changed that much.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

This constant appeal to the Good Friday agreement by remainers is very interesting. Its almost as if they are saying that when it comes to the ballot box vs the bullet then its the bullet that wins. If only political parties had realised this in the early 70s then we could have avoided decades of unrest while everyone maintained that whatever it took the bullet was not allowed to win. Also, it gives a disturbing message to the more extreme ends of the political spectrum of what to do if the ballot box result at the referrendum is ignored.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

"This constant appeal to the Good Friday agreement by remainers is very interesting."

It's because it's an international agreement which places obligations on the UK govt. It's something the Leavers ignored. Or maybe they reckoned if they were going to repudiate one agreement they might as well repudiate another. BOGOFF.

[Ben Tasker]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

> It's something the Leavers ignored.

They didn't ignore it, they claimed it was ridiculous and "Project Fear" that the Irish Border could become an issue in the event of a Leave vote.

[Nick Kew]

Re: "Where is the evidence to suggest that would happen?"

NI is a hard one to judge from outside. But insofar as a pragmatic centre ground exists in NI politics, I'd expect brexit to increase support among them for unification with Ireland. Particularly a Rees-Mogg brexit that sweeps away food standards in Blighty and so necessitates a hard border.

[2Nick3]

Backfired a bit, eh?

"In the run-up to the referendum itself, a number of big tech companies' UK tentacles came out as pro-Remain and told their staff to vote against leaving the EU, including IBM..."

Maybe if they hadn't laid so many people off that would have been more effective for the Stay contingency.

[Boris the Cockroach]

As previously

noted when Airbus went "whaa whaa whaa " about closing down the wing making operation in North Wales, this is more about Amazon protecting its profits than caring if brexit happens , doesn't happen, or happens with a one off trade deal.

Because if we lose access to the single market, Amazon WILL have to setup a british HQ and channel all the UKs profits through there subjecting them to corporation tax.(finally) with the inland theives (i mean revenue) lookign at them very carefully for dodgey things like IP transfer pricing that just so happens to match the entire years profits.. and the same the following year for an entirely different amount that just so happened to match that years profits too.

And for a lot of remainers who wittle on about the EU 'protecting our rights' , just remember the the EU as currently setup is the a neo-liberal multi-national corporatists wet dream made flesh.

[Teiwaz]

Re: As previously

just remember the the EU as currently setup is the a neo-liberal multi-national corporatists wet dream made flesh.

Really? They actually bothered to bring Microsoft to heel over bad practice, and are trying with Google.

Damn sure the U.S is too sold out to be bothered with consumer rights, and the UK certainly can be bought easily (and are ready to sell its citizens data at any time, bargain basement prices, closing down sale, final year).

* 'neo-liberal'??? Is that like new Labour - 'liberal' generally has a different meaning this side of the pond.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: As previously

"neo-liberal'??? Is that like new Labour - 'liberal' generally has a different meaning this side of the pond."

Dunno but I do get pissed off with this neo-this, neo-that stuff.

[Anonymous Coward]

Neo-xxxxxxxx

“Dunno but I do get pissed off with this neo-this, neo-that stuff.”

I’ll try make it easier for you:

Neo-liberals, let’s just call them “extreme capitalists of the rapacious kind”, but that doesn’t quite roll off the tongue so slickly.

Neo-Marxists, let’s just call them “student union politician types who mostly haven’t done a proper day’s work in their lives and sponge off mum and dad or other taxpayers.” Again, doesn’t quite roll off the tongue.

The neo part of both labels denotes that the current crop are more clueless and than the originals, but we don’t want to offend them to much by calling them out for what they really are.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: As previously

I do get pissed off with this neo-this, neo-that stuff.

Except for neo-prog of course.

[Dr_N]

Re: As previously

Doctor Syntax> Dunno but I do get pissed off with this neo-this, neo-that stuff.

Yes, Matrix fanbois are annoying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: As previously

"And for a lot of remainers who wittle on about the EU 'protecting our rights' , just remember the the EU as currently setup is the a neo-liberal multi-national corporatists wet dream made flesh."

As somebody who's staying in the EU, I agree it sometimes went too far that way - and it was largely because of the UK's influence. So the future looks better!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: As previously

Because if we lose access to the single market, Amazon WILL have to setup a british HQ and channel all the UKs profits through there subjecting them to corporation tax.(finally) with the inland theives (i mean revenue) lookign at them very carefully for dodgey things like IP transfer pricing that just so happens to match the entire years profits. Oh yes, for sure. Because we know how tough the UK government is on tax-dodging, etc. It's not as if we would ever, in any way, condone off-shore tax avoidance......

[NerryTutkins]

make up your minds

Today we have Jeremy Hunt saying the public will blame the EU if there is no deal. And we also have JRM insisting that 'no deal' is likely but no big deal and nothing to worry about.

