How about some new subjects for media interviews about Brexit ?

The mainstream media seems to have got lost in repeats on their news and comment shows. Every day is Groundhog day. They do the Irish border story, the various alleged barriers to trade stories, and various sectors at possible risk stories. Most of it fans baseless fears or perpetuates misunderstandings of what the current position is and how WTO works. It usually assumes both that the EU will be out to damage their trade with us, and that they will have the power to do so even though we are no longer under their jurisdiction!

If they wish to do a Brexit story every day when there is precious little news in these very slow moving negotiations. I have some thoughts on some new topics that many of us would be interested in. They could also provide a bit of balance.

Let’s ask the various parties how they would like to spend the Brexit bonus, the £12bn we will save when we are finally out. And let’s have some discussion on whether we should pay the EU additional money after 29 March 2019, and if so why and for how long.

Let’s look at our options for designing a much better fishing policy for the UK once after March 2019 we have taken back control of our waters and fish stocks. How much more fish could we land in the UK and sell at home or for export, whilst doing a better job than the CFP has done on conserving stocks, owing to discards.

Let’s get on with debating a modern UK farming policy, with an emphasis on how much more food we can grow for ourselves as we used to before entering the CAP.

Let’s discuss which are the best prospects for new trade deals around the world, and will the government ensure we can sign these quickly once out of the EU?

The government is rarely asked about its leaving preparations, and the Opposition rarely asked about what it wants the country to do with its new freedoms once out.


  1. oldtimer
    March 11, 2018

    These are all very good questions not least because, as things stand, all that appears to be on offer is a bad deal. Much of the mainstream media does indeed appear to have decided to trap itself in and endless feedback loop with no prospect of escape. The chances of them escaping.are probably even worse than the UK and EU negotiating a mutually satisfactory deal.

    1. Robert Betteridge
      March 11, 2018

      It’s a matter of perspective.
      Businesses & Supply Chains and even the City are transitory; traders, exporters and financiers will work round any set of circumstances they are presented with.
      Fishing rights are permanent.
      We have to take the long view rather than worrying about a short term readjustment cost, which, in any event, is prescribed by WTO rules.

  2. Lifelogic
    March 11, 2018

    “Once we have taken back control of our waters and fish stocks” – It does not look like T May will do even this.

    “A modern UK farming policy” – that would be good. One where they act like commercial enterprises responding to customer’s needs rather than farming government subsidies. The same goes for energy please.

    “Opposition is rarely asked about what it wants the country to do with its new freedoms once out. ” Confiscate other people’s assets without proper or any compensation and become a basket care like Venezuela – seems to be the Corbyn, Mc Donnall plan.

    What about discussing how much cheaper imports could be (and how much more competitive the economy can be) without the common import tariffs or the endless daft EU regulations.

    Or by restricting inward migration to people with skills we actually need and who would be an asset to the economy.

    Alas May and Hammond do not get this at all, they even want to stick to the EU model, remain uncompetitive, build on EU employment “protections”, have ruled out a point based immigration system or indeed any control of EU immigration for the transition. Plus they want to retain expensive energy to damage industry and freeze some pensioners.

    What about discussing the proper size of the state sector and what they should actually deliver and not deliver for an efficient economy.

    Tax to death Hammond will doubtless do even more damage with his spring statement on Tuesday. Perhaps he could tell us what the Office of Tax Simplification has achieved!

    1. John Edwards
      March 11, 2018

      Dead right John Redwood and LifeLogic. Why don’t we start now?

      Our Chief of Customs stated clearly to the Parliamentary Committee that he has a perfect technological solution to the Irish Border problem. Let’s publish it, buy the kit and make it happen NOW.

      Whether we get a deal or not, we need to update and upgrade our cross-channel and other container ports to make imports and exports move quicker and more efficiently. Let’s build the infrastructure NOW – and how about persuading the Netherlands to upgrade their ports at the same time. What about ‘Free Ports’? Why haven’t we chosen sites for free ports and started to build them and improve their infrastructure?

      Why don’t we cause such a stink about the Common Fisheries Policy that our government will be afraid even to consider negotiating away ANY of our rights to control our waters – AND why doesn’t DEFRA start NOW to set up a technological system using Drones to seek and monitor fishing vessels. This would be cheaper than having expensive patrol boats trying to cover the whole area. We should sell licenses to trawlers and they should have a beacon which Drones can recognise. Any trawler found by a drone to be fishing illegally should be photographed, warned, their identity noted and, if they ignore a warning, they should be arrested by a patrol boat and fined heavily to have their boat released. Repeat offenders should have their boats confiscated.

      We need to start building Drones and Patrol Boats NOW! We are already in a repeat of the Cod War although our government doesn’t seem to be aware of it. How will we be able to look Iceland in the face if we are too timid or too slow to fight for our seas?

      Priority for fishing licenses should be granted to British resident fishermen. A minority of licenses, say about one third, should be exchanged with neighboring maritime countries (like Denmark, Norway, Iceland, Netherlands, France and Spain) for reciprocal licenses for British fishermen to fish in their waters. All licenses should be re-negotiated annually and license-holders should pay a license fee, determined by the authorities of the host country. Terminated licenses should be returned to the issuing country and offered for sale by that country, in the first instance to a native fisherman or, failing that, to the participating countries. Financial incentives should be awarded to fishermen who have made improvements to the sustainability of their fishing grounds.

      We should be asking the Home Office WHY they have yet to complete their immigration policy and operating systems. These needs to be implemented on 1st April 2019, so why aren’t they tested and ready? Again: this should be the quickest and least bureaucratic system possible. Visas supported by retina recognition. Simple application systems for work and temporary residence permits, with reliable tracking methods for finding people who overstay their visits.

      I wish I could be confident that the Government and the City of London has secret plans of how they will keep Britain’s lead in Financial Services by a revolution in technology, efficiency and HONESTY, sufficient to resist all temptations to relocate the Europe.

      These and many more aspects of Brexit should be considered, discussed and acted upon swiftly to ensure Britain is fully prepared to leave; with or without an acceptable deal with the EU.

      1. Richard Elsy
        March 12, 2018

        Couldn’t have expressed these views better. The abysmal lack of imagination and positive outlook towards the new opportunities which Britain faces once removed from the dead hand of EU control is very disturbing. I’m aware of the fact that most MPs are still clinging to the ‘Remainer wreckage’ and that many, along with almost 75% of the Lords, are now banking on sufficient disruption to derail the whole enterprise. I worry that we may not be organising any popular opposition to this insidious campaign. I’m aware of the activities of a few groups which still exist and campaign for Leave but I suspect that it’s now time for them to get together under one new bannner and make sure that people like Vince Cable can’t be allowed to subvert and prevent the implementation of the biggest vote in British political history.

    2. mickc
      March 11, 2018

      I agree. However the UK consumer’s needs with regard to farming appear to be lots and lots of cheap low quality food. That’s fine and can be provided by British agriculture….if it doesn’t have all the present regime of regulation.
      Alternatively, of course, put tariffs on food which is not produced to our standards….but that won’t happen…
      Our government loves shackling our own producers whilst accepting stuff produced to lower standards. As long ago as the abolition of slavery the UK still accepted slave produced Brazilian sugar….

