The contradiction of the Remain business case about Brexit

We often have the parade of those few Remain advocates  claiming to speak for big  businesses that want to stop Brexit. They frequently repeat themselves,  going  public to help the Remain cause. They argue more than  one foolish   contradiction.

The most obvious is their statement that leaving the EU without a very costly  Withdrawal Agreement is plunging off a cliff, conjuring false  images of sharp falls in output. They then follow this with their number one complaint that once out of the EU we will lose access to cheap labour from the continent which they  say is needed to deal with the increased demand and expansion of business which they will be grappling with.

If they truly believed  output will fall and stay lower as they imply, they would not bother to seek more labour. They would be planning an orderly reduction in the size of their workforce as people retired or left for other reasons. Their economic forecasts have been so bad for many years. The pro EU lobbyists  wrongly wanted the Exchange Rate Mechanism, which did lead to a sharp fall in activity and business  output and led many  businesses to sack people without warning  because they had failed to foresee the results of their ill judged  lobbying for the ERM. They  wrongly  went along with or encouraged the Euro, which did considerable damage to UK export markets on the continent after the banking crash, when that was extended and worsened in the Euro area by the Euro crisis.

Next  they wrongly forecast a fall in UK output  in the months immediately after  we voted to leave, which did not happen .  Nor is there any  no good reason to think that actually   leaving  should lead to that. Of course the UK needs to follow good positive domestic policies to thrive outside  the EU, just as we needed to do that to grow or to offset harmful EU policies when in it. If we just get on with spending domestically all the money we save on leaving, the economy will perform well.

Let me reassure them again. UK output will not be damaged by leaving. It could expand more than currently  if the government stopped its ever tightening monetary and fiscal squeeze. The correct thing to do would be to offer tax cuts and increased spending in this  autumn’s  budget, covered by ending payments to the EU.

Business needs to turn its mind to productivity, and wean itself off the ever more cheap labour model. Together we need to build a world of higher pay, high skills and more computing and machine power to help people be more productive.

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

186 Comments

  1. Lifelogic
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:34 am | Permalink

    Indeed.

    As you say:- Business needs to turn its mind to productivity, and wean itself off the ever more cheap labour model.

    Indeed but for this we need capital at sensible rates (so get some real competition in banking and cut the many government obstacles to bank lending and fire Carney), we need cheap reliable energy (so cut the green crap), we need better premises (so cut the planning obstacles), we need easy hire and fire and different sorts of employees will be needed, we need far smaller & more efficient government that actually delivers value, better education (with vouchers and more vocational training), a health system that actually works and treats people promptly so they can get back to work, we need lower and simper taxes (so fire tax to death Hammond) and we need a bonfire of red tape (so fire the interventionist, socialist dope May).

    It seems we finally have a cabinet majority for ditching the dead as a dodo Chequers agenda. Thank goodness at long last the penny had dropped it seems. You cannot respect the referendum result and support Chequers.

    Please can we ditch the appalling May and Hammond with Chequers? It Ollie Robbins really going to still get his bonus for this Chequers lunacy.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:25 am | Permalink

      Boris today is surely right in the Telegraph today:-

      Corbyn is really not so very different from the tax borrow and waste interventionist PM that we have currently. A very similar agenda of – Tax, boss about & regulate business to the death, attack landlords, tenants and the gig economy & the usual “Government know best” lunacy.

      The difference is that he would go for it 1000% rather just 90% with May and thus kill the economy dead in weeks rather than just half strangle it.

      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/09/23/boris-johnson-must-ditch-chequers-condemned-crazed-corbynista/?WT.mc_id=e_DM842501&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_FAM_New_AEM_Recipient&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_FAM_New_AEM_Recipient_2018_09_24&utm_campaign=DM842501

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:32 am | Permalink

      Boris surely rightly concludes:-

      We need to get back to the elegance and uplift of that Lancaster House vision, because I am afraid that Chequers = surrender; Chequers = a sense of betrayal; Chequers = the return of Ukip; Chequers = Corbyn. The Labour leader is set to betray the referendum result by offering – absurdly – another vote. We Conservatives must show that we can and we will deliver.

    • Rien Huizer
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:58 am | Permalink

      I thought the ERG’s Brexit was about importing even cheaper labour (as well as food) from further afield (Subcontinent, Ukraine, US food, etc) .EU does not bar the UK from imporing highly qualified people now. Holland (with 1/4 of the UK population attracts about as much non-EU graduates via a variety of schemes, all EU prof. But government has to make the effort. Cheap labour is the bottleneck and the UK is the #1 destination for economic migrants from Africa crosing the Mediterranean. No residents’ registration system, lots of eager employers who will pay cash and an NHS that does not ask questions. Do you think Party backers who thrive on that business model would be happy with peoperly enforced immiogration policy?

      As to what international businesses say, their message has been consistent. They want to stay in the customs union and single market. Sovereignty is not their thing.

      There may be an entirely different class of businesses that want to set up shop (or expand) in the UK for different reasons than having a relatively convenient, English speaking location in EU territory (no rudeness intended) but I have not heard much about that so far, except in areas where EU consumer protection is too demanding. But that would basically aim at the UK home market.

      Media (including new media) may be an exception, given EU data protection policies (in their infancy unfortunately and not very effective, given the rubbish still possible on social media) and the role of the English language.

      If you observe a “business as usual” attitude among multinationals, it may well be that they refuse to believe that a hard brexit is actually going to happen (hard borders, no transition). To me that is a more plausible explanation than lots of businesses (I mean foreign controlled ones) being so optimistic about their future in the UK that they would be expanding. There may also be the case that the prospect of curtailed immigration leads some with “cheap labour” business models to stock up in anticipation of scarcity down the road. And of course very low numbers crossing the med may require replacements in the formal sector (though record numbers of Albanians caught recently as they try to climb into lorries about to cross the North Sea)

      Let’s just wait and see what happens during the next six weeks. Maybe by then there will be some clear heads to sort out these problems in an intellectually respectable way.

      • Stred
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

        Very true and thanks.. zzzzzzz. Zzzzz cncz zzzzzz…

  2. Richard1
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:40 am | Permalink

    I think their number one concern is not access to cheap labour it’s delays at the border due to new inspections and other bureaucracy on exports and supply chains etc. The latest to raise this fear is M. Poirot, the CEO of Astra Zeneca. There is also a general fear that planes, eurotunnel etc won’t be able to run as there will be no legal basis for doing so. Seems bizarre to me but that’s what’s said. I suggest these are the issues to focus on, not cheap labour, which if need be can clearly be sourced from anywhere.

    Reply These are myths not real issues. THe UK government is not planning new barriers at Dover!

    • Richard1
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:43 am | Permalink

      M. Soriot, apologies to him! Autocorrect

      • Harold Sharples
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:21 am | Permalink

        Pity!
        I rather liked that – it brightened my morning and fired my imagination! 🙂
        It’s a pity Brexit can’t do the same … yet!

        • L Jones
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

          It’s a pity M Poirot wasn’t involved – he would have smelt a rat a long time ago!

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:58 am | Permalink

      Companies that have interest all over the EU can easily be “encouraged” by the EU to make such daft statements. There is no need for delays at borders unless the EU choose to deliberately create them and thus damage both the EU and UK economies as a direct result.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:00 am | Permalink

        Or perhaps they just feel that such statement might well ingraciate them with the EU bureaucrats and regulators.

    • Tory in Cheshire
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:29 am | Permalink

      And what will the UK government do about barriers at Calais, Zeebrugge, Dunkirk, Boulogne, then? Illegal in the EU. Mandatory under WTO rules once we leave. Brexit gives up control!

      Reply The WTO promotes smoother trade. It does not force people to put up barriers!

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:02 am | Permalink

        “Mandatory under WTO rules once we leave. ”

        Come on then, give us chapter and verse of those rules.

        • Philip
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:41 am | Permalink

          The EU has to treat all third countries in the same way, Dennis. That is the guiding principle of the WTO

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

            Wrong, Philip. The WTO guiding principle is only against “arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination” or “a disguised restriction on international trade”, which does not mean that the EU must treat all “third countries” in the same way.

            You should read Article 7.4 of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement, which expressly states that importing countries can, and where appropriate should, vary the customs controls applied to goods according to the countries of origin and the countries from which they are shipped.

            https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/tfa-nov14_e.htm#art7

            “4 Risk Management

            4.1 Each Member shall, to the extent possible, adopt or maintain a risk management system for customs control.

            4.2 Each Member shall design and apply risk management in a manner as to avoid arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination, or a disguised restriction on international trade.

            4.3 Each Member shall concentrate customs control and, to the extent possible other relevant border controls, on high-risk consignments and expedite the release of low-risk consignments. A Member also may select, on a random basis, consignments for such controls as part of its risk management.

            4.4 Each Member shall base risk management on an assessment of risk through appropriate selectivity criteria. Such selectivity criteria may include, inter alia, the Harmonized System code, nature and description of the goods, country of origin, country from which the goods were shipped, value of the goods, compliance record of traders, and type of means of transport.”

            Note there:

            “Such selectivity criteria may include … country of origin, country from which the goods were shipped …”

          • Peter D Gardner
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

            Except the 100 odd with which it has deals of one sort or another within WTO rules. I think you don’t understand MFN status. The fundamental objective of the WTO is to reduce barriers to trade and to do so gradually so as to avoid disruption and economic shocks. The WTO would not favour the EU introducing barriers where none existed before. And its rules provide for avoidance of shock by expressly permitting and encouraging gradual change by allowing temporary anomalies.
            Furthermore, if UK were to introduce lower barriers to the world than it currently has under EU rules the WTO would say on balance what UK is doing is preferable. The EU would then be in the position of having to defend its refusal to reciprocate and would be the offender against MFN rules.