Since they've had two years and failed to agree among themselves on exactly what pie-in-the-sky customs arrangement they present to the EU to reject, it's hardly surprising they can't come up with a consistent position on whether it's going to be a shit storm they'll have to try to blame on the EU, or will be fine so best not to worry about.

How about those saying it'll be fine reassure the public by making clear that if the pound drops below parity to the EUR inflation rips to over 10%, and the economy does go into recession, they'll admit they were wrong and put their full support into joining EFTA (because the EU surely won't have the UK back).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

Since they've had two years and failed to agree among themselves on exactly what pie-in-the-sky customs arrangement they present to the EU to reject, it's hardly surprising they can't come up with a consistent position on whether it's going to be a shit storm they'll have to try to blame on the EU, or will be fine so best not to worry about.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's really odd, watching from a safe distance, to see that British politicians still haven't learned the obvious, which was told to them two years ago, and which any thinking analyst could have predicted when the referendum was first offered...

1. The EU will not allow the dismantling of their rules and structures to coddle a country that decided to leave.

2. A country that was 13% of the EU population leaving the EU will not then have the power to dictate terms to the EU.

3. The EU is not stupid enough to believe 90% of what the UK government and the Brexit bunch have been claiming... neither of whom seem to be able to put together three consecutive statements without lying or attempting to mislead about something.

4. Repeating impossible demands for 2+ years will not make them any more credible.

5. If the UK does not want to be controlled by the EU in any way, why do they think they will be able to control the EU? And keep trying to do it, through one trick or another...

It is also interesting to note that the Brexit Bunch seem to share with the Flat Earthers an ability to ignore or 'explain away' any evidence that does not support their delusions.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: make up your minds

1. The EU will not allow the dismantling of their rules and structures to coddle a country that decided to leave.

No one but remainers thinks that anyone is trying to dictate terms to the EU. What leavers would like is a reasonable agreement that works for both sides, but the EU will never agree to that. It's the EU that expects to dictate terms, and they believe that they can still do so. If not, they'll accept a solution which is poor for them, as long as it hurts the UK more. They cannot, and will not, tolerate anyone breaking away from their empire successfully. Never mind the remarks about "having their cake and eating it ", the EU wants the cake monopoly.

[Adair]

Re: make up your minds

@ Phil O'Sophical - If the UK was on an economic and population par with the EU then your point might be well made, but in reality the UK is a light weight when standing alongside EU/China/India/US. In other words they get to call the shots, just like we did when we 'ruled the waves, and waived the rules'.

No doubt there's plenty of wiggle room if the UK can come to terms with the reality of its position. The EU doesn't show any sign, and it is not in its interests, to treat the UK with contempt, but it must be getting increasingly difficult not to have that attitude given the blustering chaotic clown show the UK Govt.(TM) has been putting on to date, in lieu of actual well formulated long term propositions - with a dash of humility thrown in to grease the wheels.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: make up your minds

The EU doesn't show any sign, and it is not in its interests, to treat the UK with contempt

It's not a question of contempt, but punishment. If any country leaves the EU and succeeds, it demonstrates that the EU is not necessary, and obviously the EU doesn't want that. It is very much in the EU's interests to ensure that Brexit fails, and from that point of view they will not negotiate fairly, what would be "win-win" on a level playing field is effectively a "lose" for them.

but it must be getting increasingly difficult not to have that attitude given the blustering chaotic clown show the UK Govt.(TM) has been putting on to date,

Absolutely. May is so keen to have a Brexit without actually leaving that she has given the EU negotiators the impression that they can bully us into staying, so they are even less likely to try "real" negotiations.

[jmch]

Re: make up your minds

"It's not a question of contempt, but punishment. "

The EU refusing to accept demands from UK is not 'punishment', it's the EU standing up for it's core principles. For example one of them is EU members get free movement of goods, capital and people, and these 3 are tied to each other. No free movement of goods and/or capital without free movement of people.

UK Brexit position is to continue having free movement of capital and goods without free movement of people. The EU saying no to this isn't punitive, it's being consistent with principle. Rather, it's the UK Brexiters who want the UK to have the benefits of membership without the responsibilities, and then whine when told 'no'.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

No free movement of goods and/or capital without free movement of people.

That's not principle, that's dogma.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: make up your minds

blustering chaotic clown

Is that the clean, confused version of Insane Clown Posse?

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: make up your minds

It's the EU that expects to can dictate terms,

Beggars can't be choosers.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ Doctor Syntax

"It's the EU that expects to can dictate terms,

Beggars can't be choosers."

I do like that someone in government has woken up to point out the EU is entitled to nothing. No money, no extras no dictating, squat. The EU can cry, shout and throw toys all it likes, it is entitled to nothing.