    3. Peter D Gardner
      March 11, 2018

      On the transition, it seems to me that the reason for it is nothing whatever to do with the need for certainty on the part of individuals and industry but everything to do with the government having decided very little since June 2016. The status quo will continue by default and continue until either we have a change of government or the EU makes the decisions for us.

  3. Lifelogic
    March 11, 2018

    But they do like virtue signalling about the non existent (after adjusting for the free choices the genders take) pay gap.

    1. Lifelogic.
      March 11, 2018

      In Malta this week, where the cash for EU passports seems to be rather a boom industry.

  4. Richard1
    March 11, 2018

    I’m enjoying the confected outrage against President Trump’s (foolish) steel and aluminium tariffs from those in favour of the UK continuing to be part of the EU customs union, one of the most protectionist trade blocs in the world. The humbug of it is wonderful.

    1. Leslie Singleton
      March 11, 2018

      Dear Richard–From his point of view, every single thing Trump has said about tariffs on Steel and Aluminium makes, as I see it, all the sense in the World. As for the EU and their pathetic counter threats about e.g. peanut butter, they are just making fools of themselves.

      1. Richard1
        March 11, 2018

        I don’t think Trump’s tariffs make any sense, either for consumers or workers in the US. Perhaps it’s all bluff, and he is right that the EU’S existing tariffs are far worse.

        1. Leslie Singleton
          March 11, 2018

          Dear Richard–I do not believe there is the slightest doubt that the US’s Steel and Aluminium imbalance with China will be quickly improved and that is what counts most. The tariffs per se are close to irrelevant. I agree with Trump that his predecessors have made some dumb decisions in these important matters, that’s when they have shifted themselves to do anything at all. And of course he is only doing what he loudly said he would do.

    2. Timaction
      March 11, 2018

      Indeed. The news relating to the North Korean issue and tariffs are making the msm contort into very strange and ridiculous positions trying to make Trump out as everything bad. The public can see through it and are alive to the “fake news”, another issue Trump has been brilliant at exposing! He is the most effective communicator on the planet missing out the msm with his twitter account!
      Maybe the BBC, Sky and ITV will actually have to get out and report the news as it is, not what they want us to believe. I like many of my generation were taught “how” to think and evaluate “NOT” what to think by others !
      The protectionist EU block are never going to win on the protective trade tariff issues! 10% on cars to the USA’s 2.5%, enough said!

  5. eeyore
    March 11, 2018

    Shouldn’t government be leading the discussion with releases on the subjects JR raises? The media will talk about farming policy if Mrs May gets herself down to a farm for a photo op. Lambing now – no better time!

    As for reclaiming our fisheries, my guess is it’s a touchstone for the public and so pretty important. Let’s see a picture on every front page: “Michael Gove (left) on a trawler with a large cod”.

    1. DaveM
      March 11, 2018

      Exactly. As long as May continues to talk about nothing but FTAs and allows all talks to be dictated by the EU there’s nothing else for the media to speculate on.

      Someone somewhere (presumably in No10’s office) seems to stifle every SoS. I say “presumably” because when the PM’s away somewhere – again, talking about FTAs rather than anything else at all – various SoSs take the opportunity to say things.

      Can’t really blame the media this time Mr R – people like Soubry and Clarke manage to make themselves heard ok.

    2. Andy
      March 11, 2018

      Oh – please let these happen. Modern day media – particularly social media – is unforgiving. Lost sheep May and fishy Gove would, rightly, go viral.

      1. Libertarian
        March 11, 2018


        For once you are right, yes it should happen and yes the biased will come up with all kinds of memes about it…. brilliant

        The naive and ignorant never understand how this actually works in favour of the narrative.

    3. Leslie Singleton
      March 11, 2018

      Dear eeyore–There are only a small and finite number of fishermen and seems clear to me that our gutless Government reckons the political fall out can be contained. I now hate this Government to such an extent that I am coming round to the view that Heseltine was right but in reverse meaning maybe a period of Corbyn’s lunacy is a price worth paying to cleanse the Augean stables of May and Co.

    4. Adam
      March 11, 2018

      Amber Rudd might be a better name for the role than Michael Gove; although less fishy than Salmond and Sturgeon.

    5. Peter D Gardner
      March 11, 2018

      Dead right, the BBC should not be the target of Dr Redwood’s suggestions but the government. It has said nothing on these subjects beyond the blindingly obvious, statements of fact and banal.

  6. alan jutson
    March 11, 2018

    I agree John few seem to want to look for any positives.

    I see it is reported now that the EU will seek to fine us if we manage to stop The USA from increasing the tariffs on any Steel which is sold to the US from the UK

    That must give some encouragement and a massive incentive for Liam Fox to succeed next week.

    Whilst we do not deliberately want to be enemies, or have a trade war with the EU, we must, must, must, look after ourselves and our interests first.
    We are slowly being strangled by all things EU as are all other Countries within that organisation, other than it would seem Germany, and to a lesser degree France.

    Time is running out for Mrs May.

    1. S Matthews
      March 11, 2018

      On what basis could the EU fine us if we trade with the USA on USA terms? The EU might try and take the USA to the WTO court, but what law would the UK have broken?

      1. Mark B
        March 11, 2018

        We signed legally binding agreements.

        This is what people do not understand about that which we are a part of – A European UNION. It is a proto-superstate. Just imagine if President Trump said that he wanted Scotland to have a better deal than the rest of the UK ? How would that make us feel ?

        Do not get me wrong, I am no friend of the EU but, I know what President Trump is up to – Divide and conquer !

      2. alan jutson
        March 11, 2018

        S Mathews

        “On what basis …..”

        I have no idea, but I guess its under the, all for one, one for all mantra.

        No EU member is allowed to make individual deals about anything, with anyone outside the EU, it all has to be agreed by the EU and then filters down.

        That argument is being used to stop us signing up trade deals before we leave, and I guess this would be a trade deal arrangement. !.

    2. Andy
      March 11, 2018

      You still think there are positives? Bless.

      1. Robert Betteridge
        March 11, 2018

        Does anybody watch Masterchef? Sometimes contestants make a pigs of things and have to start again – outcomes aren’t quite what was planned.
        For forty years the older generation has known that the sauce split, but we haven’t been given the opportunity to throw it away.
        We Voted UKIP in the European Elections – Parliament didn’t take the hint.
        The Euro is a patent failure.
        The intent was good but because of a “bad sauce” the EU is a patent failure.
        It didn’t start out with the intention of 50% youth unemployment, but the writing has been on the wall.
        Finally the youth of Europe have found a voice, but Brussels is deaf, it is too heavily invested – it can’t afford to listen.
        With the Euro there is no Plan B.
        Our politicians got it wrong.
        We are in ‘damage limitation’.
        It will be messy, but we, in old age, know that the pains of living are better than the alternative – generally.
        There aren’t going to be any winners – but that’s better than being a looser.
        Snowflakes – you’re going to have to get your hands dirty, like Notre Dame your inheritance is crumbling.
        Despite what you are led to believe by the Guardian’s Children the world doesn’t owe you a living.