        • L Jones
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

          Sorry, Denis, you’ll be disappointed. Facebook doesn’t go into such details.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

            Facebook thinks the WTO is an ass and its rules are stupidly designed to defeat its core purpose of promoting trade.

    • Richard1
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:36 am | Permalink

      Maybe not but it is said the EU will impose them, in possible breach of WTO rules.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

        The UK government should challenge the EU and the other member state governments to declare that they will not do that in breach of WTO rules.

    • Zorro
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:04 am | Permalink

      LOL that must be why Easyjet and other airlines have been bombarding me with adverts for flights/holidays to Europe post April 2019! It’s a load of tosh – all the schedules are up and there is no flightless Europe post Brexit!

      Zorro

      • ian wragg
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:35 am | Permalink

        me with cruising, brochures out and we have one booked over the March/April period 2019.
        Tui are selling flight into the UK and so are all the major airlines. Just check on Google.

      • hefner
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

        Zorro, Ian, since last spring EasyJet has been registered in both Luton and Vienna. Not so many cruise companies are actually only registered in the UK. So these companies are not likely to be affected by the UK leaving the EU.

        • libertarian
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

          hefner

          So what? The remain camp tell us flights from the UK into EU won’t happen. Make your mind up….. oh I see ….

    • a-tracy
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:10 am | Permalink

      John, people are warning the French are planning barriers to cause maximum disruption and teach the UK a lesson, not on the Dover side, alternatives to France need to be set up and quickly because we also read that Macron needs a popularity boost at home.

      Reply There are plenty of channel ports not in France, and the French exporters will want to sell to us

    • Bob
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:19 am | Permalink

      “There is also a general fear that planes, eurotunnel etc won’t be able to run “

      It’s highly improbable that the French govt would suspend revenue generation from their own assets.

      • ian wragg
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:37 am | Permalink

        They want to close the Channel Tunnel, seeing it’s majority French owned, I would like to see that.

        • Steve
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:07 pm | Permalink

          Ian Wragg

          “They want to close the Channel Tunnel, seeing it’s majority French owned, I would like to see that.”

          So would I. In fact I think we should flood it.

    • Mick B
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:21 am | Permalink

      Reply to Reply

      UK checks at border is only half the story. With the UK becoming a “third country” the EU will increase their Border Inspection Post checks to the same level as other third countries. Delays with trucks leaving a ferry due to increased inspection means time delays in returning ferries and a build up of lorries at Dover waiting for them. Sorry but this will be a real issue and not a myth.

      Reply So you think France and Germany will delay their own exports, encouraging us to buy from someone else?

      • Lemmy
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:18 am | Permalink

        No, Mr Redwood, they will delay OUR exports. I really dont think you have thought this through

        Reply Yes I have. There are international rules under WTO and the law of contract. The EU has not tried to legislate to impose new barriers against imports into the EU and has to offer us the same access as any other country not a member of the EU. There doesn’t seem to be any problem getting Chinese exports into the EU.

        • Lemmy
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:33 am | Permalink

          Having the exact same access as we do now was your promise, and David Davis,s. Yet another falsehood. But then if you had said “after brexit we will face the same tariffs and barriers as China does” you wouldnt have won the referendum. Sneaky

          Reply No, I said no such thing. I always said before the vote that the only exit the UK could guarantee was a no deal one, and that entailed trading on WTO terms as we do today with the rest of the world.

          • L Jones
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

            But people like Lemming here only get their ”facts” from social media. You can’t expect them to understand anything deeper than that which is presented to them there.
            Sorry to repeat myself but I must – you can always tell a Remainer, but you can’t tell ’em much.

        • libertarian
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

          Mick B & Lemmy

          Listen guys its getting tedious now. You’ve all been told so many times. Stop believing what you read in the Guardian/Independent/Facebook

          Start googling. Start with TIR a NONE EU global transport/goods customs recognition system that the EU is signed up to.

          Oh and here’s a tweet from HMRC , you know the people who actually man the borders

          ~ 94% of goods cleared in 5 secs
          > 96% of the rest cleared < 2 hrs
          ~ 3% of imports (from outside the EU) are subject to documentary checks prior to clearance
          ~95% of documentary checks cleared within 2-3 hrs
          #HMRC ready for #Brexit

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

            Trolls don’t care about the truth and they will just carry on with the same rubbish, maybe with different names but with the same rubbish regurgitated again and again. There is an answer, and that is for JR to stop publishing their rubbish.

          • Edward2
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

            People who trade and export and import goods understand all you say is correct Libertarian.
            People who don’t and have never run a business believe what they read in remainer newspapers.
            I’ve never known a time when there has been such a tide of fake news.
            Selling in Europe is only marginally less bureaucratic than selling to the rest of the world.
            Europe has many different requirements and regulations.
            For example there are several different standards on electrical light fittings and plumbing parts in Europe.

          • Peter D Gardner
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:55 pm | Permalink

            And nobody reads things like treaties, trade reports, economic analyses, legal arguments.

  3. oldtimer
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    The Remainers campaigning for a second referendum to get the people’s verdict on the terms of the UK exit seem to have forgotten that was the very issue settled in 2016. That followed attempts to negotiate reforms to the EU by Mr Cameron . These failed totally. The EU did not budge. Mrs May is making the same mistake in thinking she can persuade the EU to change to accommodate a half in half out arrangement. It will not – and indeed probably cannot without undermining its raison d’etre. The many issues raised by membership of the EU, both business and others, were decisively settled by the referendum. The issue was you were either in or out. Most ordinary people understand that. Many of the metropolitan elite, including many politicians , still have to wake up and smell the coffee.

    • Andy
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:48 am | Permalink

      In a democracy issues are never settled. I, for one, do not want a second referendum. Mainly because I think the best way of permanently destroying Brexit is by letting you all fail and then picking up the pieces afterwards.

      But you do realise, don’t you, that you actually only have a mandate to deliver Brexit on the terms outlined by Vote Leave? Anything else was not voted for by the people. And, remember, the people ejected hard Brexit in the 2017 general election too. So go on then. Deliver what you promised.

      It shows how embarrassingly incompetent Brexiteers are that you can’t.

      • David Price
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:43 am | Permalink

        @Andy, by the same token our membership of the organisation that is now the EU, from the Single European Act onwards (1987) was not mandated by the first UK referendum.

        Considering the deceit used to con the electorate as detailed in FCO 30/1048 there was never any mandate to even remain in the CM as it became the EEC.

        You have been living a lie.

        • Andy
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

          Democracy in this country is carried out by means of general elections – not referenda. And in repeated elections from 1975 onwards voters gave an overwhelming mandate to pro-EU parties.

          For many years anti-EU voters had the choice to vote UKIP. And they did so in such huge numbers that the party never won a seat at a general election. Not one. Ever. And they only won one at a by-election.

          Indeed, ironically, most of the members of the ERG stood – repeatedly – on Conservative manifestos which were pro-EU. It is these same people, hypocrites some would call them, who object most strongly to Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Dominic Grieve etc holding the view they have always held.

          Reply I and others like me always stood on a Manifesto that reflected our views on the EU.

          • David Price
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

            There was no mention of the Common Market nor the EEC in the 1970 Conservative manifesto.

            We therefore had no say at all in joining the Common Market in 1973, none whatsoever. We only had a say in the 1975 referendum on whether we wanted to stay in. Many of us said no thanks. As a result of a deceitful establishment and government, amply illustrated by FCO 30/4198, many others said yes in blissful ignorance.

            You support and celebrate that lie.

            PS there was no general election in 1975 – there were two in 1974 then another in 1979.

          • Edward2
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

            The democratically elected government of the UK stood on a manifesto promising a referendum on our membership of the EU.
            This promise was carried out.

          • libertarian
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:08 pm | Permalink

            Andy

            You will need to explain then how UKIP won the last EU election hands down…. Oh that kind of messed up your rant hasn’t it

            so
            2014 Leave won a EU election

            2016 Leave won a referendum

            2017 Leave won a general election

            Andy…. serial loser

          • Anonymous
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

            Pick your time-line, why don’t you Andy !

            1975 is Year Zero according to you.

            In the same way you exempt your own age group from culpability for voting Leave.

            “I’m innocent. I’m 42 !”

            40-55 year olds voted Leave !!!

          • Anonymous
            Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

            Not one Parliamentary candidate wore an EU badge or displayed EU flags on their literature.

            I always believed I was voting Conservative. Little did I know that pro EU MPs were being shoed it.

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:40 am | Permalink

        No Andy, you are wrong, the mandate is nothing at all to do with Vote Leave, where do you get that bizarre idea from ? Bristol Council did a report on it maybe ?

      • Den
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

        Your confindence in an Independent Great Britan is blinding. We never did vote for Brexit becasue it wa not on the ballot paper.
        We voted to LEAVE and wwhat that meant was explained in vivid detail in Cameron’s speeches and in his expensive remainer propoganda sheet sent to every househols in the country. Along with contributions of Clegg and co and all those othere with vested interests in remaining with the decrepit EU Establishment. Freedom is priceless – go ask the Rest of the World about it.

        What is it that convinces you the EU can do a better job of governing the lives of British people than those who are elected by the Britsh people for that pourpose and who can be subsequently fired by the same people for not performing to their satisfaction?
        Especially when NONE of the governing EU Commission have been voted into power by the Euroepean people neither can they be removed for any reason. We believe in democracy in the UK whereas the EU deters democracy. Why would you want to support such a budding Totalaritarian Organisation?

        • Andy
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:58 pm | Permalink

          The EU Commission can be removed, by MEPs – who you elect. Mr Juncker is also elected – twice. Firstly by the EU Council – made up of the 28 elected governments. And secondly by MEPs – who we elect.