We get brexit purely by not participating in the EU. No money, no adopting their laws no nothing. If the EU want the money they need, to not have to build a border in Ireland (because it isnt our problem) or coopertative agreements then they need to negotiate.

I wouldnt be so degrading as to say they need to beg. All they would have to do is negotiate. Otherwise they get whatever we are willing, if we are willing, to give them.

Reality really does wipe out your view of brexit. We are not beggers. The EU can dictate all they want, we have no reason to listen. Only those desperate to remain would think the EU has rights or entitlements on our country. They really dont.

[Adair]

Re: make up your minds

@codejunky - There is an old saying which applies perfectly to your post: 'Cut off your nose to spite your face'.

You're right, the UK can sit and wait until the clock ticks down. Who do you think will be the biggest loser? It is not going to be the EU, they are a little bit bigger that us and quite able to absorb the ensuing losses, although I am sure that they would prefer not to have to do that.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ Adair

"There is an old saying which applies perfectly to your post: 'Cut off your nose to spite your face'."

I know that saying, I use it plenty when I talk about the EU. All a matter of perspective.

"Who do you think will be the biggest loser?"

Tough to define without parameters. Hard brexit/no deal the EU loses hard. Soft brexit/BINO UK loses hard. EU and UK come to a simple trade agreement accepting each others independence = win/win.

"It is not going to be the EU, they are a little bit bigger that us and quite able to absorb the ensuing losses"

Oh no, not that mistake. The recession nearly brought down the EU, Italy nearly brought down the EU, Greece nearly brought down the EU. On brexit Junker was already getting his excuses for the break up of the EU blame on the UK. The EU is large, so was the Soviet Union (not claiming they are the same thing) look at the state of Greece and the hell the EU put them through. Nobody talks about the twin engine of growth any more they talk about Germany only when looking for a success story.

The EU is big. It is also in multiple self inflicted crises. This isnt death by a thousand cuts, this is big gaping wounds and they are struggling to tend to them. Mostly because they cannot agree between members. The ECB nearly went broke bailing out Greece.

Currently they are in trade war (dragging us along for the ride). Your giant is in serious pain. If you want a success story look at China who went from socialist peasantry to proper world stage actor in a few decades. In that time the EU has inflicted itself with huge crises. Look at the US bouncing out of the global recession and in a booming position. Look at the EU still struggling to get its economy back after the recession a decade ago.

[Adair]

Re: make up your minds

You seem to have the idea that the UK is in tip-top shape and all ready to make the weight in the heavy-weight division.

But we're not, are we? Our politics are a shambles, largely populated by 2nd and 3rd raters; our social justice is a mess and has been for years; our economy is heavily weighted towards services, i.e. our tangible exports are mostly easily substituted by other nations, often cheaper, and (in the case of the rest of the world) often nearer.

The UK is by no means a hopeless case, but it is not fighting fit, is definitely in the middle-weight division, and really really needs to demonstrate some humility, AND has a hell of a lot of work to do getting it's house in order.

We may well cut ourselves adrift from the 'wicked EU', but it's clear already, through the 'Brexit' shambles, that there is no coheren,t intelligent and realistic plan and no sign of one emerging. So, all we are doing is exactly that - 'cutting ourselves adrift' - and there are people within and without who are only too willing to take full advantage of that, and to hell with the consequences for everyone else.

[jmch]

Re: make up your minds

"Tough to define without parameters. Hard brexit/no deal the EU loses hard."*

*citation needed?

[Fonant]

Re: make up your minds

"the EU is entitled to nothing"

Ah, but that's not true, is it. The EU is entitled to payments the UK has already contractually agreed to make. And the UK government has agreed this fact already.

Yes, we could just leave and refuse to pay what we currently owe. But do you think this will make trade deals with the EU, or other countries, easier or harder to negotiate? How would this affect other countries' trust in the UK as being a reliable trading partner?

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ Fonant

"Ah, but that's not true, is it. The EU is entitled to payments the UK has already contractually agreed to make. And the UK government has agreed this fact already."

Actually no. May offered the money if they negotiated. I didnt agree with her doing so, the EU is entitled to nothing and that is the total fact. They did spend in our name expecting us to pay (those are costs already incurred for being part of the EU) and I am not against paying them but the actual standing is the EU is entitled to nothing. At all. Zip.

"Yes, we could just leave and refuse to pay what we currently owe. But do you think this will make trade deals with the EU, or other countries, easier or harder to negotiate?"

Amusingly the EU will get it if the EU negotiates a deal (according to the govs offer). The EU with its purpose of existence being to negotiate trade deals, and the UK already meeting the regulations and being willing to make a trade deal shines a poor light on the EU's ability/competency.

