Brexit should boost growth

The Remain financial establishment  led by Mr Hammond 2017-19 followed policies which have led to a slowdown in UK growth. It is true there has been a global slowdown led by manufacturing, but that easily forecastable fact should have made them change their policy even more in the direction of promoting growth.

Instead the Bank of England has refused to consider cutting rates or creating more liquidity to  facilitate more jobs and activity, whilst practically every other major Central Bank in the world has eased policy in several ways.  China, France, the USA, India and others have also cut taxes to promote growth.

The UK was right to rein in the excessive public deficits reached at the end of the last decade. A period of retrenchment was unfortunately necessary to avoid loss of confidence and enable a recovery to begin. In the last two years  I  have been pressing for some fiscal and monetary relaxation to prevent the slowdown we are now predictably experiencing. The government led by the new Prime Minister is now taking action to ease the fiscal squeeze , which should help growth in a year’s time when the benefits of the next budget start to flow through.

Brexit allows us to change various policies to allow a faster expansion. Of course it is right to keep in place controls on the debts and deficits to avoid excessive debt build up and loss of confidence that can bring. It is also right to allow enough money to circulate to accommodate growth and to allow people to keep enough of the money they earn so their spending can  fuel some growth.

Brexit also allows us to set out policies that improve the amount of food we grow and process at home, and to rebuild our fishing industry landing more of the catch for home processing and consumption. It allows us to take tariffs down on much needed raw materials, foods and components form non EU sources. Meanwhile according to the Political declaration we will be negotiating a Free Trade deal with the  EU at the same as with other important economies around the world.

Thea Conservative Manifesto sets out £3.195 bn of tax cuts for 2020-21, with an increase in the National Insurance threshold giving a tax cut to 31 million employees at a cost to the revenue of £2.17 billion. Business rate cuts and an enhanced Employment  Allowance make up most of the rest.

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


  1. Farmer
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:05 am | Permalink

    If we take down tariffs on food from non EU sources, our farming industry will be killed off overnight. As ever, you are not honest enough to admit to this

    Reply I said zero tariffs on food we cannot grow e.g. oranges

    • Dave Andrews
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:18 am | Permalink

      How about banning all beef imports post Brexit? They tell us we eat too much meat and animal farming is destroying the Amazon rainforest.
      It would mean destroying Irish beef farming rather than our own, but is that a price we are prepared to pay?

    • Lifelogic
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      What about all those lovely old orangeries? Give us cheap on demand energy, some decent tax cuts, far less government and perhaps we can all have our own orangeries – or at least a conservatory/greenhouse lemon or two for our gin.

      Corbyn might even get a heated greenhouse installed on his allotment for his retirement. He certainly deserves one for making his party totally unelectable – with the many disastrous policies that they propose that would destroy the economy & bankrupt the country.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:40 am | Permalink

        If however Corbyn does win then perhaps many of the fairly rich will move to Italy with its new €100K tax cap, almost no inheritance taxes and some excellent & inexpensive housing, nice coasts, good skiing and excellent food and drink too.

        Then we can grow our own citrus fruits and much else outdoors. Perhaps I need to improve my Italian somewhat.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:05 am | Permalink

        Loads & loads of snow in the Alps already and it is only November. Did the climate warming alarmist “experts” not assure us that skiing in the Alps was done for? – about 10 years back I recall.

        Why would anyone trust experts who never get anything right? Be it Climate, the ERM, the EURO, the BoE, the IMF, the ECB, the treasury, the opinion pollsters, the remoaners, the people who pushed diesel engines killing people and all the other alarmist pushing loons.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:38 am | Permalink

          Or indeed the BBC who seem delight in being wrong on almost every major issue.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

          Or people who foolishly think that electric cars are zero emission!

        • Lifelogic
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

          Completely one sided exaggerations on climate change today on World at One from the BBC today again as usual. Lots of talk of “The Scientists” say this and think that – well not the sensible physicists in my experience.

          Why not a single sensible scientist from the sound side of the debate. The BBC should get Dr Piers Corbyn, Prof Richard Lyndsen or Prof Matt Ridley on.