          It is not unusual for figures like this to not be popularly elected. The US president, for example, is not chosen by popular vote. Is he undemocratic too? Mrs May was voted by precisely no one outside of Maidenhead – and only by half of those in it. Is she undemocratic too.

          The EU system is different from ours. It has to be to reflect that is is an association of 28 states. But those who argue it is undemocratic clearly have never had any idea what they are talking about.

          • Edward2
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:19 am | Permalink

            Quite ridiculous to claim the President of USA is not voted in by the people.
            The real power in the EU is the commission and the council neither are elected by the people in Europe.

      • libertarian
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

        Andy

        Actually is reflects very badly on you that you keep posting the same demonstrably false information.

        You are quite right to wait and see what happens once we’ve left. Then I expect you to fade away never to be heard from again.

        • McBryde
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

          I don’t know the readership figures on this site, but it is a pretty high calibre forum with largely well informed participants slogging it out.

          Given the threat to the pro EU establishment that this forum might grow into, I predict the rise of well paid trolls with tenacious and time wasting debating skills.

      • Edward2
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

        andy
        There were various groups on both sides of the referendum campaign who put forward their views.
        People had loads of opportunities to watch and listen to all the debates and arguments put forward.
        Then we all had a leaflet setting out the arguments.
        We all then voted.

        There was no rejection of brexit in the 2017 election.
        Over 80% of votes wnt to parties that had manifestos which promised to leave the EU
        The parties who supported remaining in the EU did badly.

      • oldtimer
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

        The incompetence rests with Mrs May, a Remainer, who has gone out of her way to undermine the efforts of David Davies to deliver the Brexit that people voted for and he campaigned for.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

          May & Hammond are just appalling and not just on their Brexit deceipt. She also has bonkers tax, spending, housing, criminal justice, NHS, education, greencrap …… policies too. A warm up act for Corbyn.

      • Steve
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

        Andy

        “the people ejected hard Brexit in the 2017 general election too.”

        No they didn’t.

        • Andy
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

          Yes they did. Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid, Greens and Sinn Fein all advocated a soft or no Brexit. (The Labour policy was to ‘retain the benefits of the single market and customs union’). Togetherness they got more votes than the Tories, DUP and UKIP combined – as well as a bigger % than the Leave vote in 2016.

          I appreciate these facts are awkward for you. What part of democracy do you not understand?

          • Edward2
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:22 am | Permalink

            Nonsense again Andy.
            Over 80% of votes went to the two main parties who had manifesto promises to leave the EU.
            Parties advocating a policy of remaining did badly.

          • a-tracy
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 9:30 am | Permalink

            Andy wasn’t the ‘soft Brexit’ the Labour party advocated the Chequers Deal which was soundly rejected by Europe, because the leaflet sent out by Cameron and Osborne and paid for by the Tory government clearly advised everyone you couldn’t stay in the Customs union and single market and be free to trade and make the UK’s own rules for its future spending?

          • Steve
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

            Andy

            Prove it old boy.

      • L Jones
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

        Tell us, Andy – supposing, just supposing, that our country after Brexit is a rip-roaring runaway success story, and there were no pieces to pick up.

        Obviously, your imagination is limited by social media, but let’s suppose that everything turns out right. Can we hope that you will rejoice in telling these children of yours that you were wrong? And will you partake in the golden future that WE believe Brexit will afford?

        We hope so. Because we Brexiteers don’t wish ill on you Remainers (as you clearly seem to wish on us and our country) but we’d just like to see you eat your words.

        • Andy
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

          There is precisely zero chance that your Brexit will be a rip-roaring success – and you really need to be living in cloudcuckooland to think it will. The question is how bad it will be.

          And, remember, it will not just be bad for me. It will be bad for most of you too. AND for your children and grandchildren. Indeed I’d wager that I will be less badly affected by Brexit than most of you will. That is the ultimate irony of all this.

          • libertarian
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

            Andy

            Actually i predict that you will be the very worst affected by Brexit. You head will explode as the UK goes from strength to strength

          • Edward2
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

            Even the dodgy 15 year post brexit prediction by the pro remain treasury only shows a marginal reduction in the level of potential growth.

    • Alan Jutson
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:30 am | Permalink

      Oldtimer
      Agreed
      Mrs May took over two years to ask the EU what they would give her, I can remember Mrs Merkel saying on more than one occasion, we do not yet know what Mrs May wants.

      Just like Cameron she then paraded around the EU to ask first what they would give, and after getting little response, then came up with the nonsense of Chequers.

      The second huge mistake was to allow the EU to dictate the detailed timetable for each section of talks.

      May and her close advisors do not have a clue about negotiation, thats why we are where we are.

      The back stop of WTO Terms should have been worked out first, complete with proposed rates of tariffs, it should have been made public, and then alternative/better terms of free trade offered to the EU as an option.
      Everyone including business would have then been able to plan for at least the backstop arrangements, knowing the worse case scenario well in advance, so no need for any transition period.

      • Peter D Gardner
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

        The first mistake was the Tory Party electing Mrs May as leader. on that day I posted on FB, “That’s the end of Brexit.”
        Her first mistake was aiming for a deep and comprehensive special partnership with the EU as her initial objective without trying to work out why UK need it and how it would differ from membership. She has never had clear objectives. Another reason for that and for my reaction to her election is that she has no clarity of vision, is obsessed with detail and secondary issues, leading to paralysis by analysis and no qualities of leadership.
        The best opening position for negotiations would have been to ask for nothing, offer nothing and just declare an intention to leave on WTO terms and start preparing for it immediately but remain open to an FTA should EU like to consider one. The best policy position too, so that policy would then be dominated by UK’s needs, instead of EU negotiations. Being a successful independent third country would place UK in the best possible position to do any trade deal with the EU. It should have been the No 1 objective, with any EU deal being secondary to that and best not even contemplated until that objective had been achieved.

    • Stephen Priest
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:17 am | Permalink

      Negotiating with the EU has always been a waste of time.

      Major, Blair, Cameron, Greece, May. All failed.

      If you decide from the outset not to negotiate then there is nothing they can do.

      Is there a international organisation that behaves as badly than the EU?

      Countries can leave the Commonwealth, UN, NATO, FIFA without being punished. With the EU it’s different.

      If the EU was so brilliant they would not consistently lose referendums and would not feel the need to punish countries for leaving.

      • Andy
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

        You are perfectly entitled to leave. No one is punishing you.

        The EU is simply saying that you must pay what you owe when you go, and that you should not expect unfair advantages when you do.

        The problem has always been that Brexiteers want the advantages of the EU without the responsibilities which go with them. Your behaviour is feckless.

        Reply No, I don’t want the alleged advantages, as I do not see advantages that work for the UK. How does paying them a fortune and accepting their laws help us?

        • libertarian
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

          Andy andy little andy

          No we dont want any of the EU’s “advantages”, we voted to leave them. Its you remainers trying to hang onto anything, by your finger nails in order to keep hold of you Polish nanny .

          We just want to leave, then if they want negotiate a FTA as a third country . No we won’t be paying money for a deal

      • Peter D Gardner
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

        The EU is not ‘punishing’ UK. The EU has a far better grasp of the big picture than Mrs May’s government. the latter – at least until Strasbourg has based its actions on the assumption that it is dealing with friends and partners, like minded people (Remainers for the most part on the UK side). The EU sees clearly that a successful independent UK would not only be a very strong competitor economically and politically, but also an exemplar to be emulated by other member states. A such an independent UK is an existential threat to the EU. The EU would never be able to achieve its main reason for existing, to create a powerful Federal State of Europe able to break the dominance of the USA in world affairs. Its objective is coldly logical: UK’s independence must be strangled at birth. This is not punishment.
        Mrs May and her Remainer colleagues are living in fairy land. We need a realistic Government able to understand the reality and act accordingly on the same level as the EU.

  4. Original Richard
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:47 am | Permalink

    Whatever harm the EU think they can do to us when we are not a member of the EU it is nothing compared to the damage they can inflict upon us when we are inside the EU and subject to their directives, rules and regulations decided either by unelected bureaucrats or by QMV.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:34 am | Permalink

      Exactly. It also is nothing compaired to the damage Corbyn/Mc Donnall/SNP will inflict should the Tories fail to achieve a real Brexit.

    • Andy
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:44 am | Permalink

      You mean the rules and regulations which protect your rights as a worker or consumer? The ones which ensure products are of a high standard or the ones which ensure goods and food are safe and thatvthe environment is looked after?

      Even though you do not realise this now, you will miss these things when the Tory pensioners take them away.

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:43 am | Permalink

        Do keep up Andy, we’re keeping all existing workers and environmental rights.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

        ‘You mean the rules and regulations which protect your rights as a worker or consumer? The ones which ensure products are of a high standard or the ones which ensure goods and food are safe and that the environment is looked after’.

        So what makes you think an independent sovereign UK parliament couldn’t give us those same standards and safeguards if it was so minded?

        A properly elected UK parliament would reflect the wishes of the majority of its people. If those rights and safeguards are what they want, then they shall have them or the incumbent administration gets voted out in favour of one that WILL deliver – that’s how democracy works. But remain scaremongers would have us believe we cannot possibly live or even survive outside the EU’s clutches.

        How myopic and unimaginative you all are. You fail to see the blindingly obvious, and then want to keep us attached to an institution that is very much anti-democratic, and absolutely beyond reform. There is but one eventuality for any institution that refuses evolve – it’s called extinction.

        Tad

      • libertarian
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

        Andy

        Oh for crying out loud., are you really that simple?

        Workers rights have been in the process of being established for over 80 years, the UK Labour Party and Trade Unions at the forefront.