"How would this affect other countries' trust in the UK as being a reliable trading partner?"

Our reputation is already sound. The EU already have a reputation as a law breaker and incompetent as well as being untrustworthy in their agreements-

>EU law: fish must be labelled in latin. Didnt happen in France and was not really enforced. When a fine was delivered Macron laughed, told (the mayor?) that there will be no fine and they did not need to follow the law.

>Multiple crises and self inflicted. Particularly asylum being claimed in the first safe country being disregarded unilaterally by Germany and causing a migration issue (it then becomes migration not asylum).

>The EU signed an agreement with Cameron that our contribution would not be used to bail out Greece. Then they did it anyway.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: make up your minds

Actually no. May offered the money if they negotiated

You don't seem to understand the phrase "contractually obliged". We signed deals and contracts in the past that lay down what we will pay. We have to stick to those contracts because, if we don't, no-one will trust us enough to want to trade with us.

And, if you think our reputation is sound, try talking to the New Zealand or Australian farmers that got shafted by the UK some while back.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ CrazyOldCatMan

"You don't seem to understand the phrase "contractually obliged". We signed deals and contracts in the past that lay down what we will pay. "

Actually the EU signed in our name as we were/are members. However the amusing bill was discredited line by line by a junior negotiator and even the EU negotiators didnt think the inflated bill would go anywhere. But still we are entitled to nothing from the EU and the EU is not entitled to anything from us, however you want to try and claim otherwise.

"We have to stick to those contracts because, if we don't, no-one will trust us enough to want to trade with us."

Except the EU cannot be trusted to uphold signed deals because they have form of not doing! Also form for not following the law. And are in multiple self inflicted crises which they expect we should bail them out of. So no.

"And, if you think our reputation is sound, try talking to the New Zealand or Australian farmers that got shafted by the UK some while back."

Isnt Aus one of those lovely places who made good suggestions to our leaving as it is a good idea. Pretty sure they also want a trade deal... Sorry you were saying?

[Schultz]

Contractually obliged to pay ...

So GB should not pay the EU -- and in return the EU should just cease paying pensions to UK citizens that had worked in the EU bureaucracy? There are some financial obligations that remain after the divorce, it's not just stuff made up to annoy the British.

[codejunky]

Re: Contractually obliged to pay ...

@ Schultz

"So GB should not pay the EU -- and in return the EU should just cease paying pensions to UK citizens that had worked in the EU bureaucracy? There are some financial obligations that remain after the divorce, it's not just stuff made up to annoy the British."

Excellent, I call this progress. We have moved from the 'we must pay' to the 'we must must must because contract' to 'ah no we dont have to, but...'. This is where it is difficult finding common ground with remain as we have to agree on the facts first and I often find the other side lacking. So-

The EU is entitled to nothing. Absolutely not a penny nothing. And we would have brexit. We voted for brexit and we can unilaterally have that, the EU wants and even demands things from us and is entitled (has to be given) nothing!

No matter how many times a starry eyed EU lover claims we are begging or are in a weak position or have to accept whatever the EU dictate, that are wrong, wrong, simply wrong (I am hoping repetition helps). That is the absolute starting point, the certainty, the guaranteed to be available deal no matter what.

The UK need to know it, the EU need to know it. That does not mean we should accept that as the only possibility, in fact we should on both sides work for something better. And maybe we might decide we should cough up some money or do some things for the EU, But this defeatist 'EU has us over a barrel' bull is bull.

[Steve Gill]

Re: make up your minds

@codejunky > "Isnt Aus one of those lovely places who made good suggestions to our leaving as it is a good idea. Pretty sure they also want a trade deal... Sorry you were saying?"

No, Aus was one of the countries saying they'd be OK with making a deal with us once they've finished setting up an FTA with the EU but not to expect such nice terms as the EU is getting.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: make up your minds

but not to expect such nice terms as the EU is getting.

Mainly because the EU have threatened them with reprisals if they offered such terms.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ CrazyOldCatMan

"You don't seem to understand the phrase "contractually obliged"."

Just in case you find this at all difficult (and all you others who think the EU is entitled to anything)-

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/125.pdf#page=5

'"Article 50 provides for a ‘guillotine’ after two years if a withdrawal agreement

is not reached unless all Member States, including the UK, agree to extend

negotiations. Although there are competing interpretations, we conclude that

if agreement is not reached, all EU law—including provisions concerning

ongoing financial contributions and machinery for adjudication—will cease

to apply, and the UK would be subject to no enforceable obligation to make

any financial contribution at all."

There is apparently different 'interpretations' on the legal front which likely means ambiguity and ambiguity in a contract favours the one who did not draw up the contract. Not a shock since they didnt expect it to ever be used.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

ongoing financial contributions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think this means what you think it means.