      2. Tad Davison
        March 11, 2018

        So unwilling to accept that remain lost. So biased, so blinkered, so get a life!

        1. Andy
          March 11, 2018

          I accept Remain lost. And in a democracy it is my right to question and ridicule those in charge – and those who blindly support them.

          At the moment both the questioning and, in particular, the ridiculing are very easy.

          1. Tad Davison
            March 12, 2018

            And that’s where your position falls down flat. Ours is based upon an irrefutable case. Contrastingly, the remain argument is full of holes, yet those who cannot grasp that endanger us all. Its like arguing with members of the flat earth society!

      3. mickc
        March 11, 2018

        Self government is a massive positive…..indeed the foundation of the USA, which did rather well for its citizens until it became an empire….

    3. A.Sedgwick
      March 11, 2018

      If a President Trump was in charge of our exit he might tweet ” bring it on”.

    4. Lifelogic.
      March 11, 2018

      There are loads of positives. Certainly far more than the tiny number of downsides. But we do need sensible people with a positive Brexit vision as PM and chancellor.

      We can be nimble, quick and competitive or we could stick with the European straight jacket, high and complex taxes, endless regulations, expensive energy, big government, corruption, endless tax payer grants for various lunacies, wasteful grand projects like HS2, state monopoly education and healthcare and other total insanities.

      This clearly seems to be the May/Hammond agenda – doubtless to be confirmed by let’s Tax to death Hammond yet again in his spring Statement on Tuesday.

    5. Peter D Gardner
      March 11, 2018

      Obviously I do not know what UKG will say to Trump, but were it to say that such an approach as his would be unacceptable to any future deal with the EU post-Brexit and that WTO rules permit retaliatory and protective measures to be taken against countries breaking the rules or unfairly competing and that the aim of the WTO is to remove barriers to trade, not to protect uncompetitive industries, it would do us all a favour. First of all it might force Trump to backtrack. Second it would demonstrate very clearly to the EU where UK stands on trade and will treat the EU in the same way if it starts to impose tariffs and NTBs on UK where none exist at present.
      But our government won’t do that. It seems to be incapable of asserting anything. It is just cravenly appeasing all comers. Even if it opposes Trump’s tariffs, it wouldn’t be for the reasons I give but because the EU has kept it in line.

      1. Peter D Gardner
        March 11, 2018

        Typo. I meant ‘ such an approach as his would be unacceptable to any future deal with the UK post-Brexit ‘

  7. Mick
    March 11, 2018
    We’ve had a second referendum the first was in the 70s the second in 2016, if you cannot get your head round that then tough, there isn’t going to be a third one well not for another 40 odd years, most of these remoaners activist seem to be in or around snowflake London and as far as labour new stance on trying to keep us in the dreaded Eu by the back door well you’ve lit the fuse which is going to go bang on you at the next GE, as a foot note again if these remoaners don’t want to stay in a democratic country then pack your bags and go live in one of the other 27 country of the Eu , bye bye you’ll not do missed

  8. margaret
    March 11, 2018

    When the glass is half empty .. its news.

  9. Andy
    March 11, 2018

    The reason why Brexiteers always get asked the same questions is that you are either unwilling or unable to come up with coherent answers.

    None on customs. None on judicial oversight. None on citizens rights. None on trade. None on the Irish border. None on Open Skies. None on medicines regulation. Plenty of ranting. No answers.

    You forget circumstances have changed. For 30+ years you were the insurgents. You could make preposterous claims unchallenged.

    Now you are steering the ship – there are many rocks ahead – and you are being asked what you will do to avoid them. No answers – but lots of pretending there are no rocks.

    If you are upset about this Mr Redwood I would suggest it’s time to quit. The hard questions, for Brexiteers, are just starting.

    You will spend the rest of your career trying to explain away the monumental – and entirely predictable – mess you have inflicted on my children. Their generation will be far less forgiving than mine.

    1. Echo of my past
      March 11, 2018

      Andy you continue getting answers. You cannot hear them. You do not wish to hear them.

    2. Libertarian
      March 11, 2018


      Yes because no one in the rest of the world or outside of the EU 27 ever thought about any of those things, there are already solutions to all of those things in place. Not one of the things you raise is actually a problem.

      If you’re worried about your childrens future, then learn some skills, start a business and make a success of your life.

    3. Peter D Gardner
      March 11, 2018

      You are confused. Brexiteers do have all the answers. It is the Government that does not. That is because it is a government of Remainers.

  10. Duyfken
    March 11, 2018

    I should like to know what administrative organisation is being put in place by the government so that the UK can properly manage all of the matters presently handled by the EU.

    By now surely, Heywood and his brigade of civil servants will have a blueprint of the planned procedure, together with costings and timetable.

    There was no preparation for this prior to the referendum but now, two years later and one year before we quit the EU, budgetted plans should be well advanced, with premises earmarked and even recruitment taking place. But there is not a word from the government about this.

    1. Mark B
      March 11, 2018

      I should like to know what administrative organisation is being put in place by the government so that the UK can properly manage all of the matters presently handled by the EU.

      Err, that would be the Government I think ? Much like the rest of the world.

      But don’t quote me 😉

    2. David Price
      March 12, 2018

      From an article on Facts4eu it would appear from his evidence to the select committee that the head of HMRC and the organisation is very much on the ball with regards to customs and excise preparations.

      The issue is the politicians and civil servants who kowtow to the EU. There will be consequences for an establishment that put the interests of the EU far ahead of ours and it will not be party specific.

  11. hans chr iversen
    March 11, 2018


    Great idea let us widen the debate and get more real facts, figures and realism on the table, this would make an even better debate.

    How do we know there will be an extra £ 12 billion to spend , if the economic performance potentially deteriorates short-term after leaving the EU?

    1. graham1946
      March 11, 2018

      How do we know there will be an extra 12 billion?

      Because the 12 billion is a fee we pay, it is not based on performance after Brexit. We stop paying, we save it. Simples.

      1. hans chr iversen
        March 11, 2018

        Not if it costs us more in growth and lost income leaving the Eu than the alternative

    2. getahead
      March 11, 2018

      hans, we had the debate. We voted to leave.

  12. robert lewy
    March 11, 2018

    These are all very relevant considerations for post Brexit.

    However, I suggest that there is another matter which may be far more important
    to the UK in the event that we decide to leave on WTO terms following a bad deal rejection.

    If it transpires that the EU by design or deed encourages an environment to exist which is hostile to the UK’s future prospects, how should HMG respond?

    The decision would no doubt depend on perception. How would we arrive at such a conclusion? WTO terms would not in themselves imply an intention to harm as the EU would also be adversely affected in the process. Therefore, it would a matter of how the relationship is conducted that should determine the UK response.