        Of course no countries in the world have any standards, are all unsafe and couldn’t care less , its only the EU that does this…. blimey you really are scraping the barrel.

        Hey what do you think about horse meat lasagne, transport of live animals for slaughter, force feeding geese until their livers explode and cow stabbing as a sport? All sanctioned by your glorious EU. On the environment heres a question which EU country still produces 40% of its industrial energy from lignite ( dirty brown coal)? How come the EU championed the use of environmentally damaging diesel vehicles ( until they were caught fiddling the figures) Or maybe you mean protecting us all from the 21st century by shutting down the internet.

        So no other government that could be elected in the UK would care about these thing? Sorry but you are just talking nonsense

        Grow up Andy

        • Anonymous
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

          Not forgetting slavery reintroduced in to Britain whilst in the EU… nay BECAUSE of it !

        • hans christian ivers
          Posted September 27, 2018 at 5:40 am | Permalink

          Unnecessary

      • Edward2
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

        The UK had rights for workers and consumers going back way before the birth of the EU.

        • Steve
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

          Edward2

          Indeed. The Tolpuddle Martyrs of the early 1800’s are recognised as the founding fathers of worker’s rights.

          Andy, however, seems to think the EU is responsible for those rights.

      • L Jones
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:18 pm | Permalink

        Ah, Andy! It could be no-one else but you! Getting the ageism dig in somewhere. Pathetic.

        Are you trying to suggest, perhaps, that you have never read that the UK did very well indeed before the execrable EU began to wrap its tentacles around all aspects of our lives?
        Did it never occur to you that THEY may have learned from US what ‘high standards’ are, how to care for the environment (yes – without the carbon footprint of wind turbines), how to produce water that one can drink from the tap (though there are places in France I wouldn’t risk it even today), how to use animals without cruelty, etc, etc.
        These things weren’t invented by your EU masters.

        • margaret howard
          Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:46 pm | Permalink

          LJones

          Oh dear what short memories you have.

          Thanks to the EU we have cleaner air, cleaner beaches, land set aside for wildlife, investment in formerly neglected regions.

          Laws that have improved the countryside and country immeasureably like the ban on stubble burning, grubbing out hedges, poisoning the land with dangerous chemicals etc

          This country is still being run by a secretive oligarchy who will renege on any of the vast improvements EU membership brought us

          • Edward2
            Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:25 am | Permalink

            Rubbish.
            The UK had all these things covered by laws way before the EU existed.

      • Original Richard
        Posted September 25, 2018 at 5:20 am | Permalink

        Andy,
        You write above :

        “The ones [EU rules and regulations] which ensure products are of a high standard or the ones which ensure goods and food are safe and thatvthe environment is looked after?”

        Membership of the EU prevented us from detecting the massive German diesel emissions testing fraud and hence we didn’t know about it until their engines were tested by a non-EU country, the USA.

        EU membership also meant that unlike the USA our citizens were unable to sue the German car makers for their rightful compensation.

        Just one of the “benefits” of belonging to the EU SM in addition to paying £20bn/year gross (£15bn/year loss of control and £10bn/year net) to have unlimited immigration and a trading deficit of £100bn/year.

    • Mick
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:11 am | Permalink

      Fully agree OR, these remoaners keep harping on about how bad it’s going to be when we leave but we don’t seem to be bombarded with a counter argument by leavers how bad it will be to stay in the dreaded Eu, all these snowflake remoaners who wish to stay in the Eu should move to Europe then have there land of milk and honey and conscription into a federal European forces, they would not think much of there precious Eu then 😁 and soon come running home to jolly old England 😁

  5. Henry Spark
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:49 am | Permalink

    It is false to claim that access to cheap labour is the number one complaint of business. The number one complaint is the loss of guaranteed and unrestricted access to the EU’s single market. Nowhere else in the world is trade frictionfree and costless across national borders. That is what Brexit is making us businessmen give up. I believe in free trade, the EU gives me that. Brexit is anti free trade.

    • libertarian
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

      Henry Spark

      Wrong on all counts

      There is NO single market in services which is 82% of our economy

      92% of UK business does no business of any kind with the EU

      Yes it is Australia/New Zealand for a start

      The EU is a protectionist customs union NOT a free trade area

      63% of ALL businesses support leaving the EU, big tax avoiding multinationals favour staying in.

    • Edward2
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

      The EU is a complex place to sell goods.
      There are loads of paperwork rules and regulations to follow.
      It is easier to sell to other countries like USA Canada and Australia.
      The EU is not about free trade.
      It is a protectionist bloc.

      • hans christian ivers
        Posted September 26, 2018 at 9:49 am | Permalink

        Edward2

        My experience having lived and worked in six of the EU countries is very different from your description

        • Edward2
          Posted September 26, 2018 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

          Did you run a manufacturing company exporting components to nations in Europe and outside Europe?
          Because I did.
          Living and working and holidaying in the 28 EU countries is different.

          • hans christian ivers
            Posted September 26, 2018 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

            yes I actually did in France, Germany ad the UK

          • Edward2
            Posted September 27, 2018 at 7:43 am | Permalink

            My experience is that the so called free open market in Europe is only marginally easier to trade with versus trading with the rest of the world.

    • Jagman84
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

      Free trade? Oh yes, the free trade that costs the UK £19bn a year, for the privilege of buying stuff from our neighbours at inflated prices! For example, sugar at 3x the world market price. It is a protectionist bloc that deliberately makes the cost of living far higher than it need be and impoverishes 3rd world countries by banning their processed foods from being imported, unless huge tariffs are paid. .

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

      You’re quite wrong, Henry: trade is by no means costless in the EU Single Market, and in the past even the EU Commission has expressed concern about the costs which on their own admissions may well exceed the benefits.

      That is why I often say that the GROSS benefit of the Single Market to the UK may have been about 1% of GDP – the Commission claims an average of about 2% of GDP across all member states – but the NET benefit is probably negative, that is to say it is in reality a NET COST.

      There have been a variety of studies concluding that the overall economic effects of EU membership have been negative for the UK, just some of which were referenced here in 2011:

      https://globalbritain.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/BN65-Cost-of-EU-membership.pdf

      “The Economic Cost of EU Membership”

      “Estimates of the ongoing Net Cost to the UK of its membership of the EU range upwards from four per cent of GDP per year.”

      “In the first decade of the 21st Century at least eight authoritative Cost-Benefit Analyses of EU membership have been undertaken in the UK, France, Switzerland & the USA. None has concluded that the benefits – if any exist at all – of EU membership outweigh the costs. Most conclude that the net costs of EU membership are significant, ranging from a rockbottom 4% of GDP to over 10% of GDP.”

      Personally I doubt that the costs could possibly be as high as 10% of GDP, just as I doubt that any benefits could possibly be as high as claimed by some advocates of EU membership.

  6. Roy Grainger
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:57 am | Permalink

    Despite his multiple other failings John McDonnell is a very astute politician. He says a second referendum would lead to the resurgence of right-wing populism in UK politics and so he is opposed to one. I think he is right.

  7. DUNCAN
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:59 am | Permalink

    I think we’ve now passed the stage were these arguments have ceased to retain any meaning or purpose.

    The future travel of the UK political and democratic journey will be determined by Tory MPs. If they fail to instigate the change that we all know is needed and necessary then the UK will be subsumed into the melting pot of the EU and will disappear forever

    The existential threat of Marxist Labour and the existential threat of the EU as created a political environment in the UK that I haven’t seen in a generation

    We need a proper Tory leader that understands what needs to be done. We don’t need a Macron who talks the language of reform prior to election and then capitulates following his elevation to power. We need a conviction politician who tells it as it is and does what needs to be done. We need another Thatcher in times of trouble

    If Labour achieve power or if May continues as our leader then this country is finished

    • libertarian
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

      Duncan

      If Labour achieve power or if May continues as our leader then this country is finished

      Yup , I’m then moving to Scotland and campaigning for Scottish independence !

  8. Original Richard
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:16 am | Permalink

    The UK’s handling of the negotiations appears unbelievably weak and strange, in particular the government’s refusal to refute ridiculous claims of a “cliff edge” if there is no deal (or rather, we revert to WTO terms).

    This is because Mrs. May, a remainer, and her EU supporting colleagues, persuaded the EU that if they threaten the UK and make leaving seem difficult and expensive, if not impossible, then sufficient UK voters will change their mind and vote to remain in a second referendum.

    All the time they have threatened the UK with predictions of economic disaster forgetting that leavers voted for freedom and sovereignty ahead of concern for the economy.

    They started with a large withdrawal bill and a return to violence in N.I. but this did not work.

    Chequers was another plan cooked up by Mrs. May to see if the UK voters would swallow a proposal whereby the UK remained in the EU in all but name and became a vassal state/colony of the EU.

    Since this proposal has been largely rejected by UK voters, both leavers and remainers, the EU are now saying they also reject this plan and in frustration are now turning on Mrs. May because of her inability to change the minds of the UK electorate.

    We saw the result at Salzburg.

    • Peter
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:19 am | Permalink

      “Since this proposal has been largely rejected by UK voters, both leavers and remainers, the EU are now saying they also reject this plan and in frustration are now turning on Mrs. May because of her inability to change the minds of the UK electorate.”

      Interesting theory. EU anticipating May’s Chequers failure and preempting it?

      EU have three desirable options :-

      Abandon Brexit.

      Delay Brexit.

      A different punishment Brexit, pour encourager les autres.

      I don’t think the EU are that bothered about us leaving on WTO basis myself. There are more objections to this from our own side.

      • John Hatfield
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

        So what has the EU done for you Peter?

