The cost of borders will be met

The government rightly told us this week they will work up their plans for trade and border movements if we leave without a Deal. The good news is that much of the work we need to do to improve our borders and upgrade capacity need to be done with an Agreement as well as without one. The UK is currently spending money on a lorry park in Kent for days when French strikes disrupt cross channel freight, and spending on electronic systems for smoother transit. These systems have to be able to handle both tariff free EU trade and trade with non EU countries with tariffs. We need to make sure there is sufficient capacity on the non EU system in case we leave without a trade deal. There is a £400m plus budget to do what is needed.

I found the comment of the Chancellor surprising that he wishes to limit spending on this. It is urgent and clearly a priority, whether we leave with or without a deal. The Prime Minister in Questions yesterday made it clear the government will  authorise all necessary spending. The government does need to provide in a timely way for our exit. Every matter we can fix before March 2019 is a matter we do not need to ask for delay on from the rest of the EU. There is no reason why they should grant us lots of delays, and every reason to expect they would want us to carry on with contributions to the EU if we seek to delay. The Treasury needs to understand that saving £12bn a year of net contribution is the biggest saving we have in prospect, and far in excess of any sums needed to have smooth functioning borders after March 2019. Getting a system which works from March 2019 will  be cheap at the price.

The Treasury have a dreadful record on Brexit. They backed the losing side. They made a series of forecasts for 2016-17 which were very wrong. They are still exuding pessimism at every available opportunity. The Chancellor needs to get them to cheer up, have new and more realistic and optimistic forecasts, and to find the money we need for a successful and growing economy post Brexit.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Duncan
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:25 am | Permalink

    Hammond appears convinced that the planes and passengers will be grounded should we leave the EU. I thought we had dispensed with this idiotic hyperbole and scaremongering we saw prior to the plebiscite but evidently not.

    It seems one of the most important politicians in the UK today is actively working against the interests of the country he is appointed to protect. I am missing something here?

    Why do I feel I am the victim of an elaborate scam? Vote Leave was successful and yet I feel as though we’re on the losing side. Is it because the political class is by and large pro-EU? Is it because those with decision making power can simply spin this whole charade out for as long as they wish to wear down the spirit and tolerance of the British people

    Why is it that the Conservative Party, who I have always associated with patriotism and national pride, appear to be tolerating a PM and CoE who are both in complete opposition to the instincts and soul of the party they lead?

    We have a Tory party that can dispense with a political giant like Thatcher (which led us inevitably to generational defeats against the vile New Labour) and now they tolerate people like May and Hammond..

    Is there any possibility that this party can elect someone who actually is a conservative, believes in the UK and its people and stands up in public to defend this nation’s independence and sovereignty?

  2. Miss Brandreth-Jones
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:29 am | Permalink

    Backing the wrong side seems to be the way of the UK. Many don’t understand the concept of ‘we are all in this together’ so they back a position which makes it awkward to progress , bring the sensible option down in their furious attempt to power themselves.

    • oldtimer
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:54 am | Permalink

      Leaving investments to the “last moment” as Mr Hammond put it is not sensible. A sensible Chancellor would build in a time contingency along with a financial contingency in a time critical project like this.

      I think the PM has already gone too far in her parliamentary statement. Failing a positive EU response, the offers made for the post March 2019 exit should be withdrawn and the negotiation reset on the basis of WTO tariffs. Free trade talks should be focused on countries that actually want to engage in them.

      • oldtimer
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:26 am | Permalink

        Since posting this comment I have read an interesting interview with Oliver Letwin over at ConservativeHome. Among other things he comments on the Brexit negotiations: “And I am absolutely convinced that if there is going to be an agreement at all it will come at the very, very end. Possibly after the end.” He adds that it will amount to May, Merkel and Macron sitting down together and sketching out the basis of a deal on no more than two pieces of paper. He also thinks it possible there will be no agreement at all.

        I agree it will come at the last minute, if at all, though the propect of Mrs May representing the UK at the table fills me with alarm. That said it puts into context the absurdity of Mr Hammond’s comment that everything should be left to the last minute. For him and the Treasury the last minute is at the end of March 2019. Such a position totally surrenders the UK’s negotiating stance. This is its aim. And it is absolutely untenable if the May government really means what it has been saying since it came to power.

        • Helen Taylor
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

          Totally Agree with you, she admitted on the Alan Dale interview that the Cabinet sort of all presumed something was in place if the vote was for Brexit. About time they listened to their own words. We are leaving in March 2019. Everything we need to be a functioning member of the Global Stage needs to be put in place now now. Totally agree with JR we should be pushing forward with everything now. We all know that the EU will delay as long as possible trying to make it impossible to leave. I read that they have said it will take 6 years to ratify the deal when it is made. They are a joke We dont need them to be able to control our own borders fisheries money, laws and Government. So get on now and sort out what we are going to do. To hell with the EU we wont be in there club after Mar 2019 it should be our rules that dictate what we need in our own Country, and they will have to abide by them. WTO rules.

        • alan jutson
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:10 pm | Permalink



    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:40 am | Permalink

      Dear Miss–Talk about begging the question–It is precisely the point that there is no “We” but rather “Us” and “Them”, playing towards different goals.

      • hefner
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

        And as in any good panto, there will be a happy end in the last minute, with some twenty-four months of “breathless suspense” entertained by most of us on this blog.

        • Robert Christopher
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

          Happy for whom?

          And for many in the political sphere, the response to ‘Where is my career?’ will be, ‘It’s behind you!’

      • NickC
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

        Leslie, For better or worse, it is “we” – unless you go off on your own to a desert island. Any nation must make binary choices: do we go to war? do we build HS2? do we remain in the EU, or do we leave?

        At one level you can buy an M&S shirt, where I use Primark. But some decisions are truly national and the consequences apply to everyone. So far democracy is the fairest way of dealing with that.

        Personally I didn’t like the result of the last general election. My views count more than yours so we will have a second vote. Or that’s what the Remains are demanding. Realistically, it is “we” whether you, or I, like the decision or not.

    • cargill55
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:58 am | Permalink

      We are all in this together, within the UK, with the 93% of the global population and 85% of the global economy not in the EU.

      • Mitchel
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

        Good article by left wing Leaver,Giles Fraser,in today’s Guardian,talking of his experiences in “left behind” Britain: “Still puzzled by the Brexit Vote?”

        “…the more Nick Clegg and his Waitrose friends moan about the forthcoming apocalypse,the more some will say bring it on”

        • Lifelogic
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:32 pm | Permalink

          Indeed and his lawyer wife, on the BBC yet again today.

  3. Sakara Gold
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    The problem with Brexit and the trade issue is that the rest of the world is not exactly beating a path to our door wishing to trade with us. The recent imposition of huge US tariffs on the Bombardier aircraft deal shows what may happen after a hard Brexit.

    Our old Commonwealth trading partners (Australia, NZ, Canada etc) have not forgotten what happened after we joined the common market and we will have to work very hard to rebuild our trading relationships with them.

    It would help if our Brexit negotiating team could stop bickering with each other and agree to negotiate from a sensible perspective. There are other demands on Treasury resources – the NHS, defence, fireproofing hi-rise blocks of flats etc – currently the nation is unimpressed by the antics of the dreadful Botox Johnson and our appalling PM.

    • Richard1
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:02 am | Permalink

      Is there evidence the rest of the world aren’t interested in trade deal with the UK? Surely the opposite is true, although no such deals can be negotiated until we leave the EU. Note the Bombadier row has arisen whilst we supposedly enjoy the advantages of EU membership. What it shows is we need an independent trade policy and a direct trade deal with the US.

      • Anonymous
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

        I’m sure the Treatment of President Trump by our left wing elite hasn’t helped us.

    • Caterpillar
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:07 am | Permalink

      I am impressed with the Foreign Secretary, he seems to be the only high profile Cabinet member that acknowledges and openly supports the electorate’s wish as expressed in the referendum. All parties and all MPs need to acknowledge and support this, it is a shameful situation that the Foreign Secretary has to come out and present the argument. The uk has passed this stage and all should be pushing the clean exit implementation – leave won. This clarity and certainty would then be the backdrop to future relations with the world. The PM called her disastrous GE on the basis of the lack of parliamentary support, but our childish representatives largely continue to block. They need to change and get begin the UK and Brexit, it is effective implementation that matters and getting in the way does not help.

    • Hope
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:00 am | Permalink

      Trade is an EU competence not UK. Like Tata steel there is precious little the UK govt can do. I suspect this is why Bombardier has been highlighted to mythical status by remainers. It is a good reason to leave so the UK controls trade not the EU on its behalf.

      I fully support JR’s view about the Treasury. A few sackings should resolve the problem, including BoE.

      Aligned to JR’s point, Guido highlights startling facts about high tax Tories today. New Labour May needs to curtail the welfare state so it is reasonable not a life style choice, billions could be saved. Moreover the draw for mass immigration would slow and our public services able to cope better with the money it has. It is not possible to artificially increase the population by the size of a city each year and expect everything to be okay financially. Socially it will not work because there are too many foreign people to integrate, no matter what false equality babble or PC crap May spouts. Read Casey, commissioned by govt, and implement.

      Your govt JR has the answers to the problems it creates- look in the mirror.

    • Edward2
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:01 am | Permalink

      We already trade all over the world.

      Notice any shortages of American Chinese Indian goods in our shops?
      Biggest market for Rolls Royce and Bentley cars China followed by Middle East countries

      • Len Grinds
        Posted October 13, 2017 at 6:48 am | Permalink

        Yes. So there is no point to leaving the EU.