    TFA’s should lubricate the unimpeded movement of goods so any action which impedes this would entail a a complaint to WTO which would not be decided in a short space of time (I see 41 months as being the average adjudication period).

    If HMG considered that there were grounds for complaint would it be appropriate for it to simply wait for a determination or should other action take place?

    TM now talks about an intended future partnership with the EU.

    Security must be top of the list. We will feel loathe to resile from our “unconditional” offer to continue to act in the protection of Europe. However, if we feel that the EU is actively engineering an outcome which seriously adversely affects our trade prospects I cannot see how we can retain this offer as unconditional.

    There would be many other areas in which there are common areas of interest with the EU
    which would also require careful consideration and difficult decisions to be made.

  13. ChrisS
    March 11, 2018

    Nobody in the media, especially the BBC is remotely interested in any story that might prove in any way positive about Brexit.

    The latest threat is that Horse Racing will be badly hit because horses might not be allowed to travel freely too and from the UK !

    Somebody needs to tell the doom-mongers of Brussels that we had international horse racing long before even the European Coal and Steel Community was formed so what possible reason could there be for it to suffer the slightest hindrance post -Brexit ?

    Even if the Euro-fanatics in Brussels ( and I mean you, Verhofstadt ) prove be so stupid as to inhibit such a popular sport, they could not possibly interfere with our sporting links with the Middle East, The USA and the UK.

    All they would do is damage the Irish Racing Industry which I suspect is a far bigger proportion of the economy of Eire than it is of the UK. It won’t do the French industry much good either.

    Have the Europhiles still not realised that Project Fear did not work !

    Next we will be told that the French will no longer allow Team Sky’s bikes into France for the Tour because the don’t have EU-compliant bicycle lights. ( Just like the four minis disqualified from winning the 1966 Monte Carlo Rally ).

    1. Peter D Gardner
      March 11, 2018

      I haven’t caught up with the horse racing story but I would start with some basics about it. It is a rich people’s sport and huge sums of their own money are at stake. It will survive very well whatever is done by the EU and UK governments, unless either of them decide to make it illegal. The most credible threat to horse racing is from animal rights groups. And look at what happened after fox-hunting was banned. It prospered.

  14. Monza 71
    March 11, 2018

    I see that while the EU levies 10% duty on the import of American cars, the US only charges 2.5% for European cars they accept.

    Plenty of scope for “harmonisation here, then, Mr Juncker.

    1. Tad Davison
      March 11, 2018

      And that really WILL be interesting Monza!

      Just think if President Trump reciprocated and equalised the tariffs. The German car industry might have something to say to its own government. The President has already said he doesn’t like the EU, and it’s pretty easy to see why.


  15. agricola
    March 11, 2018

    Wishful thinking, the media in the case of newspapers prints what aligns with the policy of the paper and what is judged to sell papers. In the case of the BBC it aligns with can’t do left wing guardianista policy and that of the EU who financially contribute for that same end. Fortunately the above are not the only information sources available. Daily in my school library we had available all newspapers from the FT to the Daily Worker. The message was, read all you have time for and make your own judgement. These days we have the internet which can be used on the same basis.

    On the subjects of Fishing, Farming, future trade deals, and the £12billion bonus, lets have some thoughtful in depth contributions on each. My contribution on trade deals involves turning the Commonwealth into a single , zero tariff trading bloc. 2.3 million people from 53 countries could make the EU look like a whelk stall, and on the mantra of trade is better than aid could lift many from poverty. Just for starters we have linguistic compatibility. No politics , just trade.

  16. Brian Tomkinson
    March 11, 2018

    They won’t accept your suggestions. They are the propaganda arm for the Remainers, determined to thwart the will of the people as expressed in the referendum. Broadcasters breach the broadcasting code of impartiality daily with absolute impunity. Ofcom is a toothless organisation.

  17. Dioclese
    March 11, 2018

    Time for the Mogg to take over I feel…

    1. fedupsoutherner
      March 11, 2018


      Bring it on.

  18. Nigel
    March 11, 2018

    JR: Christopher Booker claims, in today’s Telegraph that reclaiming full control of our fishing waters would be against UN law, which protects other countries’ “acquired fishing rights”.
    Any truth in this?

    1. Lifelogic
      March 11, 2018

      I suspect we will not get our fishing back as T May lacks a backbone. But also there are more members of the UN/EU with an interest in not returning them than the reverse.

      1. Lifelogic
        March 11, 2018

        All thanks to the dreadful (and an electoral disaster to boot) Ted Heath. Remind you of anyone?

    2. getahead
      March 11, 2018

      I think Booker said words to the effect that, if Brexit went into the “transition period”. the EU would be likely reduce our fishing fleets to none existent so that other countries could then claim “acquired rights”.

    3. Peter D Gardner
      March 11, 2018

      None whatsoever. The international law he vaguely asserts will be broken is encapsulated in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea UNCLOS 1982). Since it was concluded after UK joined the EEC and the CFP it will apply directly to UK in respect of its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) for the first time in UK’s history.
      Booker says asserting UK’s rights will breach historic agreements (the CFP) which he says are guaranteed under international law. He is plain wrong.
      UNCLOS is the law and is unequivocal. First of all UK will have from the date of Brexit sole responsibility for the management of the resources in its EEZ, including determining allowable catches and other states are obliged to comply with the regulations set by UK. No question. But UK will also have a responsibility to agree with adjacent states regimes for management of fish stock of species that occur in both UK and adjacent zones. (Article 63).
      UNCLOS also confers rights on other states to access UK’s EEZ, even land-locked and geographically disadvantaged states in the region (Art 69, 70) – provided they comply with UK’s decisions.
      UNCLOS also obliges UK to cooperate on research and other activities and makes UK solely responsible for prevention of pollution.
      UNCLOS allows states to make certain exceptions to its provisions if historic arrangements are considered superior but the decision to do so and how lies with the coastal state, ie., UK.
      The most important article for your point is Article 62:
      1. The coastal State shall promote the objective of optimum utilization
      of the living resources in the exclusive economic zone without prejudice to article 61 (Conservation of the living resources).
      2. The coastal State shall determine its capacity to harvest the living
      resources of the exclusive economic zone. Where the coastal State does not have the capacity to harvest the entire allowable catch, it shall, through agreements or other arrangements and pursuant to the terms, conditions, laws and regulations referred to in paragraph 4, give other States access to the surplus of the allowable catch, having particular regard to the provisions of articles 69 and 70, especially in relation to the developing States mentioned therein.
      3. In giving access to other States to its exclusive economic zone under
      this article, the coastal State shall take into account all relevant factors,
      including, inter alia, the significance of the living resources of the area to the economy of the coastal State concerned and its other national interests, the provisions of articles 69 and 70, the requirements of developing States in the subregion or region in harvesting part of the surplus and the need to minimize economic dislocation in States whose nationals have habitually fished in the zone or which have made substantial efforts in research and identification of stocks.
      4. Nationals of other States fishing in the exclusive economic zone
      shall comply with the conservation measures and with the other terms and conditions established in the laws and regulations of the coastal State. … …

      What is unfortunate is that UKG although it has been forced to admit that it will have control and will have new responsibilities has not decided what to do with its new powers apart from continue with the CFP. It is a complete abrogation. I had expected Michael Gove to grasp it. I guess someone, probably both Hammond and May, have told him to shut up or leave.
      Hammkond does not want to nvest in fishing, he wants cash for short term measures. Mrs May won’t stand up to the EU. Politically, also fishing is a symbolic and slow fuse issue. immigration, ECJ jurisdiction etc are short term noisy features as well as long term issues so have hMrs May’s attention. But Fishing has the potential to be an enduring symbol of the Government failure in Brexit negotiations because it is easily exposed and measure=able in ways other criteria are not.