      • cornishstu
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

        ‘There are more objections to this from our own side’ and that I do believe is the nub of the matter. With the lack of polictacal will to leave May et al want a trade deal so we can continue to be enmeshed in the EU via the small print. Just as trade was used to muddy waters when we had the first referendum to stay in the common market when true polictal direction and implications were known by those in government.

      • Original Richard
        Posted September 25, 2018 at 5:37 am | Permalink

        Mrs. May and the UK’s EU collaborators have been working all along with the EU to delay Brexit in the hope that the EU’s threats and project fear coupled with simply time will eventually lead to the UK electorate changing its mind.

        Since this has not happened we are seeing a very frustrated and worried EU as the Brexit date approaches.

        It is obvious that the EU knows that Brexit will be successful for the UK because otherwise they would be making it easy for us to leave.

  9. Anonymous
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:41 am | Permalink

    What on earth was Andy talking about yesterday ? “We’ll be voting back in the EU soon.” (because of demographics)

    Only 30% of the electorate voting to save our membership of the EU is hardly a ringing endorsement of this organisation.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:47 am | Permalink

      When I was young, young people were strongly and overwhelmingly left-wing and older people were by and large Conservative. That’s why now that that young generation is older we have a Labour government with a massive majority … oh wait a minute … what went wrong ? ….. did they change their minds ?

  10. Andy
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:41 am | Permalink

    Companies like BMW, Airbus, JLR would reject your allegations that they rely on cheap labour.

    On the contrary, they offer well-paid, highly skilled jobs – many of which will be going after your hard Brexit.

    It is the inevitable consequences of the trade barriers Brexiteers are deciding to erect.

    Reply I did not name them in this piece. I had in mind the Remain lobby groups

    • libertarian
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

      Andy

      Behind the curve as usual

      Airbus are hiring in the UK as are BMW, JLR are retooling for their new production lines

      They have all invested £100,s millions in their capacity in the UK since the referendum vote , hardly sensible if they think their leaving. I suggest you read the company websites

      Its people like you Andy that rely on cheap labour, your kids nanny , your local odd job man and the bloke that cuts your lawn.

      • Andy
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:22 pm | Permalink

        My kids don’t have a nanny anymore. When they did she was white, British and was born in Essex. I cut my own lawn – but we have two men to do the rest of the garden once a month. They are both white, British and from London. The builder I use for odd jobs is white, British and lives near Milton Keynes – though he does employ some foreign subcontractors. Our cleaners are from Croatia but the company we use – a small business – is owned by a white Briton.

        Our company is about 50/50 – Britons / Foreigners. Nearly all the high paid jobs are held by Britons – as are nearly all the low paid jobs. It is the middle ranking jobs we hire foreigners for, because we need fluent linguists. If you can find a Briton who speaks, writes and reads fluent Bulgarian and Romanian then please send them my way. Good luck.

        Immigration is what Brexit is all about – and the irrational fear many of you have of foreigners. Why are you all so scared?

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:30 am | Permalink

          There is no fear.
          Just a realisation that we have an unfair policy where doors are open for EU arrivals but restricted to those from elsewhere.
          Simply we need a fair and properly controlled immigration policy.
          Like other successful independent nations have.

        • Stred
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 8:21 am | Permalink

          Andy needs EU protection of certification for translation and easy imported linguists. When we are out, he may have to compete with world internet translators, working anywhere. It isn’t necessary to have an office with staff. It can be done off laptops. He may have to learn French and take his office and EU staff back to the EU to be protected like expensive French chemists. At least there will be some housing freed up.

        • libertarian
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

          Andy

          What staff, you told us you sacked them all !!

          What makes you think I’m scared of foreigners? What makes you think you even know where I’m from? What makes you think I’m white?

          What makes you think I dont employ staff from all over the world? etc ed

          What makes you think? Oh you dont

          • hans christian ivers
            Posted September 26, 2018 at 9:51 am | Permalink

            Libertarian

            Again yo do yourself more injustice, Why?

          • libertarian
            Posted September 26, 2018 at 5:18 pm | Permalink

            hans

            What are you burbling about now. I’m challenging Andy to prove some of the trash he comes out with.

            My best line was edited out sadly

    • Jagman84
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

      The trade barriers are in your mind. You make things up, with no evidence to back up your assertions. JLR has 60-70% starter rates for new/agency employees so is that cheap labour or not?
      Brexit is going to happen and it gives me great pleasure to see how much it ‘pulls your chain’! FYI, people are tired of whining babies like you, who cannot accept the result of a democratic vote.
      Another referendum would achieve an even higher level of support for leaving. Most people would be happy to leave tomorrow, with no phoney deals with the EU, if it was possible.

      • John Hatfield
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

        Jagman, another referendum would not be the same as the original one. There would be an attempt by remainers to fiddle it, for example making it a three-way choice to split the leave vote.
        The Peoples’ Vote is proposing a referendum on the deal that is struck with the EU, and if people vote to reject a BRINO the Peoples’ Vote would be calling to remain in the EU. In my opinion.
        In short we want the first referendum to be honoured before any talk of a second referendum.

  11. Mark B
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:47 am | Permalink

    Good morning

    I am of the opinion that the UK economy, no matter what, will suffer to some degree as we readjust to new arrangements. This is inevitable. To what degree it is unclear as no one has ever left the EU. Clearly those that wish the UK to Remain in the EU want to use such scare stories. What concerns me is, that not only the arguments about cheap labour are false, that those that wish the UK to Remain are clearly acting against the democratic will of the people of the UK. Further, by arguing for cheap labour that are showing contempt for the people of this country by denying them a decent job and wage. I am all for competition but the greedy corporate what their cake, complete with cherries, and eat it. They like the Single Market and the Customs Union because it keeps out non-EU competition. Hypocrites !

    • John Hatfield
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

      The Single Market and the Customs Union that the taxpayer pays for.

  12. Newmania
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Can these” John Redwood assurances” be exchanged for goods and provisions then ? If so our troubles are over , gee thanks .I like the argument , don`t worry about losing your Labour force you will have lost your output anyway ( and your customers )- sorted !
    Whether or not there is an overall loss of output over a few years is hard to know , it will certainly be much lower than it would have been which is the point
    Looks as if your Trot allies are going to be forced by their deluded support to go for a new vote . If so Brexit is toast,Corbyn will sail in and many peope who loathe and fear him will help

    • JiminyJim
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

      Newmania, it is the glee with which you predict wholesale disaster for our country, and not just the complete lack of facts to support your doom-mongering that are so unattractive. Views like yours have driven many people to support Leave now that we’ve come this far and seen the apalling behaviour of those with whom we’ve had to try to ‘negotiate’. How on earth do you think we survived as a country before the EU? Can I suggest that you explore the ‘Facts4eu’ website in order to reach a more balanced and informed position?

      • margaret howard
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

        Jiminy

        “. How on earth do you think we survived as a country before the EU?”
        ==

        Why then did we beg to join the EU?

        • Original Richard
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 5:51 am | Permalink

          Mr. Heath begged to join the EU for political and not economic reasons.

          So desperate was he to join that he gave away our fishing grounds and negotiated such a bad deal that Mrs. Thatcher had to demand a rebate.

          Today the deal we currently have with the EU is so bad that we pay a £20bn/year gross (£15bn/year loss of control and £10bn/year net) membership fee and in return have unlimited immigration and a £100bn/year trading deficit.

          • margaret howard
            Posted September 26, 2018 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

            Original

            “So desperate was he to join that he gave away our fishing grounds”
            ==

            The fishing grounds were allocated fairly to all member countries to do with as they liked.

            However many of our fishermen sold their quotas for a quick profit disregarding future prosperity. Countries like Spain snapped them up.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:33 am | Permalink

          More nonsense from you Margaret.
          We never begged to join the EU
          We voted to join a common market.
          It was hijacked by unelected failed left leaning politicians who turned it into the EU.
          Soon to be the United State of Europe.

          • margaret howard
            Posted September 26, 2018 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

            Edward2

            Extract from the official 1975 referendum leaflet:

            The aims of the Common Market are:

            Bring together the peoples of Europe

            Raise living standards and improve working conditions

            Promote growth and boost world trade

            Help the poorest regions of Europe and the rest of the world

            Help maintain peace and freedom
            ==

            That’s what we voted for and that’s what we got.

          • Edward2
            Posted September 27, 2018 at 7:40 am | Permalink

            Shame they changed it to what thecEU has now become.
            Low growth
            High unemployment
            Dreadful youth unemployment
            Falling share of world trade
            Divided nations with the rise of parties at the edges of politics.
            Dangerous foreign policy in Crimea and elsewhere.
            Centralised protectionist trading bloc.
            Sad, because I was in favour of those original aims

  13. Ian wragg
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    We now have the PM and Eeyore wanting to give priority to EU nationals . The silly Morgan wanting the Norway model.
    Your party really has a death wish.

  14. fedupsoutherner
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:23 am | Permalink

    And what would happen if the result of a second referendum was to Leave? I think politicians don’t want another referendum because of this fear. They would find it difficult not to comply. We had a democratic vote. EVERYONE, young and old was invited to take part. The fact that the younger generation couldn’t be bothered is not the older generations fault and we are the ones that take issues like this that affect our country more seriously. The time has come to stop negotiations. The EU has said non. Let’s not humiliate ourselves any more. We can make it on our own and we can show others it can be done.

  15. Richard1
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:43 am | Permalink

    It is interesting the way public debate proceeds, and I think it’s an effective and healthy way of arriving at good policy – rather like a price discovery process in a market – even if it is painfully repetitive and acrimonious. It is now clear that the Canada+ model is the obvious and sensible arrangement to aim at, and has wide public support. It offers pretty much the same trade and economic relationship with the EU as now without the political control and integration. All that stops it is the supposed issue of the Irish border. With the EU now acknowledging that electronic checks away from the border work just fine – this is how they suggest the U.K.-N Ireland checks should work should the U.K. cave in to the N Ireland land grab – that is the clear and obvious solution to this bogus issue.