This is not applicable to previously incurred financial obligations.

It applies to 'ongoing' or 'continuing' obligations. In other words, if the UK crashes out of the EU with no agreement, it ceases to benefit from any programs or memberships under EU auspices, which cease immediately, and charges that would have been incurred for those memberships or programs also cease, creating no new debt.

It is not a post meal get out of jail free card for doing a national level dine and dash scam.

[Steve Gill]

Re: make up your minds

@codejunky > "Our reputation is already sound. The EU already have a reputation as a law breaker and incompetent as well as being untrustworthy in their agreements"

When was the last time you spoke to people around the world? People feel sorry for us as individuals for having to live in a country that is so stupid economically it likes to shoot itself in the foot then yell at others for not doing the same. There is currently no trust at all in the UK.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ Steve Gill

"When was the last time you spoke to people around the world?"

Who are around the world? Currently living there? Recently visited? From around the world. The number varies.

"People feel sorry for us as individuals for having to live in a country that is so stupid economically it likes to shoot itself in the foot then yell at others for not doing the same"

Really? Can you define the extent of the people around the world you speak of as above?

"There is currently no trust at all in the UK."

Now that doesnt make sense. We are still getting inward investment. We are still at full employment. Maybe it depends on which people you speak to.

[Steve Gill]

Re: make up your minds

I have close family in about twenty different countries (mainly Commonwealth) and all say the same thing about the national mood re the UK.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ Steve Gill

"I have close family in about twenty different countries (mainly Commonwealth) and all say the same thing about the national mood re the UK."

So your saying that close family has similar views? Interesting. Maybe we should file it under anecdotal evidence not being reliable and actual behaviour being of interest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

There is currently no trust at all in the UK.

As a brit living in another EU country I can tell you that there are many people holding their breath to see if Brexit is successful (while certainly pitying the pathetic negotiators we have). If Brexit works, there will be a massive surge in exit votes across the EU, and the EU is obviously determined to make sure that won't happen.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

Just like the UK can be entitled to nothing. No loans, no credit, no travel rights, no credibility. We can walk away from our commitments, just like a dead-beat Dad can walk away from his wife and children. Just don't expect anyone to trust us again. Which kind of blows your 'trade deal with all those great countries (e.g Ruritania, Gondor, Elbonia etc.) will save us' theory out of the water.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@AC

"Just like the UK can be entitled to nothing."

Exactly, well done you are now at the starting line of the negotiation. The EU can demand but it is entitled to nothing. The UK can demand and the same applies. Of course that isnt of benefit to either side and a good trade agreement would be beneficial to both sides, but if the EU refuses or tries to dictate terms (the Dr Syntax theory of the EU being in a stronger position) the EU is still entitled to naff all.

"Which kind of blows your 'trade deal with all those great countries"

Why? Because we are willing to negotiate and the EU wouldnt have any of it? In or out no trade deal being the EU's stance (and I accept as valid) isnt our problem. In that case it is what we choose to give them if we do.

[strum]

Re: make up your minds

>Why?

Because your asinine suggestion would leave UK as a delinquent debtor - not to be trusted with the petty cash. Our hoped-for trade partners would demand payment up-front, for every shipment, in the knowledge that we have a history of welshing on our debts.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: make up your minds

Because we are willing to negotiate and the EU wouldnt have any of it

The whole art of negotiation is to prepare a starting point that the other side can at least see some value in and the 'negotiate' to a position where you both get the majority of what you want.

It's not saying "this is what I want and if you don't let me have it I'm going to scream and scream until I make myself sick" attitude that our Brexiteers appear to have.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ CrazyOldCatMan

"The whole art of negotiation is to prepare a starting point that the other side can at least see some value in and the 'negotiate' to a position where you both get the majority of what you want."

It does however require people to be aware of the realities. For example no deal means neither side is entitled to anything. The idea the EU is somehow entitled to everything and we must beg keeps being pushed by idiots but doesnt stand.

"It's not saying "this is what I want and if you don't let me have it I'm going to scream and scream until I make myself sick" attitude that our Brexiteers appear to have."

That is interesting. So what do you consider the actions of the losers of the referendum and subsequent election to be? Lets of scream scream and scream some more to save us all from the doom! But brexiters should shut up because we won the vote. But noooooo we cannot leave waaaaa.

[jmch]

Re: make up your minds

"It does however require people to be aware of the realities. For example no deal means neither side is entitled to anything. The idea the EU is somehow entitled to everything and we must beg keeps being pushed by idiots but doesnt stand."