      1. David Price
        March 12, 2018

        IMO the government must assert it’s rights and responsibilities to the EEZ, not just the home waters but for dependencies and overseas territories also. Our government must then exercise the authority and not abrogate to other countries and bodies such as the EU.

        I don’t recall any other country in the EU sharing it’s resources without restriction and for free, it is ludicrous to demand the UK does so.

      2. Stred
        March 12, 2018

        Really taking control of fishing doesn’t fit the Remainer plot and they think the numbers of votes are insignificant. They prefer to use fishing as a bargaining chip to benefit their friends and family in the city. They will see differently at the next election.

  19. Anonymous
    March 11, 2018

    To Rien Heizer (on a current thread and slightly off topic)

    Your suggestion to ‘ignore pensioners and listen to businessmen’ on immigration.

    Fine. Dismantle democracy but do so openly and put it in an election manifesto. Besides, those businesses want a cheap work force that doesn’t pay tax and lots of those businesses off shore their accounts so that they don’t pay commensurate tax either.

    The huge costs of mass immigration are put on to the British taxpayer. Privatised profits, nationalised debt.

    What business wouldn’t want us to stay in the EU under such an arrangement ?

    They are effectively subsidised by the UK government which has run up debt to record levels.

    1. Libertarian
      March 11, 2018


      It would really help if you had a clue what you are talking about.

      Low wage workers from Eastern Europe rarely work for large corporations. They mostly work in agriculture and care work

      The vast majority of overseas workers ( most of whom come from places other than the EU) are highly paid, skilled workers who do pay substantial amounts of income tax and NI

      Businesses registered and operating in the UK DO NOT offshore their accounts.

      To answer your other question. There are many many businesses who do not want to stay in the EU ( myself included) . It has nothing to do with movement of workers

      1. Anonymous
        March 11, 2018


        Restaurant chains. Coffee shop chains. Cleaners in corporate offices. Security guards in corporate offices.

        And the fact that corporations want perpetual growth in consumption in the Western economies.

        1. Stred
          March 12, 2018

          Food processing, manufacturing, airlines…

        2. Libertarian
          March 12, 2018


          As I said the vast majority of those workers do not work for large corporates. Nearly all the jobs you identify are outsourced or zero hour contracts

          All adding up to less than 8% of the workforce. That means that 92% aren’t in that category

          My business is data mining employment statistics, trends and effects… Cheers

    2. Timaction
      March 11, 2018

      ………….privatised profit, nationalised debt. What an excellent way of expressing the true costs of unskilled/qualified migrants at £3000 per head, providing all health education and housing needs at the expense of the exploited English taxpayer. Housing crisis? No. A&E crisis? No. Education crisis. No. Congestion issues? Yes. We have a mass migration crisis. It’s time the legacy politicos got on and dealt with it!

      The Country is crying out for an alternative party and voting system so we bring democracy back to its people!

    3. Rien Huizer
      March 13, 2018

      Anonymous (would be nice if you had a name, but anyway) . You live in a market economy. Whatever pensioners benefits are must come from the active (and preferably) private sector. Business is the engine of the private sector. Hence it is useful for government to listen to what business wants. That is all. Making sure business works for the country rather than “exploits and sends overseas” as some ill-informed rhetoric goes requires on the one hand, pro-business policies and on the other hand a well organized state that can defend taxpayers’ interests. Simple but hard to do.

  20. Alan
    March 11, 2018

    But there isn’t going to be a £12 billion bonus when we leave: it is becoming clearer by the day we will have less money when we leave the EU than if we had stayed in. So it’s a waste of time to debate what we would do with the money. We might as well discuss how we are going to spend the money we expect to win on the lottery.

    I suppose we could spend all out time debating fisheries policy; it’s certainly complex enough. But it is a minor part of our economy and will never be anything greater. We do have to focus on what matters, otherwise Brexit will be an even greater series of disasters than already looks likely.

    Debating the farming policy is also a waste of time. It too is an insignificant part of our economy, and in any case its fate for the near future is already clear: it will continue to be subsidised and operate within the EU rules until the end of the transition period. Then it will be exposed to imports from countries where climate and land size make farming easier and cheaper.

    Yes, we could discuss trade deals, but they will all look pretty poor compared with the deal we currently have with the EU, so that will be a rather depressing discussion.

    Why don’t we discuss how to get out of the mess that Brexit is causing, and what would be the best way to stay in the EU? Now that would be worth doing.

    1. Libertarian
      March 12, 2018


      Show any evidence ( not an opinion, not a long term forecast ) but evidence that we will have a smaller GDP on leaving. We do less than 9% of our economic activity with the EU at the moment so please explain why this will be so bad if it was reduced

      1. Rien Huizer
        March 13, 2018

        Andy is not a claivoyant No one can present “evidence’ about things that have not happened yet. You may be looking for plausible (or even credible forecasts) Those are aplenty.

  21. Original Richard
    March 11, 2018

    Mr. Redwood,

    I would like you to please research and list for us all those organisations such as the BBC, CBI, IFS, RUSI, etc. who currently receive EU funding, paid for by us as net contributors to the EU budget.

  22. Mike Stallard
    March 11, 2018

    Donald Tusk pointed out quite clearly in Ireland last week that there would be further discussions on trade or anything else until some sensible suggestions were made by the UK government on the Irish Border.
    Nobody listened.

    A lot of our trade is to and from the EU at the moment. How much is up for debate but let us say about half of it.
    When that fails, and fail it surely will when we leave, there will be severe disruption of the food chain etc ed.
    This is not Remoaning. I am a person who fully supports Brexit and who wants us out of the EU as quickly as we reasonably can.

    Reply Not so. Trade will carry on even if no deal.

  23. Willb
    March 11, 2018

    Instead of leaving.. Hammond wants to turn Brexit into a new deal with them..we didn’t vote for a new deal..we voted to leave..all of this talk about deals with them is a sell out- that would be a good topic to start with

    1. Mark B
      March 11, 2018


    2. getahead
      March 11, 2018

      Indeed, it was Hammond hinting about trading off our fishing grounds. It was also Hammond who first hinted about a transition period, while May was on holiday.
      He really does not want to leave the EU.

  24. oldwulf
    March 11, 2018

    Should members of the media be called to appear before Parliament and quizzed about it ?

