Brexit

[islandgirl]

I will take doing a deal later please. Deadlines are good.

[buzzard1994]

The only way to put an end to this mess in the forseeable future is to revoke, stay in the EU and actually try to make it work, something that will be more difficult with UK interests represented by an increased number of Farage supporters. Otherwise we face years of trying to make trade deals with people who have little incentive to do so. The Tories will remove tariffs, destroying the last remnants of some types of manufacturing so there wont be many exporters to benefit from the lower pound. The shortages of medicines will mean some people die off, many more will be out of work. "Control", what is left of it as the UK will have no influence anywhere, will be entirely in the hands of the richest.

It will be good for the environment - a much poorer UK will reduce its consumption of goods other than food, people will be less able to afford foreign holidays, the population will be slightly reduced by the medicine shortage and those who currently waste the most will be forced to waste less.

[nukecad]

The only way to put an end to this mess in the forseeable future is to revoke,

I partly agree, but there is no need to abandon leaving the EU altogether.

Many, if not all, of the current problems have been caused simply by the impetuous invocation of article 50.
Because of that rash invocation every step has been rushed and we have had to keep asking for extensions to the leave date.

So they way forward would be to remove those false time pressures, that doesn't mean abandoning Brexit

• Rescind our article 50 notice.
• Work out a reasonable exit deal without rushing because of the false time pressures.
• Then invoke article 50 again once we have a good idea of what it will actually entail.

It's entirely that false time pressure that is responsible for last/this weeks shennigans in parliament.
(No deadline, no need to perogue, no time pressure no need to hold a vote of no confidence, not time pressure......)

[jpkeates]

I partly agree, but there is no need to abandon leaving the EU altogether.

Many, if not all, of the current problems have been caused simply by the impetuous invocation of article 50.
Because of that rash invocation every step has been rushed and we have had to keep asking for extensions to the leave date.

This can't be said often enough.

Invoking article 50 imposed a deadline which massively undermined the UK's negotiating position.
It meant that the EU was obliged to act to protect itself, because the UK leaving was inevitable (which was considerably amplified by Mrs May's "red lines" on free movement and a customs union.)

It's hard to imagine a more stupid decision.
Which parliament voted for 498 to 114, which we also shouldn't forget.

[islandgirl]

Of course the UK leaving was inevitable. it is delaying that process which has caused all the problems. And you can never make the EU "work". The idea of staying in and "changing" it in some way is pure fantasy. Shortage of medicines? Lack of French apples? Shortage of salami? Armageddon? It gets sillier by the day!

[nukecad]

it is delaying that process which has caused all the problems.

Sorry but I disagree.

It's trying to rush the process by setting unworkable deadlines, and then having to extend them because they were unworkable, that has caused the current problems.

[jpkeates]

This morning a member of the government said that they wouldn't publish the documents outlining the likely, best and worst-case scenarios for what will happen if we leave the EU with no deal on the basis they may alarm people.

Which is, in itself, somewhat alarming.

[jpkeates]

Shortage of medicines? Lack of French apples? Shortage of salami? Armageddon? It gets sillier by the day

My main supplier of animal medication has warned that a) stockpiling isn't possible, because there hasn't been any chance of increasing production to stockpile and that b) they have no idea what the supply situation will be post "hard" brexit, but they imagine that human medication will be prioritised over animal medication.

They have confirmed that vets expect to put down animals that they would previously been able to treat.

Which is going to be tricky, because a huge number of UK vets are EU nationals.

[Kape65]

It's been 2 and half years since we invoked article 50. I don't see how anyone could suggest we're rushing to leave!

[Kape65]

They have confirmed that vets expect to put down animals that they would previously been able to treat.

Which is going to be tricky, because a huge number of UK vets are EU nationals.

That's if they can get the medicine to euthanize them!

[islandgirl]

JP you hit the nail on the head "b) they have no idea what the supply situation will be post "hard" brexit," These are not facts. They are biased guesses. No worries up here folks!

[Macromia]

JP you hit the nail on the head "b) they have no idea what the supply situation will be post "hard" brexit," These are not facts. They are biased guesses. No worries up here folks!

No, not "biased guesses", they are fact based forecasts.

No one knows for sure what the situation will be regarding commodities that can't be stored long term and need to be imported, but they know that the following facts apply:
1. Somethings can't be stored and keeping the people who need them supplied therefore requires that imports are not delayed.
2. Changes in import rules/regulations will result in some delays, even with the best possible preparation.

So, best case scenario will be no interruption to supplies, but there is a real likelihood that there will be at least some disruption.
Very, very few of the people who deal with UK customs genuinely think that there will be no disruption (if any actually believe that at all). The only real question is how serious the disruption will be.

[nukecad]

This morning a member of the government said that they wouldn't publish the documents outlining the likely, best and worst-case scenarios for what will happen if we leave the EU with no deal on the basis they may alarm people.

Which is, in itself, somewhat alarming.

It has now been published: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49670123

[jpkeates]

Here's the document. https://assets.publishing.service.go...ptions_CDL.pdf

It's been renamed from "Base Scenario" to "Reasonable Worst Case Planning Assumptions" since it was leaked.

One paragraph has been redacted, but the leaked version said " “Industry had plans to mitigate the impact on refinery margins and profitability but UK Government policy to set petrol import tariffs at 0% inadvertently undermines these plans.

“This leads to significant financial losses and announcement of two refinery closures (and transition to import terminals) and direct job losses (about 2,000)."

"Project fear" is now an official government position.

And while the government is making statements about planning to mitigate these risks, I don't see how you can mitigate cross channel traffic being about 40-50% of what it normally is for three months (at which point it will still only be 70% of normal).

[islandgirl]

Ah those good old "fact based forecasts"...a wonderful oxymoron if ever I heard one. As the three scousers said so memorably "calm down"!