        • NickC
          Posted October 13, 2017 at 9:30 am | Permalink

          Len, Except to regain our independence.

        • Edward2
          Posted October 13, 2017 at 10:36 am | Permalink

          Your claim has been that post brexit, trade will stop and that the UK cannot meet export nations standards.
          I am telling you that we already do meet many different export nations standards as a worldwide trading nation.
          And that great opportunities for even better world trading will be created by us being a free independent nation once more.

    • a-tracy
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:05 am | Permalink

      “It would help if our Brexit negotiating team could stop bickering with each other and agree to negotiate from a sensible perspective”

      ? Who told you this was happening?

      Please don’t speak for ‘the nation’ you just don’t know what ‘the nation’ is thinking.

      • Miss Brandreth-Jones
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

        well said !.This really irritates me; when someone says for example’ the people think.’

    • frank salmon
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:07 am | Permalink

      But the Bombardier escapade happened while members of the EU, so how can it be a reflection of what might happen if we are not part of the EU?
      When we joined the EU we were forced to put tariffs on Australian and other goods from countries outside the EU. This is an argument for not being in the EU, not an argument for staying in! (The tariffs we now pay go directly to the EU and contribute to our need for a rebate).
      Quite frankly, any dithering creates confusion and is likely to create problems. Boris is a breath of fresh air. May and Hammond could wreck the process and usher in a Corbyn/Marxist/Venezuaelan government. Who wants that?

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:34 am | Permalink

      “The recent imposition of huge US tariffs on the Bombardier aircraft deal shows what may happen after a hard Brexit”.

      As these tariffs have been imposed on Bombardier whilst we are IN the EU your point makes no sense at all I’m afraid.

    • Prigger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:19 am | Permalink

      Sakara Gold
      Bombardier has nothing to do with Brexit. Canada has been repeatedly challenged by many countries for its blatant subsidies to the company. Canadians of all parities in the past have been hyper-critical of tax-payers money being used to finance it. The British government, cross-party,did not take care not to involve itself in unfair commercial practice over decades.
      The retraction of an Invitation to Trump did not cause the rift but had he arrived here with the First Lady in July as planned then things may have been smoothed over. American companies perhaps would not have dared or wished to embarrass their Head of State, while the was so intimate with us. To blame: Corbyn, Mayor Khan and a cocky Mr Speaker.

  4. Sakara Gold
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:47 am | Permalink

    I meant to say Boris

    • Hope
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:05 am | Permalink

      Boris is not the problem, that is the bias remain media. I accept May is dreadful. We currently have the highest taxes since 1970’s, yet Tories waste billions of our taxes in foreign aid, regional EU projects like: HS2, regionalisation of England to curtail power. Even mayors still being introduced to align with MEP boundaries for EU regionalisation, we voted we did not want mayors!

      • bigneil
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:34 am | Permalink

        We did not want them – -Yet Sheffield is still going to have a vote, cost reported at £1m – -and the winner will have NO powers. a blatant waste that seems to go along with your point of EU regionalisation.

      • a-tracy
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:36 am | Permalink

        Hope, just what is the point of the Manchester Mayor? Manchester council has a massive problem with the current system of rent/rates arrears yet Burnham is saying it’s going to be worse under Universal Credit, well why is it so bad now if the present system is good and he doesn’t want it to change?

        If the Tories now put more money into Manchester to solve a homeless problem (Who are the increasing homeless? Why are they homeless? Were they born in Manchester?) Burnham is going to take credit for sorting this out but how has it happened in the first place? If we keep throwing money at a desperate situation instead of Central Goverment investigating this properly the Council will keep year after year repeating the same mistakes. I know people in Manchester waiting five years overcrowding expensive private rental houses because they keep being overtaken by others in more need in the Council house waiting lists and their families are struggling with space. The Council says it can’t rehouse them because their social rental properties aren’t big enough, well do some renovations in loft spaces and make bigger spaces for the bigger families instead of keep knocking two council houses together, then people who got these houses because of big families get to keep these big houses even on housing benefit after their children leave home.

        Then the Mayor didn’t quickly respond to kkk type horrible signs and hanging Tories swinging from a bridge, too many people saw this, it should have been immediately taken down. This is not the Manchester I want people around the world to see and he shouldn’t either.

  5. Lifelogic
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:49 am | Permalink


    The Treasury do have a dreadful record, and not just on Brexit. The current fiscal system his absurd and hugely damaging and they waste money hand over fist on endless lunacies.

    As you say they backed the losing side. They made a series of forecasts (propaganda for remain actually designed to deceive voters with their own taxes) for 2016-17 which proved very wrong.

    Liz Truss yesterday on the daily politics said the Conservative were the party of Low taxation – sure dear (as Andrew Neil pointed out) taxes are the highest they have been for thirty years and a still rising. Thank goodness the BBC have one sensible presenter who middle of the road rather than another dire, magic money tree lefty. Someone prepared sometimes to attack the Tories for being the misguided, tax borrow and waste socialists they clearly are.

    These high tax rates, tax complexity and the endless waste by government (plus the endlessly increasing red tape and misguided expensive “renewables” religion) are the main dangers to the economy. Brexit is certainly a positive in the medium to long term if we play in right and move more towards a Singapore agenda.

    • Prigger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:43 am | Permalink

      “Liz Truss yesterday on the daily politics said the Conservative were the party of Low taxation –” Liz Truss is in a minority of British people who think as she does. My Council Tax…yes it is a tax…rises irrespective of lower energy costs, little or no wage increases for the public sector, easier borrowing for the sector, working more smartly which they trumpet they do, and massively decreased commodity prices. The Tory Party is the Party of ultra-taxation and is as much a danger to the country in its weird “conservatism” as Corbynistas

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

        Not quite “as much of the danger” but nearly.

        • Prigger
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

          Okay, I was just angry, As you say “Not quite “as much of the danger” but nearly.”

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:11 am | Permalink

      “Why May must Stay” writes the Matthew Parris in The Spectator today. So not long for her (and Hopefully Hammond too) now I assume. This as I cannot remember Matthew Parris (rather like the Libdems) being right on any major issue ever.

      She should go not because of her sore throat or her “dim primary school teacher” delivery but because she is a tax borrow and waste, red tape spewing, remainer(ex?). An interventionist, a socialist and not a Conservative in any sense. She should go because her policies big state policies (taxes at 30 year highs) just will not work and she will lose the next election to an even worse socialist than her.

  6. Lifelogic
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:54 am | Permalink

    Someone, at PM questions yesterday suggested to May that the Tories were still dithering over the Welsh “Lagoon” lunacy. I had thought this daft project at least was now rightly dead.

    • Glenn Vaughan
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:16 am | Permalink

      I look forward to the “Welsh lagoon “project (to which it has been referred erroneously) going ahead.

      Only an idiot would oppose it.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:14 am | Permalink

        Anyone numerate who has bothered to do the sums (true value of electricity generated over cost and maintenance) would oppose it! It is economic lunacy.

        • hefner
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

          Show your numbers!

          • Lifelogic
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

            Well look at the Rance tidal power plant in France, built in 1966, has a peak capacity of 240 MW, impounding 22.5 km² on an average tidal amplitude of 8 m. Because it cannot always be generating at full capacity, it effectively gets 40% of this on average, or 96 MW.

            Electricity that is not on demand and varies with spring and neap tides. Worth circa £70 million PA but take away running cost and depreciation & interest on the billions these things cost to build. Hugely loss making without huge tax payer subsidies also massive potential repair bills from regular storm and wave damage and silting up.

            The laws of physics seem unlikely to change in the short term and it is not “renewable” either as it slows down the earth’s rotation.

          • hefner
            Posted October 13, 2017 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

            With tides occurring twice a day over the oceans covering roughly 70 percent of the planet, do you really think that filling and emptying a pond with 180 km^3 of water will affect the earth’s rotation?

          • hefner
            Posted October 13, 2017 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

            Ever heard of Canada’s Bay of Fundy project?

          • hefner
            Posted October 13, 2017 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

            According to Wikipedia Rance_Tidal_Power_Station, the building cost in 1966 was 620M French francs (94.5 M€) not billions. It ran from 1967 to 2011, and given the differential in output prices (0.03€ for nuclear MW to 0.12€ for MW of Rance energy), it is not active anymore.

          • hefner
            Posted October 14, 2017 at 8:18 am | Permalink

            Just for the sake of a good laugh: the lagoon pond is only containing 0.180 km^3 of water and the highly numerate Lifelogic did not even notice the factor 1000 error.

            I just hope that the guy only deals with numbers in his homestead and has no use of them professionally (or as so many empty suits has a number of people sweeping after him).

      • ian wragg
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:44 am | Permalink

        There must be lots of idiots then. It makes less economic sense than HS” and that itself is nonsense.
        For the investment and disruption involved, it will generate a miniscule amount of power.
        If it was practical, the private sector would be willing to finance it.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:30 pm | Permalink


      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

        Put your foolish money in then not the tax payers!

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:53 am | Permalink

      Dear Lifelogic–My understanding is that we are talking about one small simple and experimental tidal project–Running costs will plummet if the idea half-way works because there is infinite time for the costs to be spread over. There is so much to play for–And not just energy–How about a lagoon going all along the East Coast a mile out to sea thus arresting coastal erosion?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:22 am | Permalink

        Can you not imagine what the huge cost of building and maintaining these massive walls would be – relative to the trivial value of the small amount of electricity being generated. Do the sums. They cannot even afford to protect much of the coast at all in many areas as it is too expensive.