    This might focus their minds.

  25. Anonymous
    March 11, 2018

    To Andy (on a current thread and slightly off topic)

    Suggesting that you are the only person that cares about children. (Presumably real ones)

    We are sick of dishonest virtue signalling such as this and being taken for a ride.

    The rest of the West seems to be too: the Italian elections – the fact that Trump slams the Super Bowl and the Oscars and viewing figures for both slump by 20%.

    It was your attitude that caused Brexit. Do you realise this ?

    1. Andy
      March 11, 2018

      Ignorance and bigotry caused Brexit.

      It is not my fault if millions of people are ignorant and / or bigoted.

      1. Edward2
        March 12, 2018

        Andy are you really Sir Vince ?

  26. Epikouros
    March 11, 2018

    Politicians, pundits, journalists and academics are employed to inform us truthfully and offer us ways in which our lives can be improved. Most do neither as they do not have the intellectual capacity and sound judgement in which to do so. They are the vast majority at least these days. Maybe before the advent of socialist and modern day liberal(progressive) theory and hence the moral and intellectual decline that we are now experiencing human innate common sense ensured that those who would offer us mendacious facts and unsound solutions were very much in the minority.

    However that assumption correct or not we are now in the former position and you have the unenviable and unthanked task of having to correct many falsehoods and point out the obfuscation that is being perpetuated by omission of truthful facts. Unenviable and unthanked because most us do not like unpalatable truths that undermine our biased beliefs or having our case or cause to soundly proven to be worthless. Time and time again you and other right thinking people in the politically conservative and in the higher competence in rational, logical and objective thinking sense have exposed the nonsense espoused by others. It is a pity so many of us prefer nonsense. If they did not there would never have been the world that we have built for ourselves today. The EU, political correctness(an appendage of the police state now almost completely upon us), out of control immigration, trade treaties/trading blocks (protectionism by another name), the threat of Corbyn being the next prime minister just to name a few would never have been conceived but they were and are in fact a reality.

  27. duncan
    March 11, 2018

    I have never understood why the British people would choose more politics in the shape of the EU. The EU is simply another layer of political fat we don’t need. Another layer of unproductive bureaucrats, politicians and unaccountable areas of state activity

    The closer the public are to governments the easier it is for us to control and change them. The further away political control becomes the more difficult it becomes to impose our authority upon this clique of decision makers

    More EU means more unaccountable politicians and ever more bureaucrats. Why would anyone want more politics and more unaccountability?

    I know this PM will betray the UK. I know this because it’s in her psyche. Her political career is one of weakness under pressure. She is no Thatcher. She’s just another C21st liberal left politician who wants to be embraced by the virtue signalling liberal elite. Is it any wonder she despises Trump. She has no choice but to express her public distaste for the POTUS otherwise she’ll be tarnished and banished by this grotesque clique.

    We need radicalism from the Tories

    Dispense with the services of May and Hamm.
    Get us out of the political construct that is the EU
    Deconstruct the BBC
    Purge the state
    Reduce the number of MPs and redraw constituency boundaries to make sure no Marxist is able to achieve power. If Labour get in they will destroy the UK in all its forms. They represent a much larger threat to UK interests than Brexit

    1. Peter D Gardner
      March 12, 2018

      The EU is not ‘simply another layer of political fat we don’t need. Another layer of unproductive bureaucrats, politicians and unaccountable areas of state activity’
      It is an active agent undermining democracy as embodied in the nation state. It is an actively expansionist imperial power, a threat to European and, probably, world (stability ed), if left unchecked. etc ed

  28. Mark B
    March 11, 2018

    Good morning

    We are being softened up to accept a bad deal.
    Thanks to media brainwashing the general public, will be told that the terrible deal had to accepted in order to keep trade to the EU open (no mention of trade from the EU to the UK), and that in order to stop Ulster descending back to terrorism, compromises on the Single Market, Customs Union and ECJ will have to be accepted throughout the transition period that will have no end date. Will have to pay large sums to them for this access, and, accept fines from the ECJ. We will have to allow large scale uncontrolled MASS immigration from the EU and will probably still have to accept illegal immigrants as well.

  29. Ken Worthy
    March 11, 2018

    Spot on, but the chances of these being discussed seem pretty low at present. The ministers responsible for each area of policy should be bringing forward their plans, leading the discussion and creating enthusiasm for Brexit. Unfortunately Theresa May’s hostility to ideas and obsession with secrecy have cast a miasma of gloom over her government, with a very few exceptions. She seems to have missed the whole point of Brexit, which is that we don’t have to get the EU’s approval before doing anything. If they are upset by our policy announcements, so much the better. They can hardly become more hostile.

  30. Rien Huizer
    March 11, 2018

    What are “mainstream media”? Mail, Sun, Express? ITV? Sky. If not, what is non-mainstream about them?

    1. Andy
      March 11, 2018

      Main stream media are the ones who tell the truth – or a version of it.

      The Telegraph and Guardian will tell you the same things but from a different perspective.

      People who dismiss the MSM basically believe all the untruths they read on Facebook and social media echo chambers.

      These fact deniers are a danger to democracy and society.

  31. bigneil
    March 11, 2018

    Very slow moving negotiations True, but very profitable for the EU who are still getting £55m a day from us. What would the EU stick the daily membership fee up to if TM can twist it to a ” Remain”? Which is clearly what she wants to do.

  32. gordonB
    March 11, 2018

    Just what is the point in this endless debate? I mean what does it matter what we the public have to say- our future is all going to happen anyway, at the level of government- at the level of Tory government ministers- to which our host has ample access and to a much better degree than the rest of us? but if he doesn’t know what’s going on, then as I say, what’s the point of this endless discussion- because all else is just speculation.

    Speculation:- For a start I’d like to know about these new international deals promised us by Boris Gove and Fox- where, what and when?. I’d like to know from IDS why the German car workers have not yet come on side? I’d like to know why the French wine growers are not throwing tantrums in the aisles to get at the British markets following our departure. I’d love to know how Fox is going to get Trumps America First on side and to change their minds ‘just for us’ and I’d like to know how does 12 billion PA compare with 350 million PW on the side of a bus? is it the same?- because if it is the same then that is what was already promised us for the NHS- as I say all in the realms of fantasy

  33. Cynic
    March 11, 2018

    As regards EU rights to fish in UK waters after Brexit, it would appear that they have none. See ” Possible EU Fishery Rights in UK waters”.

  34. Kenneth
    March 11, 2018

    The Brexit Bonus should have sparked a national debate.

    i.e. What do we do with the money?

    It’s a good news story.

    Unfortunately nowadays a national debate is impossible if the BBC refuses to instigate it or talk about it.

    1. Andy
      March 11, 2018

      There is no Brexit bonus. You do realise leaving the EU will cost us money?

      Yes, we will pay money to get poorer.

      Go Tories, go. (Seriously, just go. My 5-year-old could run the country better).

      1. Edward2
        March 12, 2018

        You predicted disaster for immediately after the vote if we dared to vote leave.
        What happened to that fact?

