BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 11:06 AM

Well Pete, you may be right, but this isn't over until its over. The fight goes on.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 12:26 PM

The nitty gritty of Mays betrayal!
" Inside a customs union, “we would have to open up our markets to the third countries with which the EU had trade agreements, but the markets of such third countries would not be open to our exports since we would be outside the EU. And such third countries would have few incentives to sign trade agreements with us since their goods would already enjoy free access”.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 12:43 PM

”The nitty gritty of Mays betrayal!
" Inside a customs union, “we would have to open up our markets to the third countries with which the EU had trade agreements, but the markets of such third countries would not be open to our exports since we would be outside the EU. And such third countries would have few incentives to sign trade agreements with us since their goods would already enjoy free access”.”

Source?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 01:21 PM

Source? Try google! One of your cabal expects us to take all his warblings on trust. He has never provided a link in his life.

irritating isn't it!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 01:41 PM

An honest man - especially one who makes claims to have been ‘an officer and a gentleman’ - would be prepared to substantiate what he claims as facts.

No accreditation - more Right-Wing-Extremist nonsense, not even worth reading.

Your choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 02:05 PM

"Source? Try google!"
He means he made it up - sorry - too inventive - Guido made it up and decided he woudn't get away with it
Seargant Majors always aspire to be "offices and gentlemen - too thick to be real officers so they end up with power and no real authority
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 02:14 PM

oh, I know which Right-Wing-Extremist he dug it up from, Jim. Meaningless Righty-Confirmation-Bias.

He’s an even better wriggler than ol’ Keefy was - never answers a question, just obfuscates. I wonder if he’s a closet Belly-Dancer?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 03:22 PM

Are you going to answer a direct question, Squaddie? Short memory, or bare-faced liar, or (more likely) both?

I expect it’ll just be more barrack-room bully-boy tactics.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 04:01 PM

Good to see the Nero d'Avola at £5.50, Dave, after the price hike to £6.50. A little beauty it is. Nirvana.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 04:08 PM

”Say pretty please and I might give you some links, as you seem incapable of carrying out a simple internet search.”

Not incapable at all - I was working in IT programming on mainframes when you were still in the ACF - but I’m not wasting my time trawling through Right-Wing-Extremist garbage hunting for stuff that you’re too bone-idle, socially-inept, and plain, simple unprofessional to provide links to.

So you carry on belly-dancing, and I’ll have a good belly-laugh at a dozy, thick squaddie.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 04:58 PM

Top Cat.


Oops, did I interpret those initials wrong...? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 06:02 PM

The Cooper law is not yet agreed fully, but if it is I understand that obliges Teresa May to ask the EU for an extension.

I wonder what the consequence is if she decides not to? No penalty for breaking the law is defined, as far as I know. Being in contempt of Parliament had no effect. So what actually would be the consequence?

I was also trying to think of a precedent for a law that only applies to one person. There can't be many.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 05 Apr 19 - 07:58 PM

Calls from people to Iains to give a link are fine, if they provide links for their statements as well.

It appears Iains may be relying on the following from Economics help:
Disadvantages of a customs union
•A country can't negotiate separate deals because there is a common external tariff. This reduces economic and national sovereignty. Critics of the EU argue it has meant the UK has experienced higher food prices and reduced the welfare of low-income consumers who face higher prices.•It is worth noting – Deals can be struck if they respect the common external tariff. Turkey is in a partial EU customs union so is free to negotiate deals in other areas like agriculture where it is not bound by its customs union arrangement.

•A country cannot give preferential tariffs to a declining industry. For example, if UK steel industry was having difficulty the government might like to put tariffs on imports to protect domestic sales, however, in a customs union you can't choose to have this separate tariff.
•Trade diversion. A common external tariff can lead to trade diversion. For example, when UK joined EEC, it had to raise tariffs on imports from the Commonwealth. This means higher prices for imports of butter and lamb.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 02:47 AM

Those are alternatives Nigel, not definitive rules
Iains isn't "relying" on anything otherwise he would have humiliated everybody by putting something up (which is what he tries to do) by putting it up - he made the definitive up in desperation on the spur of the moment
What Iains wants is to feel someone takes him seriously - obviously a big void in is life