          They are happy to report the endless economic lunacy of Jeremy Corbyn as if it were remotely sensible, but not the sound science views of Physicist Piers his brighter brother. Can something not be done about this damaging, alarmist BBC propaganda. Some more gullible & younger sorts actually fall for it with very damaging results indeed.

          • Martin in Cardiff
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:10 pm | Permalink

            You sure must be scared of Labour rent controls.

            Ever more frantic, your snowstorm of posts and amendments becomes.

            Have you over borrowed?

          • Edward2
            Posted November 26, 2019 at 12:54 am | Permalink

            Would you rent at a loss Martin?
            Simple question.

            In the 1970s your beloved Labour party made being a landlord impossible.
            The result was council housing with waiting lists of several years.

          • Lifelogic
            Posted November 26, 2019 at 3:06 am | Permalink

            The Labour policy in relation to rents controls would be a disaster for tenants, landlords, the economy and the whole of the industry. Good for lawyers and other, largely parasitic, jobs.

          • libertarian
            Posted November 27, 2019 at 9:39 am | Permalink

            Martin ic

            EVERYONE should be scared of rent controls, especially the wave of new homeless it will create as people withdraw their property from the market.

            This 1970’s policy revival is aimed at the ignorant and mindless who just dont understand how things work in the real world and the damage it does ( everywhere its implemented ) You need to get out more

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:18 am | Permalink


      our farming industry will be killed off overnight.

      Would not worry about that old son the BBC last nights Countryfile are doing the job for the politicians. Promoting veganism the latest religion to be sweeping the country it would seem.

      • margaret howard
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:28 pm | Permalink


        ” Promoting veganism the latest religion to be sweeping the country it would seem.”

        After watching Liz Bonnin’s BBC programme tonight on the damage meat eating does to our environment (let alone the moral issues involved) you too might consider that becoming a vegetarian is not such a bad thing after all.

        It might help if you try to imagine what function the various organs meat eaters consume are for.

        Kidneys anyone?

        Wiki – Kidney function:

        “The kidneys excrete a variety of waste products produced by metabolism into the urine.”

        Bon appetite!

        • Edward2
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 1:02 am | Permalink

          Importing avocados and products like quinoa loved by non meat eaters cause environmental problems too.
          Without animals roaming the countryside quietly eating the grasslands we would create other problems.
          Look into the environmental impact of producing veggie products like quorn and tofu as well.

        • libertarian
          Posted November 27, 2019 at 9:40 am | Permalink


          The only trouble with that is that the scientific evidence strongly shows how unhealthy a vegan diet is for humans

    • NickC
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:30 am | Permalink

      Farmer, By leaving the EU, we can have our own trade policy. We set that trade policy for our own advantage.

      • Hope
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

        Ah no, level playing field in a host of areas means the UK is only the same as the EU. Please read the oven ready Servitude plan.

        It would be very foolish to believe any Tory pledge/promise especially in their Manifesto. Please read the key policy issues in last three and you will see quite clearly, to use their speak, they fail to deliver and tell lies.

        • NickC
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

          Hope, You’ve got the wrong man. Please read Farmer’s original comment – I was replying to that, not making a comment on the Boris WA. It is Remains who claim various forms of Remain as Leave, not me. I meant real Leave.

          I am fully aware that the Boris WA is not a trade deal, locks us under EU control, and sets the precedent for a very bad future trade deal indeed. If a Tory government will not resist the Boris WA now, then they are unlikely to resist an equally bad trade deal in the future.

          • Hope
            Posted November 26, 2019 at 8:48 am | Permalink


    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

      And for how long is your party going to replace European Union subsidies for our own farmers, John?

      Surely you don’t expect them to compete with all those farms receiving them on our borders?

      • Edward2
        Posted November 26, 2019 at 1:03 am | Permalink

        The EU have subsidised them for over 40 years to not grow things so we should be OK for a few years.

    • Matt Ryan
      Posted November 26, 2019 at 10:59 am | Permalink

      There are somewhere around 150k farmers in the UK. So we should subsidise them to the detriment (because that’s what it is) of the other 65M of us?