        You can only generate significant electricity by enclosing a large area of tidal water. So small ones make even less sense than large ones. This as the wall is relatively longer for the area that is enclosed – (as area goes up at the square of the perimeter length). Plus they can silt up quickly!

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:24 am | Permalink

        The running costs will almost certainly exceed the value of any electricity generated – even without the capital costs and vast interest.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

          Dear Lifelogic–I think otherwise certainly on the running costs (What running costs? The water just sloshes in and out on its own) and the interest isn’t “vast interest”–interest is interest and is low on any basis at present. And what about a (vast) credit from not being dependent on foreigners in any way shape or form?

          • stred
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

            They usually finance these uneconomic projects by agreeing a strike price about 3x gas with foreign companies and letting the customer pay for it for years. Wind is already going to put £150 on the bill, then there is the overpriced nuke. Fuel poverty here we come.

          • ian wragg
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

            The silt in the water is very abrasive and the turbine will require extensive maintenance. The areas adjacent will silt up and a continuous dredging operation is required.
            These type of projects are very maintenance intensive.
            Remember the offshore windmills that were going to supply free power for 25 years after installation, none have breached their planning target for generation, Gearboxes have been failing and rotor blades cracking.
            Now there is talk of 15 years being the useful life. Who will pay to remove them when they are scrap. Look what happened in California.

          • NickC
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

            Leslie, Running costs? Seal failure, bearing failure, impeller erosion, generator failure, contactor failure, corrosion, concrete erosion, silting, cable damage, leakages, flooding, storm damage, etc, etc. Your and Glenn Vaughan’s position can’t be dignified by throwing back his term “idiocy”, it is a stone-age, technology-as-magic delusion.

            The only way a tidal lagoon generation plant will be built is with government (ie: taxpayer) subsidy. How do I know this? – because you haven’t already stumped up your own cash. And neither has a private company (sans subsidies).

          • Lifelogic
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

            Maintaining the huge £ billions of wall for a start and dredging the silt out periodically….

          • Dennis
            Posted October 13, 2017 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

            If it slows the Earth’s rotation surely this is good for the economy as it will increase out working day and add to the GDP.

            It must be in all future manifestos.

        • stred
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

          Greg Clarke and his assistant Mz Perry seem to be pleased that Lord Gummer has been appointed to another 5 years as chair of the Climate Change Committee. Charles Hendry, who advised that the lagoon would be viable if the payback period was 100 years has taken over from Lord Gummer as Chairman of Forewind which will be building a huge windfarm on the Dogger Bank in a few years. The consortium has been given a strike price of £140/MWh plus inflation fro 2012 ie 150 already. As the latest prices are about a third of this, they must be very pleased to have had the advice of these ex-politicians. Who needs idiots when we have ministers?

          • Lifelogic
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:32 pm | Permalink

            Indeed follow the money seems to be the lesson. One gigantic scam against the tax and bill payer after another.

          • Leslie Singleton
            Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

            Dear Stred–Just as my gut reaction is that the experiment should go ahead (Why is payback only 100 years?) my gut reaction is that these fancy strike price schemes are no help to anybody.

          • stred
            Posted October 13, 2017 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

            The Swansea lagoon is angling for a strike price around £90/MWh which is near the high price agreed for the Hinkley Point nuke just opposite. Unfortunately, the electricity supply will be predictable but in bursts as the tides come in and out. This will mean that back up gas stations will have to ramp up and down even more than they do with wind.The best sites for lagoons have been identified but unfortunately the tides occur at similar times, so the idea of continuous supply doesn’t work. The only way that the ex-Decc minister can recommend it is to discount the scheme over 100 years. If you do this any folly can be built. Of course, contractor love building anything so long as they are paid for it. The more the cost goes up, the better.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

          Dear Lifelogic–No I cannot imagine–The walls will just be glorified harbour walls which I don’t see as particularly expensive or problematic rather the opposite. The point about the small is that it is an experiment. Perhaps because it is not High Tech it is looked down upon for no real reason.

      • Glenn Vaughan
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:18 pm | Permalink


        Don’t waste your “energy” with reasoned argument against prejudice.

        My point about idiocy has been validated today.

        • stred
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

          And your unprejudiced numbers?

  7. Mick
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:55 am | Permalink
    Should Westminster vote for us to stay in the eu then Catalonia will be a reflection of what will happen here, so these MPs that are only looking after themselves had better have a long hard think to there actions, the UK voted out and we can vote you out we are your masters and not the other way round, you are just a hundred or so MPs but we are millions , what is needed now is someone to step upto the plate and organise a mass demonstration for the leavers so we can remind these MPs and the eu who won the vote and I for don’t careless if remoaners say the referendum was advisory I voted out like I vote in national elections we have to abide by the results that is democracy or have these MPs forgot about that

  8. Brexit
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:04 am | Permalink

    Splendid, forthright piece. Your commentary and information recently has been right on the button and sorely needed.
    Best wishes, the Facts4EU.Org Team

  9. Dave Andrews
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    There is frequent talk about a “cliff edge”. Is this an accurate prediction of EU imports after we leave? With the strong Euro coupled with import tariffs, won’t EU goods be priced out of the UK market?

    Reply There is no cliff edge. We will carry on trading

    • Anonymous
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:18 am | Permalink

      Yet the cliff edge that the young have gone off – whilst in the EU – is never mentioned. The unaffordability of basic housing.

      The generation wealth gap is stark.

      Yet importing millions to compete with wages and limited housing has nothing to do with it, according to Remainers.

      • NickC
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

        Anon 7:18am, Excellent points.

    • Len Grinds
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:21 am | Permalink

      There is a cliff edge. We will carry on trading only if our exporters pay tariffs and (far more important) spend a lot of time money meeting the EU’s standards, and proving they meet the EU’s standards. Our export trade will be hugely damaged.

      • NickC
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:26 pm | Permalink

        Len, No there is no “cliff edge” for the UK economy because c90% of it is not involved with exports to the EU. The largest part of our economy is domestic by far, and we export about 50% more to the rest of the world than we do to the EU.

        As James Dyson said, the EU is not a single market because there are different standards and languages all over the continent. We comply now, so we can comply in the future just as we have to comply with the different standards in India, USA, Brazil, etc, when we export there.

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

          Dear Nick–Quite right–I’m not sure (I’m getting old) precisely what the percentage of our economy that is Export is but I think perhaps 12% ish in total from vague memory. To the EU alone it is going to be much less of course and once free there is bound to be an increase perhaps an enormous increase to the rest of the world, leave alone that we get to stop paying hard cash through the nose not to mention regain our countryhood and reduce immigration. Besides we shall continue to export something to the EU no matter what. Never really begun to understand what the fuss is all about.

      • Edward2
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

        I’ve been involved in exporting over several decades and manufacturing companies already meet technical and quality standards in every market they sell into.
        The audit checks are done electronically before the goods depart the UK

      • Jagman84
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

        We already meet EU standards on all of our produce, not just that exported to the other EU nations. These standards will be transposed into UK law. The tariffs collected from EU imports will far outweigh those imposed on us and can be used for tax breaks for our exporters.

    • Prigger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:46 am | Permalink

      The Euro will fluctuate. Will it increase or decrease compared to a basket of currencies when we leave? Will the EU be as large when we leave. Where will it buy its fish and at what price?

  10. eeyore
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:17 am | Permalink

    I found the Chancellor’s comment surprising too, as well as very unwise. We now know that the three top figures in government don’t have their hearts in Brexit, and that no serious preparation will be made for the most likely outcome of the talks.

    So a white flag is waved to Brussels while the message is sent to people here that their leaders don’t mind looking like saboteurs. Are they? If this isn’t what HMG meant to say, it is most unfortunate in its way of saying it.

    Mrs May, to whom weakness is now strength, expects that the distasteful nature of the Opposition will keep her MPs onside. It’s an ugly choice they have to make. In the phrase of the moment, the ball’s in your court, Mr Redwood.

    • Prigger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:04 am | Permalink

      The Chancellor is genuinely extremely intelligent. He has the ability to speak succinctly. I heard him in Committee yesterday and also heard Mrs May. Both spoke in perfect agreement.Laura Kuenssberg immediately after letting us hear, then proclaimed they were at loggerheads and in great disagreement. Such is the blatant disrespect the BBC has for us that it feels it can show us a bucket of custard and then say “You’ve seen it is the moon” and then proceed with straight face and still paid salary. Fake News. We should not pay the licence fee.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:31 am | Permalink

      Indeed and he is a dreadful tax increasing, tax ’till the pip squeak, borrow and piss down the drain chancellor as well. He is failing totally to control the bloated and largely unproductive (even anti-productive) state sector. Then he has the temerity to complain about “low productivity”. This when the private sector is carrying all this dead weight of taxation, expensive energy and endless damaging red tape from the state. He is failing to get any real competition in banking too and tying them up in damaging red tape too.

      His 15% stamp duty, attacking pension pots, attacking the gig economy, increasing insurance tax, ratting on the £1M IHT threshold each promise are hugely damaging. His attacking of tenants (via landlords), pushing the wealthy & Non Doms out of the country, supporting the absurd HS2, Hinkley and bonkers the expensive energy crap green crap subsidies are misguided too.

      He couldn’t run a whelk stall as my Mum would have put it.