Brexit is a massive leap in the dark where there are no guarantees about anything and no plans on where to go from here - it was sold on Xenophobia and nothing else - it has even taken a special meeting between racist Nigel Farage and racist Trump to back a 'No-Deal Brexit' and the latter is so unstable that what he says today is quite likely meaningless tomorrow

Edwina Currie put it in a nutshell - 'We'll muddle through somehow - Britain always has' - no way to run a country in today's unstable world

Waving possibilities about is as meaningless as making them up when it comes to planning a country's future
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 02:47 AM

Those are alternatives Nigel, not definitive rules
Iains isn't "relying" on anything otherwise he would have humiliated everybody by putting something up (which is what he tries to do) by putting it up - he made the definitive up in desperation on the spur of the moment
What Iains wants is to feel someone takes him seriously - obviously a big void in is life

Brexit is a massive leap in the dark where there are no guarantees about anything and no plans on where to go from here - it was sold on Xenophobia and nothing else - it has even taken a special meeting between racist Nigel Farage and racist Trump to back a 'No-Deal Brexit' and the latter is so unstable that what he says today is quite likely meaningless tomorrow

Edwina Currie put it in a nutshell - 'We'll muddle through somehow - Britain always has' - no way to run a country in today's unstable world

Waving possibilities about is as meaningless as making them up when it comes to planning a country's future
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 02:50 AM

Maybe so, Nigel, but if so it is a very biased quotation.    I don't think I am alone in freely admitting there are disadvantages to a customs union, but that is not the point. There are also advantages (as that link also points out), and the key factor from an economics viewpoint is which is greater.

I said somewhere in these threads over a year ago - I can't be bothered to track it down - that as a purely economics question it is very reasonable for any country to continually assess all its trade deals and determine if they are to its benefit or not. If not, then it is sensible to seek to change them. So - again in purely economics terms - it is reasonable to examine whether the EU relationship is a good idea or not continually and act accordingly. But my assessment, and those of most economics apart from the Minford school, it that the arrangement is in the UK's favour.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: The Sandman
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 03:47 AM

Edwina Currie in a nushell might be tickle JohnMajors fancy but she doesnt do it for me

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 03:55 AM

”Is the backwardman boasting or complaining? Then again,who cares?

I find it rather sad you feel the need to boast in order to make a point.
I was using mini computers as a tool over 45 years ago. so what?”

Nope, no ‘boasting’ at all. Merely giving some background regarding my IT capabilities and experience as a response to your completely unsubstantiated accusation that I ’seem incapable of carrying out a simple internet search’.

You really do have extreme comprehension problems, and a serious social-skill deficit, don’t you?

If you haven’t the acquired the skill to post a working clickable link on the forum, you might like to take a little time out from insulting and abusing other members and study Joe Offer’s ‘Basic Mudcat HTML’ post in the ’Mudcat FAQ - Newcomer’s Guide’. It’s very simple - almost anyone could do it.

Now, back to that direct question you’ve carefully belly-danced around...I’m guessing that, as usual, you don’t have the cojones to answer, but that’s OK, I know the answer anyway, and it doesn’t show you in a good light.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:00 AM

DMcG, how does a country assess whether a trade deal is to its benefit? To often this debate is set by the views of domestic producers. However consumers need to be considered also. A trade deficit is not bad per se, it means that consumers are getting lots of nice things from the country they are imported from. Neither imports nor exports are bad, really the benefit of the trade is the total volume, not the difference between exports and imports. And the problem is that the people doing the assessing, allegedly on behalf of the country, are looking at only one side.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:17 AM

There's also the matter of differing food-safety standards. In addition to chlorinated chicken issues, Trump has now appointed the pork industry as gatekeepers for... the pork industry. His reasoning is that if their meat is bad, they'll get sued, so it's in their best interest to keep their stuff clean. (Not a whisper about all those people who could die from eating it, or get seriously sick and not be able to afford medical care.) Good luck with that, if you start importing from some of your potential trading partners.

Oh, and nuclear plants get to self-regulate too. Welcome to your new buddy.