        1. Rien Huizer
          March 13, 2018

          That is because business does not believe that brexit is going to happen in the way you may be expecting. BINO is fairly harmless you see.

  35. ian
    March 11, 2018

    I think the first call on the money saved should be on new hospital equipment, extra body scanners in every hospital in england also the latest cancer proton beam units in every area of the country and 2 of latest robot surgeons in every hospital in the England, this what is needed to help out the staff and boost confidence in staff and people, not too worried about beds after the op, happy that the work been done, even if mean leaving me in bed in the corridor. Robots are capable of working 24/7 but not people, walking into a hospital at 2 am in the morning for the op, is the future. Alright people talking about pay rises or lower taxes, but that does not get the job done.

  36. Prigger
    March 11, 2018

    LIVE BBC Repeat LIVE Prof Dame Sally Davies, the Chief Medical Officer for England stated about the alleged nerve toxin and the form it took, LIQUID, SOLID etc

    ” We do not have that information ”

    She went on to advise the public…according to online BBC “Dame Sally said after “rigorous scientific analysis” there was some concern that prolonged exposure over weeks and months could cause health problems but it was “not a subject for panic”.


    Time for the Government to stop making statements of any kind whatsoever until, literally, it has got its ACT together.

    So far, Pravda is still a better and more reliable source of information than the British Government and its ne-re do well Chief Medical Officer

    1. The Prangwizard
      March 11, 2018

      And where is hideaway May? Still dithering I imagine. Had she been a leader worthy of the name she should have made a statement by now, but she sends out her robot twin Rudd with the fake face and nothing to say. And what about May’s fake promise to Mrs Litvinenko to prevent another international murder? May is not fit to govern and must be removed. She shames and embarasses us all.

    2. fedupsoutherner
      March 11, 2018


      No, not a problem unless you are unfortunate enough to have been in close proximity at the time. How can they say there is no reason to panic when they don’t even know what they are dealing with?

      1. Stred
        March 12, 2018

        The latest advice is to wash clothes. This is after washing the ambulance and table. The stuff then goes down the drain and to the sewage works and into the river, then used for drinking water downstream. Best drink wesk beer from breweries up stream.

  37. Adam
    March 11, 2018

    The mainstream media so frequently ask questions that their guests have answered many times before; yet they ask the same again as if they are robots with malfunctioning memories.

    Many claimed that people did not know what they voted for, & that leaving the Single Internal Market & Customs Union were not considered. This choice of outcome was set out in the Govt leaflet, delivered to every household to inform them.

    Eventually, Daily Politics composed a sequence of pre-Referendum speech extracts, revealing the leading politicians on both the Leave & Remain sides, each stating firmly that a Leave vote was for leaving both the SIM & CU. However, a week or so later, the MSM continued asking interviewees the same raw questions, as if their memories had again been reset to empty.

    JR proposes an excellent switch in emphases. Each of the positive angles should stimulate refreshing debate, & enable people to envision, realise & prepare plans for beneficial outcomes. Well done again, JR, with intelligence shining through the media’s jungle of ghosts in swamps & darkness.

  38. Denis Cooper
    March 11, 2018

    On TV this morning Philip Hammond was asked whether the government had carried out an impact assessment for its preferred exit scenario. He should have replied that over the past two years the Treasury has already carried out enough analyses of various exit scenarios for it to become perfectly clear that no reliance can be placed on the predictions from any of their models, which have been deliberately rigged to produce predictions of doom if we dared to leave the EU, and in particular if we left the EU Single Market. Instead he chose to shield his civil servants from just criticism by saying that as yet the final exit scenario has not been determined, and so it cannot be analysed. Well, I will predict now that when the time comes the Treasury economists will just produce another new edition of their previous doom-mongering predictions.

  39. Prigger
    March 11, 2018

    Actually he said “………not in the present atmosphere”. Whatever that means

  40. old salt
    March 11, 2018

    About growing more food just how I ask with the planned hundreds of thousands of new houses over the years taking up ever more valuable agricultural land.

  41. LucasH
    March 11, 2018

    OK some new subjects for media interviews about brexit:

    1/ Horse will all of this effect to the movement of horses in and out of the country for the racing industry?

    2/ a lot of the old folk, retirees, returning home from europe will have to be accomodated..where?

    3/ Shipping? Who is going to build the new container ships and bulk carriers that will be necessary to service our new trading pattern with countries far away. We are an island nation and RO RO won’t be any use for the future.

    4/ EU energy connections and utilities..just how are we going to remove ourselves from this?

    5/ fishing_ Where are we going to get the required number of young people in sufficient numbers from to apply for this work?

    6/ Where are the new fishing boats going to come from?

    7/ will farmers be able or willing to increase food production to feed the country with basics including fruit and veg..will there be enough agriculutural workers available?

    8/ Tim Martins bars will likely fill up but a lot of other establishments will start to feel the pinch and so excess property will come onto the market driving prices down for commercial..tourists numbers are likely to fall away as well having an impact on hotels?

    9/ what are we going to do with all of that time off from work like holiday time- how are we going to spend hoiliday time in our new circumstances?

    1. fedupsoutherner
      March 11, 2018


      Question 2. Retirees and ex pats have always returned from Spain and other places when they get old. We lived in Spain for 5 years and everyone we knew out there has returned to the UK because there are no homes for old people out there. It will not be a problem.

    2. gordonB
      March 12, 2018

      We could add

      10/ The language schools are going to have to switch to teaching chinese and korean languages instead of european?

      11/ It will be the end of cheap holidays to european destinations for a lot of people

      12/ Will the music and film industries be impacted?

  42. Laughing Chancellor
    March 11, 2018

    The Chancellor says he is still in a tunnel. 🙂

    1. Edward2
      March 11, 2018

      The light at the end of the tunnel….it’s the express train hurtling towards him.

    2. mancunius
      March 11, 2018

      ‘Wrong kind of Leavers’ on the line, perhaps?

  43. Helen Smith
    March 11, 2018

    Dear Mr Redwood, a topic that badly needs airing is the fate of monies collected under the Common External Tariff.

    It is my understanding the bulk of it goes to Brussels, less a small handling fee. When that is added to our membership fee it makes that £350m figure on the bus a huge underestimate. Effectively a huge transfer of funds from the poorest here to EU commissioners.

  44. Denis Cooper
    March 11, 2018

    “They do the Irish border story”

    But they don’t do it very well …

    They don’t start by explaining the small scale of the problem, which affects about 0.1% of the UK’s GDP and a similar fraction of the EU’s total trade, and asking how bad it would really be if the border was just left completely open.

    And they don’t ask whether the EU would still be making such a huge fuss about it if the flow of goods across the border into the Irish Republic was an order of magnitude smaller, or several orders of magnitude, or if in fact there was no flow at all but just the potential for a flow which could in theory “threaten the integrity of the EU Single Market”.