  11. Lifelogic
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:21 am | Permalink

    The government is to launch more mad expensive carbon lunacy today it seems. Claire Perry (Minister of State for Climate Change and Industry) talking the usual unscientific tosh on radio 4 about “a low carbon economy”. More expensive and misguided red tape spewing out everywhere seems likely. The BBC needless to say asked nothing very sensible or challenging of the daft policies.

    She too, like May, will not say how she would vote if a new Brexit referendum arose so still a “remainer” one assumes. Another Oxford Geography graduate I note – so perhaps she can be excused for her total lack of any grasp of science and engineering.

    • Miss Brandreth-Jones
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

      obviously you don’t realise that geography degrees incorporate much science and geology !

  12. Peter Wood
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    Good Morning,
    The government acquiesced to the EU’s exit negotiating schedule, rightly or not, well that is history. The government now needs to get a grip on the schedule and set the timetable for our benefit. Delay harms us and benefits the EU. It should be clear by now the EU will prevaricate until 2019. We must plan and spend aggressively now for a ‘no deal’ outcome and downgrade continuing discussions with the EU.

    • Nig l
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:02 am | Permalink

      Spot on. I remember a CEO I worked for during a time of difficult change, likening the business to a bus.

      He would put the destination on the front, explain to all the staff, why, what that means etc and invite them on to it. He wanted everyone to get on but once on, he expected no one to complain about where it was going once it started.

      To me Hammond is not only complaining, he is actually interfering with the driver. He must go.

  13. alan jutson
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:37 am | Permalink

    I am afraid JR that the present Chancellor simply does not believe in Brexit full stop, it appears he is absolutely of the mindset that he wants to delay and delay again any exit from the EU for as long as possible in the hope that it will never happen.

    Time for him to be replaced, not to do so now after his recent comments shows weakness and indecision by the Prime Minister, and does not bode well for further negotiations with the EU.

    It has not been a good couple of weeks for the PM has it !
    Not just on the EU, but with many other strange policy decisions.

    The voters are getting more and more frustrated John !.

    • Nigel
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:13 am | Permalink

      He is acting like a 5th columnist, frustrating the process at every turn.

  14. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    I confess to be pleased to hear a chancellor indicating that spending will be limited.

    An open cheque book at the beginning of the process encourages those who would complicate matters for personal gain.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:50 am | Permalink

      As an aside, your blogs this week on no deal have covered the same topic which, through the number of responses, have been thoroughly covered.

      Why nothing on an energy cap policy that will certainly punish those already shopping around in favour of the many who can’t be bothered to take advantage of competitive pricing.

      Or a piece on tax credits which are a good idea that has been poorly implemented and is too open to abuse from those coming from elsewhere. For instance I have used a calculator to discover I could take home £36K on tax credits or the equivalent of £50K per year before tax. Of course as a worker it would be difficult for me to board the welfare gravy train but if I were to arrive from abroad seeking minimum wage employment with my three kids I would be handed a free season ticket.

      • Anonymous
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:20 am | Permalink


        This is the subsidy Uber and coffee shop chains want continued while avoiding tax here.

      • Hope
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:11 am | Permalink

        Read Guido it makes your blood boil. This Tories are no longer for workers, strivers and savers. They are for the feckless, the strap line for MP’s should be, I am alright Jack f..k tax paying public.

        MPs give themselves through the sham IPSA an undeserved £10,000 pay rise, MPs exemption to keeping RPI for pensions, exemptions for tax etc. Disgusting.

        • hefner
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

          And for that price, if you ask them politely to reconsider their stand on such things as “dignity in dying”, they do not even answer your message, trying (as for example JR-M has done with abortion) to explain their reasons for refusing.

      • Peter Parsons
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:12 am | Permalink

        There is a broad consensus that the current market in domestic energy doesn’t work in the interests of many consumers, often those on the lowest incomes.

        There are plenty of folks who, rather than “can’t be bothered”, are unable to shop around easily due to not having easy access (or access at all) to the mechanisms to do so. Doing nothing to protect such people from being overcharged is wrong.

        • Narrow Shoulders
          Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

          Anyone can pick up a phone and ask for a review Peter. The staff are recorded and so talk you through it in detail and fairly.

          It is not difficult

          • Peter Parsons
            Posted October 13, 2017 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

            Do phone review get you access to tariffs from providers other than the one you are currently using?

      • graham1946
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

        The Energy Cap is yet another Tory sham. If it gets approval, it will not come in until late 2018 or even 2019 and end in 2020. What use is that? Why is everything involving politicians so slow? Why not get it up and running for this winter – presumably because they want to minimise the effect on the profits of their friends. The energy companies will get round it – they just decide how much profit they want to make and then adjust prices to achieve it. Thus smart meters etc are a waste of time and money, even if the worked – any drop in usage would simply result in a price per unit increase to achieve said profit requirements. Regulators do not protect the public, they act as a trade association for the entities they are supposed to regulate. The whole thing is wrong headed and needs major overhaul, not just a bit of tinkering to try to fool the public – they will find out soon enough when their bills don’t fall.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:03 am | Permalink

      Dear Narrow–Except that one has to take a view NOW as to what is likely to happen (No Deal of course) and act on that view. I woke up again this morning to find Hammond still in place. This alone (plus much else) means Mrs May should go too so both of them should. Her judgement continues appalling and I don’t care whether she is doing her best and all that stuff. I simply don’t want her making the crucial decisions very much still to come.

  15. Roy Grainger
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:54 am | Permalink

    Hammond said something quite strange, that if he spent money unnecessarily on preparations for something that never happened it would take money away from the NHS. This is obviously nonsense. It would only be true if the government only spent the fixed pot of money they took in in taxes and so extra spending in one area would lead to cuts in others (and it would be the NHS which would be cut according to him). However, as we know, they just borrow massive amounts to meet any spending requirements so spending more on preparations would just mean he borrows more with no impact on the NHS at all.

    It was also a politically stupid thing to say because it implied he WOULD cut NHS spending in the case of him having to spend more elsewhere, playing right into Labour’s hands on their central campaigning issue.

    No 10 should really screen Hammond’s announcements in advance to stop them being so damaging.

    • graham1946
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

      Number 1 rule in politics and economics – if you want to make an absurd point just threaten the NHS. Hammond really is a liability, a useless Chancellor and not a supporter of the UK. I expect he will go after he presents yet another howler of a budget. He makes Osborne look good.

  16. Helena
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:54 am | Permalink

    It isn’t Dover we need to worry about. It’s Calais, Boulogne, Dunkirk, etc. Brexit means they have to be re-built too, and it’s the UK’s job to pay for it since it’s Brexit that’s caused it. that’s a lot of money that’s not going to get spent on the NHS.

    • Jagman84
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

      The EU could have avoided any expense by giving David Cameron more than ‘thin gruel’ during the ‘re-negotiation’. He may have squeezed out a remain vote with some modest concessions. Why do the likes of you so keen to give away UK taxpayers money?

    • stred
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

      French customs are in Dover and UK customs in Calais. We could put in numberplate readers looking both ways and hire them to the French if they are not ready. If they want to stop and search every lorry, they would need to hire our lorry park near the M20. If they do this, it will destroy their food and wine sales and tourism. Macron would have farmers dumping produce in the Elysee.

    • lo
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

      French infrastructure is none of our concern after Brexit.

      • stred
        Posted October 13, 2017 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

        We keep helping them make ports work, as with the wall to protect lorries from illegal boarding and attacks. The French army still checks boots for stow- aways and weapons in order to protect ferries.

  17. Edward Faltburgh
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    Hold on, hold on. Cost? You told us there would be no cost. You told us Brexit would be easy. You told us we’d release money for the NHS. Turns out now we’re spending it on lorry parks. What a deception!

    • NickC
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

      Edward, I don’t know about all of JR’s statements – you will have to provide evidence for your claims – but I have consistently stated (4 years+) that if anyone thinks the EU will be friendly and reasonable they haven’t been paying attention for 45 years. Which is why I advocated 12 months notice and WTO rules at the start.

      Now you’re telling us you want to be locked into the EU, and run by the EU, for the EU’s benefit, in perpetuity, despite the waste, corruption, bureaucracy, hostility and blackmail for 45 years by the oligarchic EU? You may want us to be a subject nation of the EU empire; I don’t.

    • Edward2
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

      12 billion saved
      A few million spent on lorry parks

    • stred
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

      We are already building huge lorry parks to wait while the French are on strike.

    • graham1946
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

      The lorry parks are needed for the effect of the frequent French strikes which bung up our motorways – no lorry has been delayed by Brexit. Similar with their frequent air traffic control strikes. The Remoaners keep on about flights being grounded by Brexit, without any evidence and no agreements any where near reached, yet they don’t consider the French strikers effect on flights at all, which are actually real, not imagined as they are in their fevered dreams.

  18. Caterpillar
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    The Chancellor appears to be on a strategy of remaining by the back door, very nearly the front. Nothing prepared for exit so that UK pays large ‘divorce’ bill, created uncertainty followef by long transition period. It is clear the intention is to pay and stay so that hoi polloi adopt an outer EU circle vision. The Chancellor does not surprise nor does the PM’s inability to replace him with someone supportive of the electorate’s wishes. There seem to be very few in either house that are capable of representing the referendum result.

  19. Ian Wragg
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    Hammond, Rudd and company are determined to derail Brexit. Sqeaker Bercrow says MPs could ignore the referendum result.
    Do these people think 17.4 million will sit on their hands if the government fails to deliver Brexit.
    The government is treading a very dangerous path.