Please excuse lack of hyperlinks - I can't get the clickifier to work:

That [above] is the essence of the Trump administration's argument for getting rid of about 40 percent of federal pork inspectors. By next month, according to The Washington Post, the pork plants themselves will be in charge of "identifying and removing live diseased hogs when they arrive at the plants"—as opposed to the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service...

https://www.foodsafetymagazine.com/news/pork-industry-to-begin-policing-its-own-food-safety-system/

https://www.motherjones.com/food/2019/04/trump-is-about-to-make-the-pork-industry-responsible-for-inspecting-itself/

https://newrepublic.com/article/153465/its-not-just-pork-trump-also-letting-nuclear-plants-regulate-safety

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:19 AM

I may well nip to mozzers myself later then Steve if it is down to £5.59 - £4.95 with my discount :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:30 AM

Iains isn't "relying" on anything otherwise he would have humiliated everybody by putting something up (which is what he tries to do) by putting it up - he made the definitive up in desperation on the spur of the moment
Do you think double posting your tortured abuse of the english language adds clarity? Think again!

"Take a customs union on its own first. A customs union would create far less friction to trade in goods. It would be easier to keep vital manufacturing supply chains intact and it would obviate the need for the customs part of the Irish backstop, as long as agriculture was included. But it would also mean that Britain could not operate an independent trade policy in respect of goods, because we would be obliged by the EU to operate its external tariff rather than vary our own in bilateral trade agreements with non-EU countries.
The biggest shortcoming of a customs union, however – and it is a major shortcoming – is that it does not in itself address the issue of regulatory alignment between the UK and the EU that single market membership gives us. This is the principal guarantee of the barrier-free trade we enjoy currently with the EU and why every alternative to membership will leave us worse off.
For this reason, many MPs are looking to a deeper agreement with the EU, one they call common market 2.0, which in addition to a customs union would mean continuing membership of the single market. The attraction is obvious: it would keep the UK close to its most important trading partner while fulfilling the mandate to leave the EU. It comes with a set of institutions based on the existing European Economic Area through which the UK could potentially influence (but not determine) EU policy and incur reduced UK payments for market access.
The disadvantages are equally clear. Britain would have to operate EU rules, without a vote or a veto, for both goods and services – becoming a rule taker – making it largely pointless to leave. Free movement of people would also continue. Yes, there is provision for an emergency brake on migration but this would not give Britain “control” of its borders."

A hotel California brexit!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:51 AM

There's also the matter of differing food-safety standards....

You are absolutely right, Bonnie, there is far more to it than a simple financial balance sheet. The regulations are important, the social rights and benefits of your citizens are important, the environmental aspects are important ... It goes on and on. That's why I said "purely economics" a couple of times. It is not that the rest of that does not matter, it is that even if you restrict yourself just to the economic argument the case to leave is feeble according to all but one relatively tiny segment of the economists.

Moving onto David Carter's point: again, I agree. Assessment of whether a trade agreement is to your benefit or not is horrendously complicated and also time dependent. You might carry out a vast and sophisticated assessment and come a conclusion then something like the OPEC oil agreements come along and change everything. Economics is not 'truth', it is more like a formal encoding of a decision process, which is only ever as good as your base assumptions.   But, to take a trivial example, suppose decide to enter into a 5 year trade agreement with one country to trade in a certain way, but then another country becomes a potential supplier who can provide the same thing cheaper but differing in some other way. You have to make an assessment to stay with your original supplier, switch or take a proportion from each. That is an unavoidable decision - even not thinking about implicitly decides to stay as you are - and businesses and countries have to do that all the time. Just being immensely difficult and risky due to uncertainties doesn't stop you having to do so, either explicitly or implicitly,

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:54 AM

Source?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:56 AM

That was for the Belly-Dancer, by the way, not DMcG. And only a muppet would post a quote with no indication whatsoever that it’s a quote.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 04:59 AM

Magnificent quater-page headline on from page of the Daily Express - set our ocan farmers all of a-giggle
BREXIT BETRAYED
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 05:32 AM

Anyhoo, Dave is absolutely correct - there’s no profit in engaging with an ITC-illiterate sociopath, so I’ll leave him to carry on with his usual abusive behaviour. I’m off to do something worthwhile. ‘Bye now...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 07:20 AM

Far better left alone. Kicking that kind of shit does nothing but leave a nasty smell and make a mess of your shoes.

Anyone for keeping to the point and commenting on this?