      Farming as a whole won’t go away – it will just change to larger scale than now even. So it’s really only FUD created by the NFU as they don’t want the easy money to go away.

    • libertarian
      Posted November 27, 2019 at 9:44 am | Permalink


      Waitrose has just announced that they will be supply only British Lamb from now on

      Aldi statement

      100% of our fresh everyday meat and poultry in the UK is from British, Red Tractor approved farms. More than 40% of the fresh fruit and vegetables we sell in the UK are also British.

      Maybe youre just going to have to do some proper farming instead of relying on EU subsidies?

  2. Peter Wood
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:19 am | Permalink

    Good Morning,

    So you want to create more cheap money.

    Yield on a 10 yr Gilt in 2000 was 5.75%, in 2009 it was 3.5%, it is now 0.69%. Exactly how low do you want to go, and have you asked the pension funds what their view is?

    Armageddon ahead it seems.

    Reply I wish to see reinstatement of LTROs and supply of liquidity to banking system, with a possibly steeper yield curve as the US is doing.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:07 am | Permalink

      Get bank lending up and bank margins and fees down – with some more real competition in the market and less very misdirected red tape.

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:02 am | Permalink

        Lifelogic, Separate investment banks from retail banks.

    • Hope
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:39 am | Permalink

      There are lots of things we all want but it will not happen under your govt. Johnson claims dither and delay, how would he describe the failed promises over the last three and half years? Same for economy policy and eve main policy issue. Lies lies and more lies. That is why there is no trust in your party. So now we get Tory scare stories to vote for the least worse left wing person to vote for. Not for me.

      Admit it JR, no matter how sensible your ideas might be the conservatism in your party left a long time ago and you are being soundly ignored until you retire.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:36 am | Permalink

    Hammond and Osborne were both complete disasters increasing taxes hugely, tax complexity and fiscal irrationality. As you say the “Bank of England has refused to consider cutting rates or creating more liquidity to facilitate more jobs and activity, whilst practically every other major Central Bank in the world has eased policy in several ways.” Yet we still have Carney in post – why? Is Javid up to the job.

    Brexit should indeed give scope for growth as you suggest. All we need is cheap reliable energy, a bonfire or red tape, far less government, relaxed planning, tax reductions and simplification, competitive banking, freedom and choice in health care and education, scrap student loans for as the pointless university degrees 50% of them. Few should be going unless they can get at least 3Bs at A level and many of the subject offered are of little or no value anyway.

    I have a property loan coming up to renewal a shop with flats above. I am currently paying base plus 1% with HSBC and only borrowing about 30% of the value) with rents about 5% of value. Yet the bank simply do not want to renew it at any price. They say that their new rules and government red tape would force them to charge a margin of nearly 10% why? Yet if you deposit money with them you are lucky to get even 1%. What has gone wrong with the banks and bank red tape? Can JR shed any light on this?

    • Nig l
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:31 am | Permalink

      Basel 111

    • Ian terry
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:12 am | Permalink


      Totally agree with your second paragraph, spot on the money. But who is listening let alone thinking about actually doing something about it?

    • Everhopeful
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:18 am | Permalink

      Does that increase denote a higher demand for loans? Possibly people given up on saving thanks to totally barmy fiscal meddling policy…no returns??
      Re red tape…banks are horribly good at ignoring it when it suits…like with the raided accounts of the deceased! ( Recent unpleasant executor experience. Traumatising ).
      Like govt…banks totally unaccountable..make rules up as they go along!
      Could you re finance elsewhere?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:42 am | Permalink

        Yes will have to refinance in some other way. But might well still have to pay base + circa 4% plus are the fees valuation and the likes. Then Corbyn will doubtless effectively steal the flats off me with rent controls should he get in.

    • APL
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:30 am | Permalink

      Lifelogic: “Yet the bank simply do not want to renew it at any price.”

      Since the government bailed the banks out in 2008, they are no longer in the business of lending money ( NatWest/RBS being notorious for asset stripping viable businesses ), they now manufacture it. And of course, get first go at spending the new money before us peons.