  20. am
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:01 am | Permalink
    Trouble ahead for trade talks and new trade deals. Hardly the move on and up approach we were led to believe would happen more like tie ourselves unnecessarily to an eu system and for how long?

  21. sm
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    I can fully respect the views of those voters and politicians who do not wish the UK to leave the EU – they have their opinions, I have mine.

    What I absolutely cannot accept is that members of the Government such as the Chancellor and the Home Secretary were willing to compromise their own beliefs in order to achieve high office in a Government that is pledged to Leave, and then are, by all accounts, working to inhibit Brexit.

    I spent more than 20 years as an unpaid, exceptionally active and eventually senior voluntary officer in the Conservative Party in London, to the extent that despite having just been devastated by widowhood I worked in the 2015 election campaign. I should be used to the naked cynicism I saw displayed by many politicians of all stripes in that period, going right to the top (with the exception of our host and a very few others), but even I am appalled by the antics of the big beasts at the moment.

    If Sir Patrick McG is at all concerned by the appalling drop in Cons Party membership, he need look no further than the current conduct of most of the present Cabinet.

  22. Les Folds
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    Dear Sir,

    It has been a bad few weeks for lifelong Conservative voters like me who have seen the party led by people who don’t seem to share our core values. It is your column which has kept me in better spirits, as it dispels the doom and gloom that seems to be a never ending stream from the BBC and most mainstream media.

    Please keep up the good work.

  23. Richard1
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    Just heard Kwazi Kwateng vs Hillary Benn on the Today Programme. Kwazi as always articulate and says we need to be prpepared for no deal, Benn hysterical and saying No Deal will be a catastrophe – planes won’t fly, medicines won’t be delivered etc. But Kwazi did not say why No Deal is not a problem, so Hillary Benn ‘won’. The Govt and all its members need to be clear about what the consequences of no deal are and why we should be relaxed about it, even if they prefer a deal. If the reality is the Govt in reality don’t disagree with Mr Benn that No Deal will be a disaster then they need to just go and ask the EU what concessions the UK needs to make and make them. Bluff won’t work.

    • Beecee
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:05 pm | Permalink

      Our host has explained on numerous occasions how we would trade and operate in the event of a no-deal.

      Mr Kwateng should have said ‘rollocks’ every time Mr Benn spoke garbage!

      • Richard1
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

        He may have done so but Government ministers repeatedly duck opportunities to explain whether or not they think we can live with no deal. If they are of the view that we can’t it would be better to do the best we can in negotiations now and go eg for EEA membership, probably paying a big bung along the way. If they want to play hardball and go for the best deal with clean Brexit, then they need to be prepared to walk away and to explain how they think that would work. The present fudge is hopeless.

  24. Bob
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    If you can believe the BBC, there is no anxiety at all in the EU about the prospect of UK flights being grounded, huge tailbacks of lorries at Channel ports, the loss of fishing rights and a £10 billion hole in their budget.

    Almost as if they know something we don’t.

  25. JJE
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:28 am | Permalink

    I see homes are not an asset to be passed on to our offspring?

    Has the Conservative Party been infiltrated by people determined to eliminate it? Because that will be your fate at the next General Election. Perhaps you plan to retire then and leave the mess to others.

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

      Much quoted but worthwhile repeating yet again :-

      “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves”-Vladimir Lenin

    • sm
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

      JJE, I do not think my children and grandchildren should be taxed further to fund your Care Home needs in order that your children can benefit from inheriting your house.

      And vice-versa.

      And I am a Conservative.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

      Dear JJE–Some of us have never grasped what is special about houses (or more accurately the house one dies in). What about people who choose to rent and buy say jewellery or shares in Li for batteries with the proceeds, what is the difference? Admittedly May and her semi-secret advisers screwed the whole subject up about as comprehensively as can be imagined, possibly with no way of rowing back but that is a different subject.

  26. Bert Young
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    There is obviously a difference between No.10 and No.11 on the build up spend situation pre Brexit . Theresa made it clear in the Commons that some expenditure would be required and Hammond – appearing before the Finance Committee , said differently . I can only conclude that Hammond has decided to steer his own course and ignore the overall decision of the Cabinet . If this is so , then he has to go .

    John’s blog this morning has highlighted the need for preparation and the inevitable expenditure that has to occur ; why should Hammond decree otherwise ? . Border staff numbers will have to be increased together with all the other considerations that go along with this recruitment ; this is just for starters . The public are the ones who are being confused and this must stop .

    • bigneil
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:46 am | Permalink

      ” Border staff numbers will have to be increased ”
      An article I read yesterday said we have a million illegals here that would be impossible to get rid off. This is clearly an announcement prior to an amnesty being announced. Those million will be put on the records, so they can get all the benefits etc that the rest of us have to pay taxes for. And that, now legal, would then be replaced by millions more arriving, knowing that if they are caught, legal aid lawyers, again paid for by us, will ensure that the new(er) arrivals stay as well.

      Border staff were cut for a reason. To ensure more got in. We are to be flooded – – one way or the other – and our leaders are in full agreement with this country becoming a third world – ASAP.

      • Anonymous
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

        Notice how the BBC has gone silent on the Med crisis ?

        Are we to believe the problem has been stopped ?

      • Robert Christopher
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

        ” Those million will be put on the records …” and their relatives will be invited in.

  27. Mark B
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:11 am | Permalink

    Good morning

    The Treasury needs to understand that saving £12bn a year of net contribution is the biggest saving we have . . .

    And this is why many think the current Lord of the Tresury and Chancellor of the Excheqor are simply not up to the job. But it is up to the Legislator to hold them to account.

    . . . find the money we need for a successful and growing economy . . .

    I disagree. Want we need to do is to tell the EU and others that the UK will become a low tax economy. Both personal and company. Government need to get out of the way and stop thinking that they are running some kind of corporate enterprise. They are not.

  28. Anonymous
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    Defiance against the democratic vote by the Remain Chancellor is a useful indicator as to where we stand. Whatever happens, 2016 was a moment of truth and revelation. Our vote was not in vain.

    None articulates the veiled contempt better than Newmania

  29. a-tracy
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    Look, if we are going to have trouble importing our Citroen vans and cars and delays at ports from the French side, and the Germans truly don’t care about future trades with us then let’s start talking to other suppliers and other Countries now, especially those that build in the UK, and give us alternative purchases, lets start telling the Japanese and Koreans what the vehicles are we require, what emission standards they need to meet and set up container ship importing systems now in anticipation of these problems or encourage their build in the UK factories getting the wires and cables for replacement parts etc. made in the UK. I did think that the Europeans would want to continue friendly trade and transport but they’re now indicating they don’t care for this.

    If we have to increase our JiT systems then perhaps we need to start recreating the dairies that we closed down when we started importing so much milk so that we can provide for our own needs and get our farmers to prepare in advance. There is no need for any of this but as we keep being told by contributors to your blog expect to be treated like a third world country and the isolation Mr Junker feels we should get a taste of and get our worst-case scenario alternatives ready and waiting. Mr Barnier says ‘this is not a game’ it certainly isn’t and we are being told now the European side want to make sure there will be an issue at ports then prepare for it.

  30. Peter
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    Yes, getting out on time is the biggest saving we can make, so spending to ensure that happens is sensible.

    I am not sure Mr. Hammond is the man to galvanise Treasury thinking though. Many voters would like to see the back of him. We don’t know the nature of the infighting amongst members of the government. An attempt to challenge the PM came to nought and talk of removing Boris got more coverage than talk of removing the chancellor.

    It is all a big worry.

  31. Nig l
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:33 am | Permalink

    Maybe a bit anorak but Liz Truss yesterday seemed to differentiate from her boss stating very clearly that having voted to remain she would now vote to leave and she sees the Treasury figures and is subject to their culture.

    She is very ambitious and I wonder whether this is her now seeing the tide very clearly turning in favour of the Leave camp, so positioning herself post Brexit, post May or even earlier if there is to be reshuffle.

    In any event I am now shorting Hammonds.

  32. agricola
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    Yes the Treasury would appear to remain a force for negativity, politically led by a chancellor who seems to be in tune with them. It is up to the Cabinet to force policy for a well managed Brexit on both, and for the conservative party in the Commons to reinforce such policy.

  33. Iain Moore
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    I saw someone describe Hammond as Remainer Vampire, which I can’t improve on , for where ever he opens his mouth all life sucked out of the room. But in light of Mrs May guaranteeing payments to the EU for at least an addition two years , you might have thought a Treasury Minister was doing everything in his power, like making the necessary investments, to ensure No Deal was a distinct possibility so we didn’t have to pay out that money.

  34. Freeborn John
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:46 am | Permalink

    Hammond should have left the Cabinet months ago. There will never be a united government approach to deliver brexit while he is there doing his best for Brussels. It is like having Guy Verhofstadt in the Cabinet. He is a lousy Chancellor too no doubt because he seems to spend all his time on brexit.

  35. Epikouros
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    The chancellor in saying what he did was just indulging in propaganda to aid in the cause of the EU and remainers in keeping us in the EU. It puzzles me that so called intelligent people can believe in the rectitude of being a member of the EU. Especially Philip Hammond and other remain Conservatives as they should know that Conservatism standards for civil liberties, democracy and small state government not multilayered rule by corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats. By every measure the EU fails not only to achieve what it was set up to do, which sensible people knew it would but also heaps on all those who have the misfortune to belong to it burdens of complexity that are wasteful, costly, restrictive and coercive.