You are perfectly right when you say the EU isn't entitled to anything, but you seem to be confusing that idea with the idea that the EU actually wants that much from UK. Exports to UK make up less than 15% of Rest-of-EU's exports. UK's exports to EU are 45% of UK exports. UK as a EU member also has privileged access to trade with other countries through EU trade deals, and while it's possible that in the long run the UK manages to get trade deals that are as good or better with other countries / trading blocs, for the moment it has zilch. It's clear that hard Brexit would hurt the EU somewhat but would be much more painful for UK.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

and the 'negotiate' to a position where you both get the majority of what you want.

Except that there is no such position. The UK would like a large slice of the cake, but would accept a smaller one. The EU insists on keeping all the cake, exclusive control of the recipe, and ownership of the bakeries so that the UK can't even get all the bread it wants.

The only solution is to abandon cake, and start making biscuits.

[jmch]

Re: make up your minds

"We are not beggers. The EU can dictate all they want, we have no reason to listen"

The EU isn't trying to dictate anything. UK wants to leave, EU said fine, you can go. These are teh rules for non-EU 3rd-party countries. It's the UK who are saying "hold on, we don't like 3rd-party rules, we want to negotiate something better", at which EU is shrugging it's shoulders, because UK negotiating position is extremely weak. It's the UK who voluntarily gave up all the advantages, and now if it wants some of those advantages back it has to offer something in return.

"We get brexit purely by not participating in the EU."

Exactly correct. And in that case you get "Brexit means Brexit". It means a hard border between Eire and NI. It means UK goods will have tariffs applied when exported to the EU. It means international financial services firms will find it much harder to operate out of London and will start considering their options elsewhere in the EU. None of that is strictly disastrous for UK, but it WILL take a big hit particularly in the short term.

If, in the long term, UK manages to make it work, good for them. I'm certainly not rooting for UK to fail, and I think I can say the same for most EU citizens who want UK to stay - not because it makes that much difference for us but because we think it's better for you.

[codejunky]

Re: make up your minds

@ jmch

"The EU isn't trying to dictate anything. UK wants to leave, EU said fine, you can go"

This is the progression of leading a few commenters to some facts. Unfortunately some remainers seem to believe we are over a barrel or the EU holds all the cards or whatever. The comment you are replying to is my response to the idea the EU can dictate terms (Dr Syntax) so you may want to refer to him. Although I do believe the EU has tried to dictate as it is entitled to nothing yet demanded money, an Irish hard border and sovereignty breaking control.

"because UK negotiating position is extremely weak"

This is again extremely wrong. We can unilaterally get brexit without any agreement, the EU is entitled to nothing. Absolutely squat. We have a strong negotiating position in that we can have what we want unilaterally without further discussion.

"It's the UK who voluntarily gave up all the advantages, and now if it wants some of those advantages back it has to offer something in return."

This is seriously backwards. We want brexit, done. The EU has no say over it and is entitled to nothing. That is not an optimal solution, easier trade benefits both and the EU would like some money. There is room to talk. We are not weak, we are not losing advantages.

"Exactly correct. And in that case you get "Brexit means Brexit". It means a hard border between Eire and NI."

That is an interesting one since neither side of Ireland want a border and the UK doesnt want one so the EU would have to cough up and force the Irish to implement one. Not our problem.

"It means international financial services firms will find it much harder to operate out of London and will start considering their options elsewhere in the EU"

70% of Euro clearing gone from the nearest global financial centre in the world. If they want to its up to them. We cant tell them what to do and they cant tell us.

"None of that is strictly disastrous for UK, but it WILL take a big hit particularly in the short term."

I agree. Both sides will. The EU in multiple crises will have to deal with more self inflicted damage. The UK having to deal with changes we voted for and being more open. So much so the EU want us to sign an agreement that we will not use our competitive advantage when we leave!

"I'm certainly not rooting for UK to fail, and I think I can say the same for most EU citizens who want UK to stay - not because it makes that much difference for us but because we think it's better for you."

I hope other EU members who are suffering the EU self inflicted crises pluck up the courage to leave. I think it would be better for the people of each of the various countries especially those inflicted with the Euro. I dislike the EU not the countries nor the people trapped in it.

[redroof]

Re: make up your minds

"What leavers would like..."

Who in EU cares? They want out, then stop whining, demanding and get the hell out.

"... is a reasonable agreement that works for both sides, but the EU will never agree to that."

Why would EU have to agree to anything? Whether it hurts EU more or less, it's not a Brexiter's problem, is it. Leave, walk away, bon voyage and do what you please.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

No one but remainers thinks that anyone is trying to dictate terms to the EU. What leavers would like is a reasonable agreement that works for both sides, but the EU will never agree to that. It's the EU that expects to dictate terms, and they believe that they can still do so. If not, they'll accept a solution which is poor for them, as long as it hurts the UK more. They cannot, and will not, tolerate anyone breaking away from their empire successfully. Never mind the remarks about "having their cake and eating it ", the EU wants the cake monopoly.