    So the government should acknowledge the rejection of Chequers by the EU and propose a clear Canada+ arrangement, with technological solutions to any new checks the EU feel are needed in Ireland (I don’t see why the U.K. should feel a need to impose any). If the answers no to that it’s WTO.

  16. Thames Trader
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:43 am | Permalink

    In the majority of cases where businesses say they have to recruit from overseas as they can’t find suitable skilled labour it’s because either they refuse to pay the going rate for those skills or because they refuse to train up existing staff with those skills.

    For example, if the NHS trained more nurses in this country they wouldn’t have a shortage.

    • ian wragg
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:45 am | Permalink

      The people recruiting from overseas have a vested interest in maintaining a steady flow. For example, Filipino nurses have to remit a certain percentage of their earnings home by law.
      The Philippine economy relies on foreign remittances to function so they train vast numbers of professional people with the sole objective that they work abroad.

    • sm
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:21 am | Permalink

      TT, remember that old saying:

      “cheaper is always more expensive in the long run”?

    • libertarian
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

      Thames Trader

      The NHS dont train Nurses , the idiot Blair made nursing a mandatory degree subject and people dont want to run up a £50k debt to get a £20k job. There aren’t enough bursaries and nurse training places, thats why they import from overseas. If this stupid degree idea was scrapped we wouldn’t have the problem.

      By the way in case the serial (misleader ed) Dr Sarah Woollybrain MP is reading this, here are the actual facts about the NHS staffing levels . 4% of all NHS staff are from overseas, of those the largest contributors are India and Ireland.

  17. Kevin
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    JR writes: “We often have the parade of those few Remain advocates claiming to speak for big businesses that want to stop Brexit.”

    It appears that the value of business leaders’ contributions to a referendum debate may depend on the subject of the vote.

    For example, yesterday, BBC reported that “Voters in Switzerland have overwhelmingly rejected two proposals on ethical and sustainable food”. A caption under the leading photograph in the article reads as follows (emphasis added):
    “Local, high-quality food is already popular – but the Swiss do not seem to want to pay more for ethical farming

    That reads to me like a criticsm of the voters, but who was “responsible” for the outcome of the vote?

    The article goes on to write (again, with emphasis added):
    “[O]pponents, including business leaders and the government – which advised people to vote no – had warned of higher food prices and less choice…. [I]n the closing days of the campaign, warnings from the government that the measures were unenforceable, and from food retailers saying prices would rise, clearly swayed voters, our correspondent says.”
    (Source: BBC News Web site, “Swiss voters reject ‘fair food’ plans”, 23/9/2018).

    So, BBC, should the Swiss people have ignored business leaders in that referendum?

  18. Adam
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    When Mrs May is replaced with a strong Brexit-leading PM, both the UK-doubting Remainers & the EU will realise the uselessness of their negative stance.

    The UK shall then advance into the freedom of independence with greater vigour, sweeping aside the presently-recurring Referendum losers’ nonsense.

  19. Anonymous
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:07 am | Permalink

    Business needs to be charged the full cost of open borders policy.

    The cost of:

    – schooling
    – housing benefits
    – crime
    – anti terrorism
    – NHS
    – welfare top ups
    and
    – welfare benefits to displaced workers

    These businesses are a net cost to us as the debt and tax figures show and this applies especially where those businesses use clever accounting to minimise their own tax profiles.

    • bigneil
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

      Thanks Anon – just what I say – -but mine get binned.

  20. George Brooks
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    The sole aim of the EU commission is and has been for nearly 40 years, to beat this country into submission. THEY WON’T.

    Their whole approach and attitude has been hostile ever since Article 50 was triggered and they have been encouraged by the remainers propaganda. ‘Original Richard’ is absolutely right when stating that the harm the EU could do to us after we leave would be absolutely nothing compared to what they will do to us with rules, directives etc if we stayed.

    News seems to be coming through that Canada ++ is gaining traction within the cabinet and let’s hope they provide a ladder for TM to climb down gently

  21. acorn
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    There was some confusion over import and export percentages yesterday, the latest is at
    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/bulletins/uktrade/july2018

    Alas, my number crunching project has been brought forward, (matching electric vehicles to electric generators through old street wiring). To do with “Connecting Europe Facility energy funding if there’s no Brexit deal”. So, au revoir see you at the Brexit Stargate if not before. 😉

    • libertarian
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

      acorn

      No need to apologise. I sincerely hope your project is successful

  22. con
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    There is talk of not paying the £39bn EU ransom unless the UK gets a satisfactory deal.
    As I understand it, the £39bn has been made a legally binding commitment to be paid regardless of the ultimate deal or even if there is no deal. As such it would be regarded as a debt default if we refuse to pay with all the negative consequences for the UK in the debt market.
    Can anyone please enlighten me on the true position?

    Reply NO, it is not an obligation. It only becomes one if the UK government ratifies a Withdrawal Agreement with it in and Parliament then approves that Agreement and legislates to put through the money and the rest.

  23. Denis Cooper
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    I saw the Tory MP Nicky Morgan on TV dismissing out of hand the option of a trade deal like the one Canada has with the EU, on the grounds that it would do nothing to solve the (largely fabricated) problem of the Irish border.

    She was actually right about that, insofar as that CETA agreement does not involve Canada entering into a customs union with the EU.

    However she then went on to recommend that when we leave the EU we should join EFTA and use that to stay in the EEA, and be like Norway, apparently oblivious of the fact that Norway is also not in any kind of customs union with the EU, and the Irish government has categorically rejected the idea of a “light touch” customs border like that between Norway (EFTA/EEA) and Sweden (EU/EEA).

    It is now nearly a year since Sky News put this question to Irish ministers, no doubt with malicious intent, and their 3 minute 50 second feature broadcast on November 24th 2017 is still available to watch here:

    https://news.sky.com/video/is-the-norway-sweden-border-a-solution-for-ireland-11141058

    “Is the Norway-Sweden border a solution for Ireland?”

    “Sky’s Lewis Goodall takes a look at the border of Sweden and non-EU Norway and whether it could work as a model for Ireland post-Brexit.”

    And the answer from the Irish ministers was a clear and unequivocal “No”, with their Europe Minister Helen McEntee propounding their absurd, extreme and intransigent doctrine from just after 3 minutes in:

    “We have been very very clear from day one, there cannot be a physical border and that means ruling out cameras, that means ruling out technology, that means ruling out anything that would imply a border on the island of Ireland, it is not an option for us”.

    I repeat that this was broadcast on November 24th 2017, eleven months ago now; it has been continuously available to view on the Sky website since then; and moreover it is far from having been the only public statement to the effect that the Irish government led by the robotically intoning “No hard border, no physical infrastructure on the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland” Leo Varadkar is not prepared to tolerate any changes at all at the border, not even Boris Johnson’s small and unobtrusive changes like those needed to collect the congestion charge in London.

    Frankly it staggers me that eleven months later there are still UK politicians like Nicky Morgan and Stephen Hammond, and other people like Mike Stallard, around in the UK, who are unaware that the Irish government has effectively vetoed the “Norway option” which they favour as either a temporary or a permanent post-EU future.

    Personally I no longer see any major “Irish problem” with either the Canada or the Norway options, but that is because in late 2017 I concluded that the UK government should take the Irish government at its word and publicly declare that in view of the absurd, extreme and intransigent position it was adopting we would drop any idea of making any changes at all on our side of the land border, they can do what they like on their side but to be helpful to them we could pass and enforce a new law to control what goods could be taken across into the Republic.

    • ChrisS
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

      “ruling out cameras, that means ruling out technology, that means ruling out anything that would imply a border on the island of Ireland, it is not an option for us”.

      I have not heard that statement before but it very clearly rules out every option other than the UK remaining within the existing Customs Union. As this would breach our Red Line over being able to make our own trade deals, it is not going to happen.

      Having ruled out a border down the Irish Sea, it would appear that the only solution has to be a total back down of the EU and Irish from their hard-line position and a Free Trade deal between the UK and the EU.

      That effectively means we will be leaving under WTO terms next March and it will then be up to the EU whether they place any barrier between NI and Eire. We certainly won’t be doing so.

    • forthurst
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

      With regard to the various options for trade with the EU, there seems to a deficit of discussions as to the regulatory body which would settle trade disputes; if our disputes are directly or indirectly subject to the ECJ, then we haven’t left; if they are adjudicated by corporatist appointed bodies then we could find cancelling HS2 is more expensive than building it.

      With regard to the Irish land border, the infrastructure required at the border is not a matter of whether we have free trade but whether one or both of our countries is third world because if that were the case that would require a man in a hut on the border with a rubber stamp which cannot be grasped without his palm being pre-greased and with a Kalashnikov to ensure enforcement. On the other hand were both countries first world then they would be able to agree the necessary mutual mechanisms that would ensure that the man in the hut would not be required. etc ed

    • Original Richard
      Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:27 am | Permalink

      Re :

      “And the answer from the Irish ministers was a clear and unequivocal “No”, with their Europe Minister Helen McEntee propounding their absurd, extreme and intransigent doctrine from just after 3 minutes in:

      “We have been very very clear from day one, there cannot be a physical border and that means ruling out cameras, that means ruling out technology, that means ruling out anything that would imply a border on the island of Ireland, it is not an option for us””.

      Guido Fawkes wrote on 16/03/2018 :

      “Remainers don’t seem to realise that there already are high definition cameras at the Irish border with a high speed data link to police computers, which can easily be retasked to connect with customs and excise computers. The video above was taken at the border on the A1 motorway, the main route between Dublin and Belfast along which the vast majority of intra-Ireland trade happens.”