  36. English Pensioner
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    I note that yesterday the Chancellor said that air traffic with Europe could come to a halt if no agreement is reached for Brexit. I thought this idea was put to sleep a long while ago, after all, the EU would be the biggest looser if this should happen with no UK citizens holidaying in the EU.
    The Mail reported today that EU citizens would still get free NHS treatment, whilst UK citizens in the EU would have to pay. This is crazy, our citizens in the EU should be treated the same as EU citizens here, and vice versa.
    The sooner we are out, the better, agreement or no agreement.

    • hefner
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

      “the EU would be the biggest loser if this should happen with no UK citizens holidaying in the EU”. There are indeed no American, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, … strolling the streets of Rome, Athens, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, … only oh so well-behaved Brits. Poor continental Europe.

      • lo
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

        Not many of those nationalities in the holiday resorts though?

        • hefner
          Posted October 13, 2017 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

          I guess it is because a lot of Brits love to be within themselves so as to be able to criticize “the bloody foreigners” …

    • forthurst
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

      “..yesterday the Chancellor said that air traffic with Europe could come to a halt if no agreement is reached for Brexit.” I thought Chris Grayling was Transport Secretary; time to fit Hammond with blinkers?

    • hefner
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      EngPens, Are you sure you know what you are writing about? As a Brit settled in France, you could get registered with “Securite Sociale” and get a “Carte Vitale” (for free), which would cover between 70 and 80 % of your health expenses. Furthermore, once registered you would get the same mail advertisements from the “mutuelles” (additional insurances) that a majority of French people have. You would have to pay for it as French people do.
      So with regards to health provision, you would be in the exact same position as a French native.

      I would like to get Britons settled in other continental European countries to comment on their health provision, as I suspect the Daily Mail to have taken the situation in one particular continental European country and generalised it to all Europe, you know, just to play their usual anti-EU game …

  37. Newmania
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:07 am | Permalink

    Have the EU suggested they will handle this border any differently any other EU border then?
    How exactly does it make any difference is we continue to remove money from the NHS so people endure pain an die , so we can have a vast lot of checks no-one acknowledges the worth of . The country letting the components in is the one that checks the point of origin and who on earth would believe a word the Brexit state had to say ?

    No-one here does

    • NickC
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:53 pm | Permalink

      Newmania, Given that your incoherent comments must be a reflection of your incoherent thinking, it is no wonder you believe EU serfdom is preferable to independence. My advice is to proof read your comments until they make sense, otherwise you will continue to be jeered at.

    • forthurst
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

      We are not in Shengen so all apart from Irish have to pass through border control. As there are upwards of a million uninvited guests here, there clearly needs to be inprovements in both Border control and removals.

      • hefner
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

        It is something quite funny to have “the usuals” complaining about border control: every time I come back from out of Britain, I spend between 20 and 40 minutes queuing one way or another within the UK border controls.
        Could one of “the usuals” explain to me clearly and with details of locations and dates how they know about this million of uninvited guests subrepticiously going through the borders, as to me, if there are such people they have gone through the UK border controls (as the number of the few coming through the tunnel must not have been much more than hundreds or a few thousands).

        If there is a problem (and I do not deny the problem), it is with the “ridiculous” who keep asking for a smaller and smaller State without even imagining that a decrease in the size of the State directly translates into fewer people manning border controls.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 8:44 am | Permalink


      I can hardly believe a word you say let alone understand it. Have you been drinking too much French wine?

  38. A.Sedgwick
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    Getting out of the EU should be just the start of reducing the power of The Treasury. Apparently 95% of the UK tax take is controlled by them. Hammond’s forthcoming budget will be another dire offering.

    On Farming Today 11 Oct some spokesman of some organisation went largely unchallenged when he said without access to food from the EU we could basically starve – slight exaggeration but not much.

    • graham1946
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

      No food arriving in the UK from the EU and we would starve? What about the people supplying it? No effect presumably in their muddled thinking. Never in history have so many intelligent people uttered such rubbish as they do when trying to support the EU.

    • Foodie
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 12:52 am | Permalink

      A. Sedgwick
      ” without access to food from the EU we could basically starve – slight exaggeration but not much.” World food production is in surplus and has been for some time. Land is actually being turned over to other things because over-production of food is so bad. Transport systems too are reprioritising away from say grain transportation. When Russia, a massive producer of grain had a bad year due to climate the Canadian government had to order and impose fines on their railways if they did not place more emphasis on grain transport. Same thing happened in India in the same year though people believe they are starving. They were hoarding grain until the price went up.
      The EU dare not lose its food contracts with us. So many are waiting to take their place. I’m waiting too because the EU produces lousy tasteless fruit and vegetables compared. I know how Adam must have felt when I tasted an apple in America a few years ago. Wow! ( Actually I think it was Mexican 🙂 )

  39. robert lewy
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    Perhaps the difference positions of May and Hammond on funding No-Deal preparation
    represent a good-cop bad-cop approach.

    It would be more than surprising if the issue of this funding had not already been discussed
    in some detail by PM and Chancellor if not the cabinet.

    That both decided it was time to speak publicly on the matter must be partly at least intended to send the message to the EU that they should be in no doubt that we are preparing for a No-Deal outcome but that we will also defer the incurring of costs until they are necessary.

    The purpose would be to emphasize the fact that although there are no visible signs of preparation for a No-Deal it is only the cautionary principle which prevents evidence yet appearing.

    This is wise as far as it goes.

    However, markers should be set out to guide as to at what point such expenditure as is necessary will take place i.e we need a time table.

    • robert lewy
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

      “immoderate” behaviour!

  40. Dennis Zoff
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:25 am | Permalink

    “The Chancellor needs to get them to cheer up, have new and more realistic and optimistic forecasts, and to find the money we need for a successful and growing economy post Brexit.”

    JR, in a nutshell: They need to get on and do their damn job and stop politizing, period!

  41. mick
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:37 am | Permalink
    Why is this snake oil salesman being given so much tv and media time, ho i know because they, you know the ones the eu loving luvvies think he can make a difference, well he won`t, the British public are not idiots well the ones north of the watford gap that is, even his constituants saw through him in the GE and got rid just a few more to follow him next time, it`s a pity the tv and media don`t give as much coverage to the leavers, but that will change after March 2019

  42. Kenneth
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    Whether the chancellor is a puppet of remoaner civil servants or is his own man, he must go.

    The new chancellor will also need to clear out some of the obstructionist treasury officials.

  43. Prigger
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    After the Referendum, our Chancellor was himself questioned regarding his previous taunts that our economy would take a nose-dive immediately and his wholly incorrect predictions. He smiled broadly, no I’m not a liar, he smiled broadly and allowed the meaning to be conveyed that his words were deliberate untruths because politics even the Referendum campaign was but a game to be played and therefore anything goes. Politicians, I’ve heard senior ones say has been said directly to me by two, that “It is just a game. You have to understand that!” Oh but I do, for them.

  44. A Briton
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:11 am | Permalink

    “The Chancellor needs to get them (the treasury) to cheer up”. It is NOT in his interest (never has been) to do so. HE doesn’t want to leave the Single Market and that’s as plain as the carbunkle on my face which is another IRRITANT that drives me nuts.
    As I understand it whatever agreement we reach with the EU is subject to approval by the ECJ therefore a quiet whisper in their ‘shell-like’ from any of the 27 could scupper the deal and send it back for years and years and years of re-negotiation. Why are we going through the motions to something that people will still be talking about in 50 years time? Scupper it NOW – declare UDI as at March 2019 and MAKE British Industry gear up to WTO rules so that they are ready to trade throughout the world the day we leave. THEY can do it but they wont and that’s the answer there. Force them to by declaring ‘No Deal’.

  45. PlanningAhead
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    Cannot understand why we are so preoccupied with getting a deal with Europe, we voted to leave and that is what we should do, March 2019, no if’s, no but’s

    OK we’ll need to beef up the borders which will also require more manpower, customs and immigration officials, which we should also be recruiting and training right now if we are to be ready.

    Then there is the question of merchant ships- we’ll need a huge ship building programme in place to get the tonnage up to what is needed for after march 2019. Unfortunately the Ro-Ro ferries for cross channel work will be of little use for the type of new trading world-wide that will be required when we begin trading with our new partners overseas. Incidentally there are a number of large shipping companies operating out of UK at present time but they are wholly owned by European EU interests and european EU pension funds etc. In the event of an outbreak of hostilities in the world like what happened in WW2 we can hardly rely on them to supply us as they will have to look after their own. With saying that we will also now need to start a recruitment and training programme for thousands of young seafarers- all above if we really want to be free and independent of the EU- and taking back control

  46. miami.mode
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    ……I found the comment of the Chancellor surprising……

    Don’t you just love the vocabulary of politicians. They have their own dictionary. Most readers of this blog would not have been at all surprised at what the Chancellor said. In my dictionary it says appalling.

  47. Peter D Gardner
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    It is high time someone who believes in Brexit headed the Treasury. How quickly can Hammond be moved?

  48. stred
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    This comment, with suggestions for a priorities, seems very sensible. Perhaps Mr Arnell could be given a temporary job at no 11., as there does not appear to be much hope that Eyeore and the Romoaners will be singing any more enthusiastically than they are at present.
    The idea of Phil cheering anyone up was a dry one.

    • stred
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:29 am | Permalink

      Not. JR is using the latest Commission figure of £12bn pa. net, which they think they will be missing if we ever leave.