Tory minister says taking part in EU elections would be 'suicide note' for party

Not often I hope that a Tory is right but fingers crossed on this one :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 11:24 AM

"I do not think any rational person would welcome that as an outcome."
As you say "Oh dear"
Talk about shutting the closet door after the skeleton has emerged with a petition in its hand
Too late - too late, the maiden cried
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Apr 19 - 12:10 PM

"Anyhoo, Dave is absolutely correct - there’s no profit in engaging with an ITC-illiterate sociopath,
Me too - couldn't help pointing out that this "anti-Tommy Robinsonite" spent a fair tim in handing a petition around to try and get him out of nick, while gloating as the number of signatures rose
A classic "I wish I hadn't done that"
Fun over
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 03:47 AM

I was reading about a recent survey on a further referendum and it seems the majority are keen that 'we should be free to pursue our own trade deals.'

What a surprise. But let us phrase the same question differently. "we should be forced to   renegotiate all our own trade deals, whether or not they are poorer than the existing ones."

Somehow I don't think that would be as popular.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:24 AM

If the outcome of the first referendum is thwarted what is the point of a second?
   Do you not think a wrong answer will be denied again?

This is of course the EU way - reminiscent of "hotel California" -
keep resubmitting the question until the right answer is obtained


A little jog for the memory:
This has happened three times in EU referendums – in Denmark on the Maastricht Treaty in 1992-3, Ireland on the Nice Treaty in 2001-2, and Ireland again on the Lisbon Treaty in 2008-9 – with all of these referendums ultimately proving successful for those backing the treaty.

For the EU it is a war of attrition.

The mighty Rees Mogg has the right idea, ably backed by the inestimable Mr Farage

We shall fight them on the beaches........................!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:27 AM

It's reported this morning that May has offered Corbyn a 'Boris-proof' Brexit - a soft Brexit that cannot be overturned by future Governments
That should cause a bit of stir in the Tory Monkey-house
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:47 AM

a soft brexit means the uk leaves the EU but is in the equivalent of the EEC a fairly sensible compromise imo, we are not fighting the second world war, rees mogg is a hypocrite he avises his investors to invest in the euro yet talks about no deal , the man represents the interests of the very wealthy

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:50 AM

Where have you seen that, Jim? Couldn't find it in any of my usual haunts, but they're not comprehensive. I'm interested to know more - all I can find is that her cabinet are furious with her for even talking (or going through the motions of talking) to Corbyn. Are there any links?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:52 AM

[Cross-posted with Dick]

Grease Smog also moved a few of his millions to Dublin. The word "hypocrite' doesn't even begin to be strong enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:53 AM

THE MIGHTY MOGG
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 06:53 AM

A soft brexit is being subjected to the EU in all its glory with no more representation. Such an agreement would be the height of stupidity.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 07:09 AM

To paraphrase Dorothy Parker, who famously wrote of attempting suicide:

Razors pain you
Rivers are damp
Acids stain you
And drugs cause cramp

Guns aren't lawful
Nooses give
Gas smells awful
You might as well live


Brussels or London
You don't have a say
If you're going to be undone
You might as well stay

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 07:34 AM

That would go well with a Billie Holliday tune Bonnie
Might add, "Can't help loathing that Mogg of mine"
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 08:12 AM

A shame peabrain cannot distinguish between a man's personal wealth and an investment company that invests in emerging markets. A tad too technical for him to comprehend(like so many other things)

The fine Mr Rees Mogg can hold his head up high unlike commie corbyn,
a chef extroidinaire!

https://order-order.com/2019/04/05/corbyns-evidence-shows-cooking-books-terrorist-wreath-laying-trip/

from Guido of course. The scourge of bubbleheaded leftards!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: peteglasgow
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 08:24 AM

is this just all an elaborate and tedious wind-up, iain. if so , it's offensive nonsense

mods?.....please give us a break

---

Working on it. Most have been deleted; apologies if responses are still in place, the posts were taken out in one fell swoop, away from the thread. ---mudcat techie

---

And many non-abusive posts that are simply objectionable to some have been UNdeleted. -Mudcat ratheroffendedbyopinionatedmodding mod

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 08:56 AM

It really is time those who genuinely support Brexit started to enter into this debate rather than using it as a rabid-right soapbox
I've lost count of the number of times people have asked what the benefits of leaving Europe are as distinct from staying and trying to change what they disagree with - Britain has been little more than a silent and begrudging member of the EU since day one, based on the old Empire adage, "If we can't control it, it's no use to us"
Now the Government has Britain's future in the hands of scummy populists like Farage (and his queue of be-robed and be-turbaned foreign invaders)
Patriots like the Mudcat incumbents, stand by and cheer the worst elements of the British establishment claiming that to hold out for the best deal is 'treachery'
None of them has the gumption nor the imagination to put forward a rational argument - just abuse (as shown by the latest deeply thought out offering)
If Britain can sell planes to slaughter the Yemenis (while at the same time blocking any chance of giving the victims refuge) Corbyn's actions of supporting the Palestinians fight against ethnic cleansing put him in line for sainthood
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 09:10 AM