  24. Iain Gill
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    I was in a big multi national at the time of the referendum. They sent all the UK staff an email instructing us to vote remain, and made it clear there would be consequences if we did not. They also sent an email to their US staff telling them to vote for Clinton. Its hardly surprising that people are reluctant to express main stream views now.

    On what planet do businesses think its appropriate to impose their political views on their rank and file staff?

    • sm
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:27 am | Permalink

      Of course it’s ‘inappropriate’ to impose political beliefs, but given both the UK and the USA have secret ballots systems, how the heck would they know who you had voted for?

      • Iain Gill
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

        well those of us who openly told them we would be voting differently were hounded and abused.

        hence lots of people not being prepared to admit what they voted.

        hence the nonsense to ban anon internet accounts dangerous etc.

      • Original Richard
        Posted September 25, 2018 at 6:29 am | Permalink

        Actually our voting system is not secret as each voting slip is numbered and TPTB can determine how anyone voted.

    • Stred
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

      The MOD did the same.

  25. Christine
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    Remain continues to promote Project Fear as if everything is a fact. Notice how they only ever concentrate on the trade argument. Move the discussion to topics like where the EU is headed. Rather than always being on the defensive go on the attack. Most of the UK public have no idea what the EU has planned for their future. They think that the EU cares about the people when all it cares about is big business and lining its own pockets.

  26. jack Snell
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    A second referendum is not going to solve the problem- there is far too much division and
    confusion in the land about this whole matter- probably a general election is the best way forward now to clear the air, and so what if Corbyn gets in for a term, it might give the country some direction and allow the tories time to regroup. Then there is the other matter of a rump Ulster unionist party the DUP propping up a British government with ten votes can hardly be the best way for decisionmaking and for democracy. We are out of the EU now, that is accepted, but how far out is another thing-

    What would be so wrong with going for a Norway style for the interim period? it would give us some room to look at the world outside for other trade options, why does everything have to be so black and white? we could ease ourselves out without the crash.

    Nothing we say or do matters much here now because we are in the middle of a storm- with the Labour party conference just finishing, the Tory conference about to begin and we are only weeks away from the EU Council meeting- we know full well what the sticking points in the departure deal are, they will just have to be addressed, but best thing to do now is to ask the EU27 for an extension of A50 so that we can have a general election.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:58 am | Permalink

      “What would be so wrong with going for a Norway style for the interim period?”

      The absurd extreme and intransigent position of the Irish government, see above, plus a series of other objections, plus admissions such as these made by one of its foremost advocates only today:

      http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87003

      “Thus, in my advocacy for the Efta/EEA option, the biggest mistake I made in the early days was to argue that it was an “off-the-shelf” arrangement. It isn’t, and the process of negotiating the necessary adaptations would doubtless take a long time, with the expenditure of considerable diplomatic effort.

      Furthermore, while the EEA Agreement would be a necessary step, it is not sufficient – even with adaptations covering such issues as freedom of movement, customs cooperation (with special reference to Northern Ireland), and technical matters such as rules of origin and external tariffs.

      In addition, we will need separate agreements on a wide range of other issues. Norway, the largest of the Efta/EEA states, has 56 recorded bilateral (and more than 20 multilateral) treaties with the EU, including an all-important agreement covering administrative cooperation on VAT. In fact, on this one subject, we will need to go much further than Norway if we are to secure frictionless borders.

      If we also include the negotiations required for us to rejoin Efta – which will be necessary in order for us to access the institutional structures of the EEA Agreement, without re-inventing the wheel – then it is unarguable that we do not have sufficient time between now and 29 March to conclude the necessary arrangements.”

      • Chris
        Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:17 pm | Permalink

        I saw this and thought of Mike Stallard. The apparent backtracking by North is unusual but at least he has admitted it.

  27. Know-Dice
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Delay and uncertainty are surely doing more damage than leaving could ever do.

    Remaining and/or a second referendum are not the solution.

  28. John Finn
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    John Redwood is right. This is from the ONS this morning

    From 1998 to 2000 the UK had an average £3.5 billion trade in goods surplus with the EU. In 2001 the surplus turned into a deficit and by 2017 the trade balance with the EU was £93.7 billion in deficit with most EU countries contributing to the deficit.

    We’ve gone from surplus in 1998-2000 to a £94 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2017. You’d think our marvellously clever business leaders might turn their attention as to how domestic producers can meet increasing demand in the UK economy.

    This deficit must actually represent a drag on our GDP. A widely recognised measure of calculating GDP is the Expenditure Approach which is represented in the following equation.

    GDP = C + G + I + (X – M)

    where C = Consumption; G = Government Spending and I= Investment

    ALSO X = Exports and M = Imports

    As far as Goods Trade with the EU is concerned (X – M) = -£93.7 billion. That’s around -4.5% of GDP (i.e. negative). While Consumption and Imports are not independent factors clearly more domestic output would improve GDP hugely.

  29. John Probert
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    I agree cheap labour and low skills is the road to no where

    We need to innovate and aspire to being a highly skilled economy

    Higher rewards will naturally follow

    This means investing in our people and stop taking the easy option

  30. Christine
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 11:26 am | Permalink

    I attended the Leave Means Leave rally in Bolton on Saturday. Very interesting speeches from Kate Hoey, Nigel Farage and David Davis. The whole rally can be watched on YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBOt3GOB-zs&t=1222s

    This is the first of several rallies being held across the country over the next few weeks with different speakers at each. Venues: Torquay, Birmingham, Gateshead, Harrogate and Bolton.

    Try and get to one if you can.

    • ChrisS
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

      I’m going to the Birmingham one

    • David Price
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

      None announced for nearby so thanks for the link

    • Know-Dice
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

      Christine, Many thanks for the “heads up” 🙂

    • Chris
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:25 pm | Permalink

      The rallies were tremendous in 2016, and to see some Tory Brexiter MPs on the same platform as Nigel Farage was wonderful. The atmosphere was electric in a lot of those rallies, in no small part due to Nigel, and I believe that those Tory MPs were honourable enough to credit Farage with his tremendous ability as an orator and his ability to connect with the people, to speak the truth and to stand up to the bullies.

      Sadly there was a contingent of Tory MPs in the Vote Leave group who treated Nigel Farage disgracefully. However, it is not they are who are recognised world wide as the people responsible for winning the Brexit, it is Nigel Farage who is credited overseas with being the singlemost important person in bringing about that Leave vote.

    • Andy
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

      The photos of the rally you went to are ace. They show a room packed full of old white people. They show precisely what is wrong with Brexit.

  31. hans christian ivers
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

    JR,

    The hypothesis that we need to build a much higher skilled economy , absolutely makes sense but we have also had 45 years in the EU, where we unfortunately have not been able to achieve , what you are proposing. But that should not stop us from trying going forward.

    The hypothesis that we have had good economic performance after the Brexit vote is just a load of nonsense. We went rom the best performing economy to the one with the lowest growth in the G& after the Brexit vote, due to the falling pound we had inflation at twice or higher than the average European inflation and falling real wages.

    your final hypothesis makes sense but the argument leading up to it is simply factually not correct

    Reply Our growth rate did well for the first nine months after the vote. Other policies then slowed the UK economy as I forecast at the time and have explained since.

    • hans christian ivers
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

      JR,

      Interesting hypothesis you put forward I am not sure that the other policies made the full slow down, though.

    • libertarian
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

      hans

      We already have a high skill economy. What we have is a skills shortage ( unlike most of the EU which has rampant unemployment) .

      Less than 8% of the UK workforce are in minimum wage jobs , which of course means 92% are doing better than that .

      It is imperative that we leave the EU in order to maintain and grow our lead in Digital, AI, Fin-Tech and other creative industries. Sadly the EU despite EU MEPs voting against it, have gone ahead an added Article 11. Article 13 to the gibberish that is VAT Moss on Digital Services, MiFid2, GDPR . The EU has just consigned the 27 to become a digital backwater.

      As to the boom and bust cycle of statistical performance plus ca change

      The policy wonks, economists and other entrail diviners are a completely meaningless and useless diversion for those of us who get up every day and carry on our business . As you have pointed out there are far worse things that impact business performance. The huge cost of employment due to over regulation, the extortionate level of business rates , appalling broadband & cellular coverage, skills shortages, the complete fiasco the government has caused over apprenticeships etc etc etc

      I couldn’t care less for the percentage points on a graph this week

      • libertarian
        Posted September 25, 2018 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

        hans

        any thoughts….

        “Conservatives in Germany’s lower house of parliament picked Ralph Brinkhaus to lead them, ending Volker Kauder’s 13-year reign and weakening the chancellor.Merkel is seriously wounded ” Handelsblatt

        • hans christian ivers
          Posted September 26, 2018 at 9:56 am | Permalink

          Libertrian

          your predictions have not stood the proof of time and that still seems to be the case, so I am not surprised that you are wrong again

      • hans christian ivers
        Posted September 26, 2018 at 9:59 am | Permalink

        EU

        Rampant unemployment, interesting?

        Denmark, Germany , Holland, Austria, Slovenia, Poland, Sweden,Estonia

        Rampant unemployment, I think you should look up rampant?

  32. The PrangWizard
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:26 pm | Permalink

    The main theme on these pages when covering trading after we leave the EU seems to cover what we may be able to import and how easy it should be. It is exports which concern me, or the lack of them. I’ve just come back from Holland and in a casual survey, when I visited the supermarket – a Dutch national one – to do some shopping I kept on the lookout for products from the UK. I noticed orange juice, Marmite, and potato crisps. Elsewhere whisky, and gin. In the street BMW Minis are popular. That’s about it.