  49. Know-Dice
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 10:46 am | Permalink
  50. Yossarion
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    Is it protocol to refer to the Government as the the Current UK Government as Barnier has just done live on TV?

    • bigneil
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:53 am | Permalink

      The EU are about to lose ( hopefully ) our contribution of £55m a day. They do not care if they insult us in any way. Staying in the EU would see that £55m seem like a drop in the ocean. It would rise and rise. They want to bleed us dry and destroy us
      and flood us with free movement.

    • cryingoutloud
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

      Yossarion..if it is not the previous government and it is not the next government then it must be the current one..I think

      • rose
        Posted October 14, 2017 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

        Do you speak about the current Queen?

  51. Prigger
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    Barnier/Davis statements. It looks like NO DEAL is very likely.

    Now the EU wants EU migrants here to have the right ” for ever” to bring their parents here to live. What about divorced parents? The right to bring either one or both divorced parents and their new spouses?Their new mothers and fathers?. What about the children of those new marriages? Wouldn’t it be a violation their human rights to have them leave them behind? No mention of whether the parents will bring with them a viable EU pension, working hospitals and care homes. This is unthinkable unworkable and the idea that EU migrants “will pay our own pensions ” has just been thrown out of the window “for ever”
    No, we’re heading for NO DEAL unless the Tory Party does not wish getting elected again ” FOR EVER”

  52. Peter
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    Barnier is still refusing to discuss trade today. We should stop wasting time and prepare for No Deal.

    We need politicians in charge who can drive this through. If that means getting rid of Hammond, Rudd and May so be it.

    Otherwise we will continue being strung along and wasting money on EU contributions.

  53. Peter VAN LEEUWEN
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    A little off topic:
    Always interesting to see the value movements of the pound sterling during a press conference.

    • Nig l
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

      And when the Catalans gets excited, Putin flexes his muscles, the Chinese export figures come out etc.

      Many commentators said the pound was over valued before Brexit. A lot of my income is in dollars and Euros, so Peter, cheers to the press conference, I am better off because of it just like the UK will be when we get our contribution back rather than having spread all over on roads in Romania or Poland or falling down castles in Italy etc.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

      It shows that the value sometimes moves purely on sentiment and not only on actual economic factors. It is also amusing to see commentators who automatically assume “strong” = “good” and “weak” = “bad” without any attempt to justify that view.

    • Oracle
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 12:38 am | Permalink

      I used to watch the press conferences LIVE of Mario Draghi regularly. It helped with my insomnia. The amazing thing was that when currency speculators were waiting on a particular sentence being said or not said, that just less than one minute before he said it the currency either momentarily soared or dipped. I put this down to astounding unrecognised telepathic powers in the EU

  54. DancerJ
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    The only border that will matter will be the Northern Ireland border because it is a land trade with EU Europe will be greatly reduced after march 2019 then why go on about customs controls etc, because I’m sure we can manage very well in the sea ports with the reduced traffic. The airports and passenger traffic might however be different with longer queues and stricter customs and immigration checks..?

  55. Brit
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    Mr Davies is honest. But he is playing politics. I feel that if he did not have to consider the domestic implications and fallout of walking out of negotiations, he would, now. It is pointless to continue.

  56. William Long
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    How can Mr Hammond be allowed to remain in post when he makes a statement that so clearly contradicts what his Prime Minister said in the House of Commons only the day before?It is a real measure of Mrs May’s lack of authority that she allows him to stay.
    I saw it floated in the Letters in the Daily Telegraph that Hammond and Johnson might change places; I am not sure if Boris would be the ideal Chancellor, but certainly better than the present one.

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

      Hammond has already been Foreign Secretary for a couple of years(until mid 2016 from memory).He was hopeless,continuing our drift into international irrelevance.I believe Jacob Rees-Mogg would be a much better prospect.

      • Forres
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

        I strongly disagree. Fabricant, with Redwood as his number 2, is the best choice

    • rose
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

      Hammond could go to a big spending department – Social Security – and Boris stay where he is, with Kwasi Kwarteng as his Minister of State instead of the disloyal Duncan. JR should be Chancellor, without a doubt. We need another Brexiteer as Home Secretary – Bernard Jenkin? Or one of those soldiers on the back bench.

      • rose
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

        JRM could be Deputy PM.

  57. Martin Odoni
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    That’s it? That’s your plan? Just “Tell everyone to assume the best”?

    Never mind that “realistic and optimistic” borders on a contradiction in terms. Assuming the best will not negate the economic damage.

    And Tories have the nerve to say that the Left don’t live in the real world?

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

      And Labour have the nerve to say they want to stay in the Single Market AND give state aid to the steel industry and nationalise rail and utilities. What real world is that ? One in which the ECJ doesn’t exist ?

  58. backtoback
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    Barnier makes sense to me about the guaranteeing of EU citizens rights- agreement has been nowhere reached yet. On Ireland the crux of the problem has not yet been properly grappled with and as far as the money owing goes the UK is holding up the talks about this in an effort to needle the EU to move ahead to the talks about the future instead ..but am afraid these kind of tactics won’t work as it has all been predicted before and will be faced up to. The UK is heading for a huge embarrassment when all of this high stakes stuff shakes out. Problem is DD is full of pious platitudes and hot won’t work. “Michel this”and “Michel that”..yeah

    Reply It is heading for No Deal unless the EU gets real

    • Backtoback
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply..the EU in the form of Barnier has to do very little really only to extract from the UK the price for exit on EU terms and so to allow future arrangements be discussed. We are leaving the EU so it is up to us to make the running on the three items that’s if we want any kind of a new deal, but saying that, not everone is convinced that we want any deal at all with the EU into the future. Howevr making empty threats and playing silly games like mrs may and DD are at, is not going to get us anywhere, the EU negotiators are sophisticated intelligent people not third world natives running in fear of the gun boat.

      • Dave Andrews
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

        The EU terms for exit are set out in Article 50 of the Lisbon Agreement. Legal advice indicates there is no price to pay.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

      A50 requires by treaty the exit terms to be discussed at the same time as a framework for the future relationship. If the EU persist in blatantly ignoring this requirement then it’s hardly for the UK to turn a blind eye to this violation. The ball is in their court.

    • backofanenvelope
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:35 pm | Permalink

      I feel sure that the French don’t care tuppence about the Irish or the EU expats. So it is all about the money. Tell them what we want and just ask them – how much?

  59. Tom Rogers
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    May should sack Rudd, Hammond and Green, and bring in Messrs. Redwood and Rees-Mogg as Chancellor and Home Secretary respectively.

    • Forres
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

      Fabricant and Bone are the more intellectually gifted contenders

    • Miss Brandreth-Jones
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

      Some other would pull them to pieces as they do everybody.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 8:35 am | Permalink


      I agree with that totally.

  60. Simon Coleman
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    You keep gloating about the Treasury’s post-referendum forecasts being wrong. 2016 is now irrelevant but the recent figures show a real slowing down of the economy. However you dress up the figures, the fact is that real uncertainty about Brexit is harming investment and higher inflation (largely resulting from the post-referendum fall in the pound) is hitting consumers. You are a specialist in presenting black as white, but you can’t keep it going for much longer.

    Reply Just not true. I have analysed the figures and shown the slowdown is not because of Brexit

  61. BillyElliot
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

    ‘we are all in this together’

    Lets hope we all so stay like this together forever.
    Unfortunately Brexit might change union relations so that with in a time span of ten years UK as we now has ceased to exist.

    Instead we have 2-3 midget countries and one island called Republic of Ireland.

    But lets hope that will never happen.

  62. Duncan
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

    If the Tories called a GE now and went to the country on a Leave-EU ticket I am certain that millions of traditional Labour voters would back the Tories against Remain-EU Labour. This is the Tories trump card if they have the guts to use it, ditch May and the cuckoo in the nest Hammond and defend the UK’s national interest with some grit and determination

    • Len Grinds
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

      Brilliant idea, Duncan! Maybe the Tories could have tried that, say, last June?

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

        Yes they should have tried it, with a Leave candidate for PM.

    • Pickled grape
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

      I think people are fed up of voting. So far nothing has been achieved by voting. A year’s inactivity since the Referendum then fruitless talks with he EU who still won’t talk about is a trading Bloc…it is about trading???!!! We joined it to trade. There should be no more votes, just get out of out of the EU any how.!

    • Richard1
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

      It would likely result in Corbyn. The treaty he would strike with the EU would be abject surrender, just to get it done so he could press on with Socialism in One Country.

  63. Peter
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    I do wonder what is going on inside the government. Leavers do not appear strong enough to take control and drive things forward. Remainers are presumably happy to let things drift indefinitely and occasionally snipe from the sidelines.

    How long can this go on? Will we leave or will there eventually be a fudge?

  64. ian
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    Lovely weather today, and it going to be a nice weekend coming up too. I love to see the voting system the elite has given you in action, one of divide and conquer of the people in a party ststem of voting with the voters left not knowing which way to turn or who to trust when voting. A divided country is much easy to deal with than a united one, and by having a party voting system in place which leads to letting the people of the country down badly every time and never giving the people what they really want. I wish you luck with the system that the elite have chosen for you/ because it serves them well.

  65. agricola
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

    Has anyone actually measured the impact of trading with the EU on WTO rules. Based on our current trade pattern, how much duty would we pay and how much duty would the EU pay us to continue trading. As the EU sell us more than we sell them, would the duty we would collect on incoming goods be sufficient to compensate our exporters for their exports to the EU. Under WTO rules it might not be possible to do so in such a direct overt way , but there is more than one way to kill a cat. Please enlighten us.