============================================================================

Nonsense. Someone hasn't been paying attention.

So far the UK and / or members the UK Brexit faction is insisting that the EU should (or should allow the UK to):

1. Redefine the nature and legal structure of the single market, a core EU concept.

2. Allow the UK, as a third country, some control over EU financial regulations.

3. Change the legal requirements for the Galileo project, specifically requirements that the UK insisted be added.

4. Abrogate control and oversight over UK financial institutions operating in the EU under May's 'advanced equivalence'.

5. Change the way taxes and tariffs are collected, including adding tariff collection for a third party, while giving a third country powers to administer EU regulations and collect EU tariffs.

6. Break up the fundamental unity of the 'four freedoms' that are part of the essential nature of the EU.

7. Accept that the UK has the option to refuse to pay the money they owe for EU services and programs, including pensions and other obligations incurred during the UK's membership in the EU unless they get their wish list deal, reneging on the agreed method of calculation and the promise to pay the appropriate amounts.

8. Accept the Chequers plan as a 'take it or leave it final offer' with no further negotiations.

9. Renege on the agreed backstop plan for Northern Ireland - which they agreed to twice - and force a different plan on the EU.

10. Allow the UK, as a third party, to take part in an a la carte menu of EU organizations.

11. Allow the UK to participate in regulated activities normally adjudicated by the ECJ, while denying any authority to that court in the case of UK related matters.

12. Allow the UK, as a third country, to access protected data as if it were an EU member, while the UKrepudiates EU oversight and legal controls, in violation of EU principles and laws.

13. Give the UK, because they want it, access and privileges that no other country has, with fewer obligations, limitations, oversight, contributions, etc. than countries currently in more constrained agreements than the UK wants.

14. Allow the UK the benefits of the single market while allowing the UK the unique and unprecidented freedom to make unrestricted outside trade agreements.

15. Allow the UK, as a third country, to unilaterally grant certification, qualification, and or licensing to its professional services companies/people to operate within the EU without EU certification and licensing, and to allow the UK services company to operate within the EU without EU oversight.

16, Allow the UK to trade in goods and services as if it were abiding by EU regulations while allowing the UK to diverge from EU standards and regulations at will.

... I could go on, but if the pattern is not clear to you at this point, you will never allow yourself to see it.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: make up your minds

but if the pattern is not clear to you at this point, you will never allow yourself to see it.

I think you're missing the key part about this being a negotiation. Of course you go in with a big wishlist of your ideal situation, and then you negotiate to some mutually-satisfactory solution.

Unfortunately we have two problems here

1) The only solutiuons acceptable to the EU are "remain under our contrrol" or "fuck off with nothing, and pay us to do so"

2) Theresa May is a completely incompetent negoitiator who doesn't believe in what she's trying to negoitiate anyway, and prevents her other negotiators from doing their job.

Some of the items in your list are exaggerated, others are reasonable positions for two partners to agree on, without necessarily agreeing to be part of a political union. Unfortunately they are much harder to swallow when tied to the process of leaving such a union.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

"I think you're missing the key part about this being a negotiation. Of course you go in with a big wishlist of your ideal situation, and then you negotiate to some mutually-satisfactory solution."

That's from Hollywood movies. In real life, demanding first that the other party abandon its founding principles is hardly a way to endear yourself to them, let alone sound reasonable.

"1) The only solutiuons acceptable to the EU are "remain under our contrrol" or "fuck off with nothing, and pay us to do so""

And that was clear from before the referendum. It works well for plenty of other 3rd party countries, too, which are not whining.

"2) Theresa May is a completely incompetent negoitiator who doesn't believe in what she's trying to negoitiate anyway, and prevents her other negotiators from doing their job."

I think she has an impossible job, and I wouldn't like to be in her shoes.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: make up your minds

I think she has an impossible job

That's because she's stuck between the "nevaar Europe" and "lets stick with what we have" wings of her party and whatever she does is going to result in a dagger in the back.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: make up your minds

You are missing the point. "The only solutions acceptable to the EU are "remain under our control" or "fuck off with nothing, and pay us to do so"". And that was clear well before the referendum. But some people were dumb enough to believe the leaver rhetoric that in the end they would bend.

And name one competent negotiator. David 'can't be bothered to read my brief Davis'? or Boris 'oops - ha ha' Johnson? Glad to see you are setting up for the 'it's not our fault you lost your jobs, have to pay for a visa to pop over to Paris, have to eat radioactive chicken and swear allegiance to Emperor Trump Brexit - it was someone else's fault' that we have come to expect.