      Of course, holding money is a stupid idea too, since government inflation policy is to devalue your savings and capital by 3% and force down interest rates to 0.75%

      Then they stand by and decry industrial ‘short-termism’ from the safety of the tax funded, pension insulated, expense padded economic sidelines.

    • NickC
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:07 am | Permalink

      Lifelogic, Why give you a loan at base + 1% (or 2%), when the banks can (and do) charge 20% for credit card loans.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

        Indeed though one is secured and the other is not.

  4. formula57
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:39 am | Permalink

    Some fiscal stimulus would seem overdue. Will undoing the Evil Empire-imposed various onerous VAT measures (on hygiene and green products) be permitted in the face of the promised freeze?

  5. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:51 am | Permalink

    Put my rose tinted glasses on, but can’t actually see an awful lot in the Conservative manifesto about those four letter words beginning with f.
    (fish and farm).

    Apart from that as has been said elsewhere it’s a fair copy of the UKIP 2015 manifesto, just a shame it wasn’t the Conservative 2015 manifesto and acted on in the past 4 years.

    • formula57
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:47 am | Permalink

      A “fair copy” perhaps but not a good copy in not promising to abolish either the middle class-clobbering IHT or the England, Wales and NI clobbering Barnett formula.

  6. Lifelogic
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:53 am | Permalink

    Maajid Nawaz on LBC was yesterday suggesting that optimising the tax take at the highest Laffer point rate for tax receipts was someone the idea position to aim for. What a mad policy that would be. People and businesses spend money so much more efficiently than governments do so it is economic lunacy to maximise tax take.

    This would be like managing agents managing a block of flats charging as much as they could up to the point where people were abandoning their flats so the tax taken would increase no more. When clearly they should only charge what is needed to maintain and insure the block.

    The UK government has never been able to raise more than about 45% of GDP in taxes even with tax rates of 98%. This figure is about double what they should be raising and spending/wasting. If you do take more than this one year (perhaps by asset theft) you will get far less the next as you kill the tax base.

    • acorn
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      Laffer disciples should read the IFS summary of the Conservative manifesto, particularly the bit about Corporation Tax. “The government’s estimates imply that cuts to the headline rates of corporation tax from 2010 to 2019 cost £13 billion a year. The additional reduction from 19% to 17% that was due next April would have cost a further £6 billion …”.

      Reply I don’t believe them! Revenues went up a lot

      • Richard1
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:44 am | Permalink

        The IFS has had great difficulty with the corp tax cut. Rates have been cut from 28% to 19% but receipts have risen from under £40bn to nearly £60bn, a classic example of the operation of the Laffer curve. The IFS has been casting around for 101 other reasons this might be so, but we haven’t heard a credible alternative explanation yet.

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:14 am | Permalink

        Acorn, The Laffer curve is just common sense. Ohhh . . . .

      • a-tracy
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:39 am | Permalink

        Acorn, why would the IFS have to use “The government’s estimates”, surely there are actual figures of the receipts now?

        and John who in the government is putting these estimates out?

      • acorn
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

        BTW JR, I am knocked out by the economy boosting massive reductions in taxation in your manifesto. I can see you have had an equally massive influence on Boris and his Treasury. The National Insurance take will drop from £144 billion a year to a £141 billion at this year’s costings.

        Still, if the Polls are saying you will have a majority of 68 seats, why would you give away anything tax wise, to a tax innumerate voting population? Particularly 17,410,742 of them.

        • Edward2
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

          Tax revenues are up.

        • libertarian
          Posted November 27, 2019 at 9:49 am | Permalink


          The tax innumerate public are all labour voters

          People like you without the first clue of how the world operates . The IFS report you quote would have been useful if you read it in full with ALL of its explanations and caveats.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:35 am | Permalink

      somehow (not someone)

  7. Lifelogic
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:58 am | Permalink

    Thanks goodness Hammond, at least, has gone – but many people rather like him are still standing as Conservative candidates why? They might well undermine or even destroy the next government yet again?

    • Nig l
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:00 am | Permalink

      There is only one problem with your interminable free market rants? The politics have left you well behind, I wonder whether you ever had them, and you would never get elected. So little point in them.