    We don’t try hard enough to sell our products and we are far too keen to buy from abroad, as individuals and as businesses.

    Holland on the other hand presumably has a completely different view of itself and the world. They run a trade and budget surplus and it shows. Most of England appears rather worn out and poorly maintained, most of Holland appears new and well maintained.

    We need a change of view, and most certainly we must invest in the latest machinery. There’s no advantage in hiring cheap labour so that more widgets can be made in exactly the same old way.

    • Know-Dice
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

      Most of England appears rather worn out and poorly maintained, most of Holland appears new and well maintained.

      After just coming back from a nice trip to the Netherlands, it’s quite shocking the run-down state of our roads (A12) compared to those in the Netherlands.

      PvL certainly has something to “crow” about there 🙁

  33. VotedOut
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    IEA = common sense and a reasonable strategy.

    Civil Service = Chequers car crash and £38 billion charity donation to the EU.

    Can the IEA please replace the Civil Service ?

  34. Mike Wilson
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    If we leave with no deal and then trade on WTO terms – how much extra tariffs will be imposed on our exports and how much will we impose on imports. If trade stays the same, how much will we make?

    Reply I f we applied EU tariff oevels to EU imports and they to our exports to them the UK authorities would make a net gain of £8bn a year, subject to us buying less of their imports.

    • Know-Dice
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

      Mike, Bear in mind that currently 80% of tariffs applied to goods coming in to the UK from outside of the EU are passed across to the EU. After we leave the EU 100% of any tariffs are available to be used in this country.

      May be used to mitigate any detrimental effects of WTO tariffs or just be wasted on projects like HS2 or Hinkley 🙁

      But in any case spent or saved by the UK in the UK…

  35. Chris
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

    Regarding above comment, quotation marks should be placed before Writing in The Telegraph….This is a quotation from the Express article.

  36. Denis Cooper
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

    Today the Tory eurofederalist Evening Standard editor George Osborne has given the New Labour eurofederalist Tony Blair most of a page to push their joint cause of getting a repeat EU referendum in the hope of overturning the result of the first referendum.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/we-need-a-second-brexit-vote-so-that-we-don-t-betray-britain-s-future-a3943901.html

    “Tony Blair: We need a second Brexit vote so that we don’t betray Britain’s future”

    “If we lose access to the single market and go to a Canada style free trade agreement we will pay a heavy price”

    There’s no actual evidence to support that claim anywhere in the article, but nevertheless we should be shaking with fear given his reputation for honesty and accuracy … however this is certainly worth noting:

    “My side will use the halfway house of Chequers as a stepping stone back into Europe.”

    Just as they would try to use a EFTA/EEA halfway house in the same way.

    • Steve
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

      Denis Cooper

      “Blair: We need a second Brexit vote so that we don’t betray Britain’s future”

      Blair needs (stopping ed) so he doesn’t betray Britain’s future.

    • Anonymous
      Posted September 24, 2018 at 9:26 pm | Permalink

      As a Leaver I’m glad that Tony Blair is showing his face for Remain. The man is toxic.

  37. Steve
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    JR

    The remainers say the things they do because; they’re full of crap.

    They say the things they do because; they put their personal wants above the common good of the nation.

    Some of them say the things they do because; they’re still wet behind the ears and weren’t around when this country was a world leader.

    Some of them still harbour 300 year old grudges and will side with anyone if it helps stab the English in the back,

    They think it is the norm to have one’s country stolen and ruled by corrupt unelected foreigners.

    They’re brainwashed to live by political correctness.

    When we get away from the claws of the EU pariah, these people are going to have to emigrate to europe, we won’t want them on our soil let alone hold post in the government or civil service.

    Various institutions such as the civil service, BBC etc will need to be purged and returned to their former politically neutral status. If it takes a McCarthy style witch hunt so be it.

    I have nothing but loath for remainers. Clearly they don’t value our country, and should be made welcome to emigrate to somewhere else.

    • Oggy
      Posted September 25, 2018 at 7:23 am | Permalink

      Excellent post Steve, I wholeheartedly agree.

  38. bigneil
    Posted September 24, 2018 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    Totally off topic — the proposed “Energy cap” – -I assume this covers Gas and electric only – -what about those who use coal etc for their heating?

  39. mancunius
    Posted September 25, 2018 at 2:07 am | Permalink

    “Business needs to turn its mind to productivity, and wean itself off the ever more cheap labour model.” Perhaps, JR, you need to talk to the Home Secretary about that: he has declared the government will allow unlimited immigration from the EU for at least two years after Brexit. That includes the low-skilled and all new arrivals who have (or declare) low incomes, thereby triggering tax credits, Council Tax reductions, child welfare payments overseas, etc etc.
    Presumably these are Sajid Javid’s ‘orders from the PM’.
    Meanwhile, the government has offered this ludicrous concession without at all exacting any promise from the EU about the treatment of UK citizens in EU countries. Having been one of those for quite a long time (going back to the period before we joined the EEC) I can say with some authority that the sense of fairness of European bureaucrats and politicians is by no means to be relied on.

  40. Ron Olden
    Posted September 26, 2018 at 3:08 am | Permalink

    I wish posters would stop wasting everyone’s time speculating on ‘what people voted for’ in the Referendum, and rabbiting on about what the ‘Leave campaign ‘promised”.

    We know what people voted for. They voted for the option on the ballot paper which said ‘Leave’. So that, and possibly, excluding a relationship with the EU which is no different from staying in, is all the mandate consists of.

    On any case we are not leaving the EU because of the Referendum. We are Leaving because Parliament subsequently voted by more than 4 to 1 to invoke Article 50.

    If any MPs voted to invoke Article 50 conditional on a deal being reached, then they must be as thick as two short planks.

    Labour’s position crosses the line in being downright ‘deranged’. They say, we must Leave in accordance with the Brexit Vote, we mustn’t Leave without a deal, but that they will vote against any deal regardless of what it consists of.

    These positions are mutually incompatible.

    Corbyn even says now that he doesn’t rule out another Referendum but won’t say how he would vote in one of we had one!! I doubt if Mrs May would say either if asked, but she can at least fall back on her position ruling one out, and therefore saying it’s hypothetical.

    Neither were we asked to decide what ‘deal’ (if any) would follow our Leaving.

    The 52% will contain large numbers of people who, if asked, will prefer anything from Hard Brexit to Brexit to Leaving in name only. As will the 48% many of whom might hold the view that seeing as we’ve voted to Leave, a clean break is better than some complicated fudge that’s worse than being in.

    The only ‘mandate’ that comes from the Referendum is that we must Leave. It’s up to Parliament, what (if anything), follows the event. We don’t need endless Referenda on whether or not we’d l like to ‘change our mind’ or on what ‘deal’ (if any) we should have.

    That’s up to the Government and Parliament, and is what we pay them for.

    Neither, contrary to what I’m always reading, did the Leave campaign ‘promise’ anything. They weren’t standing for office , so they were in no position to ‘promise’ anything.

    All they did was told us what, as they saw it from their varying perspectives were the advantages and opportunities which would arise if we voted Leave. It was left to us to make the judgement.

    That judgement was not conditional on getting some sort of ‘deal’, and it certainly wasn’t conditional on a ‘deal’ coming forward which would suit the losing side.

    Corbyn and the Labour Party Remainers, both the Referendum and the General Election a year later. They have no right to set ‘six tests’ to determine whether or not, or when we now Leave.

    Most of these ‘tests’ do no have definitive answers anyway, are impossible to achieve, and leave it to Corbyn to tell; us if they have been.

  41. Ron Olden
    Posted September 26, 2018 at 3:21 am | Permalink

    How can imported unskilled cheap labour be a good thing anyway?

    It drives down wages, and we have to subsidise the people concerned with Tax Credits and Housing Benefit to sell us cheap Labour.

    Cheap Labour is one of the main reasons for the UK’s low productivity.

    Anyone should be allowed to come to the UK and stay here provided that they can earn more than £30,000 a year, are not entitled to any benefits at all, are willing to do without certain Tax Reliefs e.g. Pensions Contribution Tax Reliefs and are willing and able to pay (say) £2000 a year to give them access to the NHS

    The purpose of a National economy is to enable us all to get richer, not expose us to competition from cheap labour which we have to subsidise, and so make us poorer.

    • hans christian ivers
      Posted September 26, 2018 at 9:54 am | Permalink

      Ron Olden

      Your entire hypothesis is wrong.

      The low skilled EU labour has not had any country wide impact on salaries at that level in the UK that has been proven several times in one survey after the other.

      Nor have the low skilled labour been a drag on the social system overell, so your hypothesis does not stand up to more detailed scrutiny

      • Edward2
        Posted September 26, 2018 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

        Plainly you are wrong
        Several million people added into the labour market will have an effect on wage levels.
        We know wage rates have hardly risen for many years and without the state increasing minimum wage rates this would have been worse.

        GDP is up but GDP per head is not and this shows how the numbers of low paid do not raise the real prosperity of the UK
        No one is placing blame on any who have come here to better themselves but the figures show no advantage when the total costs are factored in.
        The reports you alude to simply looked at wages and tax.
        Housing benefits free health education tax credits child benefits and more, were left out.
        Other reports say the break even income rate is £35,000 per year.

        • hans christian ivers
          Posted September 27, 2018 at 5:48 am | Permalink

          Edward 2

          You are jumping the gun again

          not if they are seasonal and come and leave during the year which a lot of them do, so let us look at the facts, before we start saying who is right or wrong. We have had productivity problems long before we became part of the EU

          • Edward2
            Posted September 27, 2018 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

            Out of several million new arrivals only a small number are seasonal workers who come and go.
            There is no gun to jump.
            The facts are as I have stated.
            Productivity is a side issue
            Look at GDP per head.

  • 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