    And they very rarely pick up on the reality that it would not even be enough for Northern Ireland or the whole UK to remain in the/a customs union with the EU:

    “She said in the case of a customs union at least seven other border controls would be necessary, including for livestock and food, cash and capital, and work permits for EU citizens commuting across the border.”

    And they do not bother to ask how it could have become possible for the EU to finally dispense with such internal border checks at the end of 1992 if there had not been a high level of trust between the member states, including the UK, or try to explain why the UK should suddenly cease to be a trustworthy counterparty when it leaves the EU.

    1. Stred
      March 12, 2018

      EU citizens arrive as tourists and can apply for a work permit afterwards. Livestock and food will be trusted traders, cash and capital are electronically checked.. Aren’t academics wonderful.

  45. Iain Gill
    March 11, 2018

    Trade deals indeed, good that you are not using the brand “free trade deals” for things that mostly are nothing of the sort, very good to see.

    Sure we need trade deals, I am sure I could ring friends up in quite a lot of countries and have decent trade deals agreed in a few days, why is it taking those taking the public purse as diplomats and politicians so long…

    A number of the big multi nationals need to be put in their place too, after having sent round emails to their staff at referendum time instructing them to vote remain (one of the most outrageous things I have ever seen in my working life) they are still working behind the scenes to block things. Largely no doubt because the senior folk are making big bonuses from importing cheap Bulgarian and Romanian workers into the UK, and other such wheezes. Name and shame and put them in their places.

  46. Endo
    March 11, 2018

    You have no solution to the irish border. You have no new trade deals. Growth has stalled. They ask the same questions cos you have no answers

    1. old salt
      March 12, 2018

      Endo – Irish border solution – cancel the last referendum result as they didn’t know what they were voting for.

  47. Jim Whitehouse
    March 11, 2018

    Another Brexit question:
    “What would you like to change that the EU has prevented us doing?”
    Sample answers:
    Tampon tax.
    Export of live animals.
    Import of fur.
    All subjects dear to the heart of many traditional remainers.
    I would like to see us use tariff free trade with the 3rd world to help them help themselves, partly in place of poorly directed foreign aid.

  48. Burt Wilding
    March 11, 2018

    My goodness me John. You must be one of a very small number of people in the country who actually believe that there’s going to be a brexit dividend.

    Brexit would have a wider degree of support of people pedalling these obvious falsehoods.

    1. mancunius
      March 12, 2018

      Recent economic modelling at the Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge, last week, shows that the Treasury forecasts have got it wrong: any future negative impact will be extremely small.

      By thye way, your final sentence is complete nonsense in English. And you cannot apparently distinguish between the two entirely different English words ‘peddling’ and ‘pedalling’.

      Perhaps if you could write coherently your comments would enjoy ‘a wider degree of support’…

  49. Peter D Gardner
    March 11, 2018

    All excellent suggestions, Dr Redwood. I dare say that there would be many lively debates on them were our Government itself to say anything about them beyond the blindingly obvious and banal.

  50. fedupsoutherner
    March 11, 2018

    I see that the USA thinks they have perfected nuclear fusion. What of our renewable energy and the useless turbines? Perhaps we can see the back of the obscenities littering our landscapes? Nuclear fusion will be safe and clean and provide cheap reliable power for years to come and solve the emissions problems too.

    1. Stred
      March 12, 2018

      They may have improved magnets to contain the plasma, which is hotter than the surface of the sun, but they haven’t found a way to transfer the heat out to a turbine without melting it. That is the really difficult bit. Fusion is too hot and always 40 years away. But 50 other conventional nukes are being built in other countries at less cost and much faster than we are, and will have electricity which is not open to change in the weather or damage to pipelines and undersea cables. May and her energy ministers cannot see this.

    2. Rien Huizer
      March 12, 2018

      In 2065?

  51. John Dodds
    March 11, 2018

    So long as we have the Remainers in charge of our destiny,aided and abetted by the top “Civil Servants”,there seems little likelihood of the Brexit that 17.4 million people voted for ever happening.
    As you say, all the news is negatively biased and people are getting gradually brow beaten to the point that they begin to wonder why they bothered to vote and whether our Prime Minister is capable of anything but virtue signaling and repetitive speeches.
    We appear to have told the EU what we want and if they are not prepared to accept this we should be saying farewell,not offering huge sums of taxpayers money in the hope that this will persuade them to change their mind.Perhaps the PM should tell the gentlemen from Brussels to stop ” mansplaining”,instead of Mr Corbyn?
    We should be using the Internet to tell the citizens of the various members of the EU what we currently buy from each of their countries and what effect our leaving will have if we don’t get what we are asking for,then maybe they will begin to realise that they should not leave their futures in the hands of the Belgian based bureaucrats.

  52. mancunius
    March 11, 2018

    Including transport and internet coms, automation, and R&D into smart, future-oriented solutions for the problems. (HS2 is not the right solution: past-fixated technology that will simply help well-heeled state and corporate senior employees buy a cheaper house in the north.)
    Transport and broadband/fibre/post-fibre rollout is vital – but everything in Britain seems to be creaking at the seams, water, sewage, energy, drainage, roads. (And yet every little ex-industrial town in the Midlands and the North has to have a new, overhead-expensive Museum of Medieval Ethnic Diversity or a dance troupe interpreting The Many Not the Few to music by Elliot Carter to an audience of one).
    To mitigate the pressure on transport, decentralise as much as possible. Even the whole of the City doesn’t need to be in the City of London. Parliament could sit in the Midlands. The
    But don’t let the decentralised offices be commandeered by the ‘local workforce’. Buying votes is not what this idea is about.
    Above all, much more money thrown at R&D to address automated solutions, supported by tax money and with laws to prevent the copyrights/patents from wandering abroad at least for a substantial period.
    If transport can be fixed, if internet rollout is fixed, if smart distance-working is rewarded, anyone can live almost anywhere, and the land and housebuilding problem (surplus or deficit? nobody can agree) should sort itself out. The result would be an improvement in living standards.
    This can never be organised by the private hand – a national infrastructure plan needs to be coordinated and only government can do that. It can employ private companies to carry it out, but as we’ve seen, this involves risk.

  53. Rien Huizer
    March 12, 2018

    Why is “infrastructure” related to Brexit. Infrastructure varies a lot within the EU but the UK is the beneficiary of several infra projects.

    1. mancunius
      March 12, 2018

      We are leaving the EU at the end of March 2019.
      John’s question is about what we shall do after leaving with the money we save from our contributions to the EU.
      We shall in the future decide our own national and regional priorities, not have them decided for us by unelected civil servants in Brussels.

      1. Rien Huizer
        March 13, 2018

        Thank you. I had no idea. I thought infrastructure was a matter of budgetary priorities and domestic planning constraints (NIMBY). Given the structure and shape of Uk infrastructure one would guess it has a very low priority. But of course once the UK wins the Brexit lottery and is flush with funds, roads and bridges will be built. Maybe in someone’s backyard. Do you really believe brexit (either through a shift of funds from EU perposes to domestic ones or through less rigid environmental or workplace rules) there will be more and better infra? Show me.

Comments are closed.