[Steve Gill]

Re: make up your minds

Phil O'Sophical: "I think you're missing the key part about this being a negotiation. Of course you go in with a big wishlist of your ideal situation, and then you negotiate to some mutually-satisfactory solution."

Ah, I think I see where you're misunderstanding the EU stance.

This is not negotiation as in when a couple of relative equals strive to make an agreement that suits them both.

This is negotiation where the EU as the controlling party is offering a series of options (membership, CU, SM, EEA, WTO, etc.) with some fine detail regarding the trimmings being discussed. We get to tell them which of the primary routes we would like to go down and which options we want and then we can discuss the details within that framework. That's all there is on offer, and all that ever was on offer, anyone claiming otherwise is deluded.

It's more akin to a family buying a car with various options than it is to a business negotiation, the biggest fights will be between the husband and wife not between them and the dealer.

The big wishlist is just that, a wish, it has nothing to do with what will be discussed.

[Schultz]

"What leavers would like is a reasonable agreement that works for both sides"

Define 'reasonable'. What the Brexiteers want is not reasonable from the point of view of the EU. The EU rules and regulations were created through hard-won consensus between all member-states. You don't get to pick and choose the rules you like because that would break the EU. Breaking the EU is considered unreasonable by the remaining member states.

The EU offers a take it or leave it deal for members. There is the EEA and EFTA for those who want to opt out from the political union. Non-members get complicated trade agreements with limited benefits and obligations. Please stand in line over there and wait for your turn to negotiate a bilateral agreement.

I hope Britain can take their time to sort things out under EEA rules. Give them time to prepare proper Brexit or to change their minds.

[&rew]

Re: make up your minds

"No one but remainers thinks that anyone is trying to dictate terms to the EU. What leavers would like is a reasonable agreement that works for both sides, but the EU will never agree to that."

The UK government did - successfully - agree more favourable terms with the EU while remaining within the EU. There were four large EU concessions that were agreed would be put in place AS LONG AS Article 50 was not triggered.

That improved relationship with the EU and "improved sovereignty" or whatever it's called was thrown away the moment that resignation letter was sent. The EU agreed to it, it was all set to go, but that's all been flushed away and any negotiations from outside the EU will never get the UK closer to that bargaining position.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: make up your minds

"Today we have Jeremy Hunt saying the public will blame the EU if there is no deal. "

It's not surprising. Leave was all about wishful thinking.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

Re: make up your minds

Today we have Jeremy Hunt saying

Something, something, something. To be followed several hours later by saying the exact opposite and denying that he said the former.

A consumate politician[1]. And that's not a term of approval..

[1] How can you tell a politician is lying? They are awake..

[Teiwaz]

How about those saying it'll be fine reassure the public by making clear that if the pound drops below parity to the EUR inflation rips to over 10%, and the economy does go into recession, they'll admit they were wrong and put their full support into joining EFTA

That sounds like an Election promise. The UK Government (and maybe all governments) use those for toilet paper the moment the Election's over.

[Flocke Kroes]

Were is your pension fund invested?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Were is your pension fund invested?"

Mostly in the FTSE. Which has done rather well since the Brexit vote.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Mostly in the FTSE. Which has done rather well since the Brexit vote."

Of course it has.

Lots of people still feel at some level that the British people can't be stupid enough to go through with it...

and pounds are getting cheaper all the time, given that not everyone is a rampant optimist.

The ones betting on a late outbreak of sanity are probably buying British assets while they are cheap.

[strum]

>Mostly in the FTSE. Which has done rather well since the Brexit vote.

Because most footsie companies benefit from a weak pound.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand what were mean but what's a pension?

Edit: Who in their right mind would trade stock in Amazon? It's a bubble waiting to burst, sploffing cash all over the shop.

[depicus]

Plausible

I remember the start of the year we had a few days of snow and it was near riot in the local Sainsburys so it's easily imaginable that a lack of custom officers may lead to travel chaos much like when the French like to go on strike.

Although what Amazon actually said was civil unrest was part of their contingency planning at all their facilities both here and around the world and that Brexit could trigger said plans all the way up to civil disorder and I suspect they've even planned for government overthrow. Of course any large organisation has contingency plans for many many eventualities but just because you have a plan and can foresee it doesn't mean you think it will happen.

[Mark 85]

Re: Plausible

A large part of contingency planning is plan for the unexpected. The planners have to assume X will happen to plan for it. For example, where I am, forest fires and flooding have in depth plans. Can't remember the last time there was a flood but we get forest fires every year. But that 1 in a million chance may come true.

There is some motive (taxes most likely) for Amazon to make it's statements about their planning as seldom does any company publicize their planning for competitive reasons.

[Pete4000uk]

I predict

A bit of a wobbly road, but little chaos and certainly no plagues of locusts, sewage coming through the taps, grass snakes turning white, cats and dogs living together.