Dorothy Parker's ode always remind me of Chesterton's ballade about having second thoughts on suicide - which is equally apposite:

The gallows in my garden, people say,
Is new and neat and adequately tall;
I tie the noose on in a knowing way
As one that knots his necktie for a ball;
But just as all the neighbours–on the wall–
Are drawing a long breath to shout “Hurray!”
The strangest whim has seized me. . . . After all
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

To-morrow is the time I get my pay–
My uncle’s sword is hanging in the hall–
I see a little cloud all pink and grey–
Perhaps the rector’s mother will not call– I fancy that I heard from Mr. Gall
That mushrooms could be cooked another way–
I never read the works of Juvenal–
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

The world will have another washing-day;
The decadents decay; the pedants pall;
And H.G. Wells has found that children play,
And Bernard Shaw discovered that they squall,
Rationalists are growing rational–
And through thick woods one finds a stream astray
So secret that the very sky seems small–
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

ENVOI

Prince, I can hear the trumpet of Germinal,
The tumbrils toiling up the terrible way;
Even to-day your royal head may fall,
I think I will not hang myself to-day.

I'd have thought that those Brexiteers who complain, quite rightly, that all the deals that are available are worse than staying in the EU would welcome the opportunity to vote for that as a second best, if they can't get the No Deal they might prefer. In fact getting No Deal bput on such a ballot in a three option vote (with an alternative vote system of voting) would offer the way to get that preferred option, if that is really what people want. (And we know how keen they are about carrying out the will of the people...)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 09:35 AM

McGrath of Harlow No One would argue with a second referendum had the first been implemented and a decent period of time elapsed. To ignore the first referendum negates the legitimacy of any subsequent one.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 09:36 AM

!Que?!
And that's it from the Brexiteers
Tw letters short of a the description of the line of lorries from Fishguard to the Channel Tunnel
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 10:23 AM

The Incredible Leadsom has apparently said this morning
=======
"It’s not nearly as grim as many would advocate," she said. "The civil service have done an amazing job of ensuring that we minimise the problems. I’m not an advocate for no deal, but it would not be nearly as bad as many like to think it would be."
=====

Of course, it is good news the civil service has worked hard on this, but they are not in the front line, are they?

Are all small international traders ready?
Have all port and other border protection staff be trained and, where necessary further staff recruited and trained?

Have vets been recruited and trained for all physiosanitary matters arising ?

In short, the civil service preparation is a drop in the ocean. What about all the rest?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 10:34 AM

I don't think anyone would doubt that if the vote in 2016 had been 52% for remain, the Brexit camp would have called for a second vote, and the Remain camp would be opposing it. That would be reasonable enough - when your side has won you'd rather not risk a rerun.

But what is hypocritical is to pretend that the reason for opposing a second vote was something to do with democratic principles, and to claim that refusing it shows that the UK is a truer democracy than Ireland, Denmark and Norway.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 11:06 AM

I keep quoting, here and elsewhere, David Davis from 2012...

”A democracy that cannot change its mind ceases to be a democracy”

Whether the Union-Jack-Boxers Brigade accept it or not, that is the absolute, undeniable truth.

(Note for our computer-illiterate sociopath - that’s how to post a quotation).

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Apr 19 - 11:41 AM

One aspect of all this is that pretty strange everyone talks as the referendum results indicated that Labour voters in all the Brexit voting seats were overwhelmingly in favour of leaving.

That isn't actually at all clear - the Brexit vote in that referendum would have included the overwhelming majority of Conservative voters, together with a section of Labour voters - and many of those Labour voters could well have been more motivated by a desire to kick the Cameron government than by leaving the EU. The fact that in the election of 2017 most of those "Labour leave" constituencies returned Labour MPs suggests that this is the right way to interpret the referendum vote.

The thing to remember is that in the 2015 election not a single MP in the UK got as much as 50 per cent of their constituency electorate.