    Reply I have seen an estimate that we will get £12 bn of tariffs on their exports to us and they will get £5bn on our exports to them. The £12bn is of course paid by UK consumers, but we could give the money back to them as a tax cut

    • hefner
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

      So it roughly means a £200 tax cut per tax payer per year. Worth taking.

      Now what remains to be seen is how much more expensive our weekly basket of fruits, vegetables and other foods, our petrol filling-up and other utilities will be.
      I promise I will put some milk and biscuits to Santa Claus for his reindeers if I see much of these £200 for some “extravagant expenses” in the coming years.

    • John terra
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

      The World Bank estimates that moving to WTO rules means c 40% drop in GDP, costing millions of jobs. John Redwood will be fine. Will you?

      Reply Complete nonsense. The UK is forecast to carry on growing and will do so

    • agricola
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

      Reply to Reply.

      Surely the £12 billion goes to our exchequer via HMRC. The £5 billion is paid by our exporters to the Duane. It is the exporters who need to be compensated to ensure their continued competitiveness in the EU market place, not UK consumers. UK consumers can make alternative buying decisions from UK producers if they so choose. In terms of food , UK consumers should benefit from lower cost worldwide sourcing. The balance of £7 billion can help fund the NHS or any other worthy causes like the elderly in need of care, or tax cuts all round.

      • Augustyn
        Posted October 13, 2017 at 11:09 pm | Permalink

        No. In essence you are wrong. Who “pays” the tarrif depends on the terms of trade and the price agreed between the parties. The importer will always ultimately be responsible to their Customs authorities for the tarrif. SO for experienced organisations it comes down to a commercial negotiation to determine price taking account of tarrifs and exchange rates. It’s really not difficult and is in line with what multinational exporters currently understand for exports out of the EU and have being doing for many decades.
        Smaller businesses trading only in the Eu though may struggle to understand international terms of trade versus what has gone before.

    • Augustyn
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 12:00 am | Permalink

      So there we have it. Under WTO rules there is a UK revenue tax take through tarrifs of c £12bn and of course the saving on the contribution to the EU of £18bn means the net positive position to the uk is £30bn or so. There’s an awful lot of really great things you could do with £30bn per year.
      Under WTO rules the increased cost to EU based importing customers of U.K. produced products JR advises us is £5bn. On most of our exported products to the EU WTO rates are below 5% and sometimes zero. The current value of the pound more than compensates for any increases in costs incurred by EU importers.

      So the often mentioned exit cost of say £60bn to remain in the EU could be considered quite small in terms of the gains to be achieved over years in going to
      WTO rules.

  66. J.White
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    I have always said Hammond it the cuckoo in the nest. How the party could attack Boris when he was just reminding everyone of what we voted for, but no hew and cry about Hammond saying he won’t spend until the last minute ! He has deliberately said that while negations were ongoing and more or less told the EU we won’t walk away. We should walk away now. He should have been sacked on the spot. Philip Hammond wants the transition period to be as long as possible which is why he is making these stupid comments. He obviously doesn’t care what happens at the next general election as long he can stay in his beloved EU. He has to go and we need a chancellor who believes in this country. We should be working on border controls and tariffs we need them whether there is a deal or not. I would like to suggest remin MPs ,the Labour Part, Lib Dem’s and SNP pay the billions themselves to Brussels rather than the tax payer who are fed up of paying billions of pounds to unelected buerocrats for fancy buildings and high salaries. When did the United Kingdom lose its backbone! I assume all the other parties would allow themselves to be bullied into spending 100 billion on the divorce fee then pay to be members of the single market etc. I despair of what is happening to this country. We need a cabinet of brexiteers or at least get rid of the useless chancellor and Home Secretary.

  67. Bob
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:22 pm | Permalink


    “Abolish the tv licence, it shouldn’t be a legal requirement.”

    The petition will now be debated on Monday 20th November at 4.30pm.

    I hope this will be the beginning of the end of the BBC TV Licence.

    • NBC
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

      I’d get rid of my TV immediately as the BBC is dopey but I use a computer so I still have to pay a TV licence for TV I don’t actually watch on my computer. I’ve heard there is a way to have a computer and not pay for TV but I’m not into modern technology so I don’t know how to do it. I watch Trump LIVE on my computer via American TV but they never ask for a licence fee but just offer more ways to view. I like Americans. I don’t like BBCians though I am not racist in saying so, just terribly clever.

    • Jagman84
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

      I suggest that they employ the same system as with members leaving a trade union but still receiving the benefits of membership. Allow those who do not wish to fund the BBC, via a licence fee, to donate an equal amount to nominated charities.

  68. NorthbyEast
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    We voted to leave so why are we still in discussion with the EU..we should just leave

    So why does JR continue talking about the EU on a daily his diary..on sky and BBC, every time i look around he’s there talking about the EU….it’s like he has an obsession with it..we should just follow michael gove, IDS, jacob R-M and Boris advice and just leave..walk away..Liam fox is out there already preparing new trade deals with more friendly countries. Am sick and tired of it all at this stage..we don’t need them so lets just walk away.

  69. ian
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    It the chancellor turn today to be moaned at, well his constituents who voted for him in numbers at the last election are happy with him or they would ask him to leave before the voting took place and picked someone else to vote for. Mrs May seems to be happy with him or she would not have chosen him for the job, and con party MPs are happy with Mrs May or they would not have picked her for the job as PM. Do not see what it has to do with anyone else apart from the chancellor constituents and Mrs May.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

      Likewise Mrs May’s constituents seem to be happy with Mrs May and the voters seem to be happy with her else they would have voted Labour into power so Mr Corbyn should stop opposing her as it’s nothing to do with him. Good argument.

    • Dagmar
      Posted October 13, 2017 at 12:22 am | Permalink

      I agree.He keeps his opinions to himself and his throng of the wrong.

  70. The Prangwizard
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

    But when are we leaving Mr Redwood? In the 2 year extension we keep paying and we keep following the rules. To my mind that means we are in effect still in.

    Some time ago I asked what action would prompt you to resign the Whip and you said joining the Euro. Have you considered and will you resign the whip over this extention of membership in all but name.

    Many people think it is a betrayal of our democracy.

  71. Qubus
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

    I seem to remember that Hammond said, “it is a theoretical possibility that aircraft will not fly after acliff edge exit from the EU … ” or words to that effect.
    It is also a theoretical possibility that this planet will be hit by a meteorite tomorrow and civilisation will be wiped out, but I am not losing any sleep about it..

  72. Jason wells
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

    I don’t believe there will be any agreement at the EU council meeting next week. Tusk is getting fed up as well so this whole business will very likely be suspended wound up for the time being probably in the spring and the clock will be allowed to run will be a ‘no deal’ situation..the we had better prepare now while we have the time.

    The main problem is that there are too many high profile civil servants on both sides tied up in these useless discussions going absolutely nowhere.

  73. ian
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Uk will gain 40 billion pounds by leaving the EU if the UK charges it, citizens the same tariffs on food as the EU is now. 100% on sugar worth 4 billion and billions on other food which could be tariff-free outside of the EU, the 12 billion in contributions 12 billion on imports from the EU, billions from fishing, nearly pay off the yearly deficit in one year. That now much is worth to the UK people to leave the EU with lots more money coming into the country with exports to new countries around the world. But the majority of politician do not want the money they want to continue to give it to the EU out of your taxes and pockets. Happy voting.

  74. Caterpillar
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    Now that Barnier appears to be taking a ‘blackmail’ like stance I trust the Govt including the PM and Chancellor will finally appreciate the ethics of the EU when interacting with the world. How they can remain wanting to remain is unfathomable. Stop the negotiations and prepare to leave, it is clearly a waste of time and resource talking with Barnier.

  75. Dunedin
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Mr Hammond has to go – the next Chancellor needs to be supportive of Brexit.

  76. TomF
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    We’re going to need very well defined borders especially with the EU now heading for a military alliance and the setting up of an EU army. Cant’t see it any other way with the way Turkey and Russia is going

  77. Tourist
    Posted October 12, 2017 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

    Tell the EU to come to England for negotiations. They obviously like most foreign country representatives are pitching for a bribe. A week in Fleetwood near Blackpool seems generous and appropriate. Make sure they don’t eat the meat pies served in cafes until shortly before they depart. They are so old they are classed as national monuments.

  78. anon
    Posted October 13, 2017 at 12:56 am | Permalink

    The cost of freedom. Priceless.

    If you want the EU move out of the UK.
    Strangely the traffic is still mainly one direction.

    There is no prospect of our government getting us a better deal than a no deal.Quite the reverse.

    The actions of May et al (plus Barnier etc) speak volumes.

    It’s seems its all a delay with the aim of thwarting and ensuring Brexit is slow ( more payments to the EU) and where possible made more difficult by deliberate non planning and rearguard action to frustrate timely progress.

    This will not change until personnel are removed to encourage the others.

  79. Derek Henry
    Posted October 13, 2017 at 1:05 am | Permalink

    C’mon John,

    At least be honest. You know hammond doesn’t need to find the money.

    Any money needed is just typed into a computer and it is there. Like when they bailed out the banks or bought trident.

    It’s created from thin air by crediting an account. The key is to make sure whatever figure is typed in does not outstrip the skills and resources that asorbs it or we will get inflation.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page