      As for Javid. How condescending. From an extraordinary poor background, firstly he became incredibly successful in the City then gave up a massive salary and then shoot to the top of the political ladder.

      Incidentally why should our host comment on HSBCs policy? etc ed
      I would want to get rid of you as well when I can redirect my capital to the Far East and get a better return, even more so as it is under pressure to improve its performance.

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:24 am | Permalink

        Nig1, If Lifelogic’s opinion is in favour of free markets, and JR allows comments, then why shouldn’t LL advocate free markets?

        However, LL seems to be more concerned about Tory MPs like Hammond undermining a (possible) Tory government – as he and other Remains did the last one.

    • Shirley
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:20 am | Permalink

      Agreed. The re-instatement of Brexit blockers to the party undermines all trust in the party to deliver a genuine Brexit. Farage should have put candidates up against the Brexit blockers if they were in a Leave constituency. The Brexit electorate have nobody who supports Leave to vote for in those constituencies, and that loyalty to party MP’s in preference to the voters could lose the Conservatives many seats that could have been won by the Brexit Party. But it’s party before country and its voters, eh?

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:34 am | Permalink

        Dear Shirley–Can’t see how it can be denied that Boris has put Party before Country. He and Nigel working together would have annihilated the hard left but instead we are worrying that Corbyn could still end up as PM

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:27 am | Permalink

        Shirley, Exactly right, unfortunately. Added to which there are Brexit party candidates standing in constituencies where there is a sound Tory Leave challenger to the incumbent Labour Remain.

    • Stred
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:26 am | Permalink

      It will be a good excuse for Boris again when he has to extend and pay again. There is no mention of leaving on WTO in the manifesto if things do not go well in negotiations.

      The manifesto also avoids previous suggestions of a ban on the long distance transport of animals. This would contravene EU law and the EC would rule against it.

      There is a commitment to the Paris agreement for the environmental law to be parallel to the EU. The acceptance of the advice of Gummer’s committee is now in print. Even phrases such as the clustering of industry for carbon capture is taken from the CCC report, with large expenditure for development of this so far unviable process. The CCC proposed that hydrogen will be used but the manifesto uses the word ‘gas’. Boris’s favourite pie in the sky project for fusion power gets a mention.

      The whole thing is a Boris BS handbook with get outs written in.

      • agricola
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

        Silly thing is these politicians take us for fools. It is laid out in easy to understand language in a HoC briefing document in the HoC library, and accessible on the internet.
        Simply put the Boris WA is little different from May’s WA. It fiddles with the NI relationship to make it more confusing and probably unacceptable to NI politicians. The rest is much as May failed with it. It will be like marrying the ugly sister with little prospect of a mistress in sight. The EU is fearful of the mistress it could be far too competitive, something they have schemed to avoid. All they can offer is a threesome with the ugly sister.

  8. Helena
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:13 am | Permalink

    According to David Davis we were meant to have secured top-class free trade deals with all the important economies around the world by September 2018 at the latest. Ian Duncan Smith, Jacob Rees Mogg and you all made similar claims. In fact as of now, November 2019, the number of new trade deals we have is precisely zero, and a whole string of countries – India, US, Canada, Japan, Australia etc – have said they will not waste their time negotiating with the UK until the UK has finalised its future relationship with the Eu and that, anyway, the EU is a much higher priority than the Uk when it comes to fixing a trade deal. What will it take for you Brexiters to apologise for your serial failures and misjudgements?

    Reply I did not state we would do this and was critical at the time of Mrs Mays government that they were unwilling to negotiate a trade agreement ready for our departure. We always said you cannot bring one in before you have left the EU.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:26 am | Permalink

      Yawn. Same old rubbish. We are not allowed to sign free trade deals because we are still in the EU – this is because people like you have stopped us leaving, not sure why IDS should apologise for your actions ?

    • Hope
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:50 am | Permalink

      Irrespective it was your party and govt that made pledges and promises and failed to deliver all. You shouldomhavemousted Mayhab when she strayed from Lancaster speech, no need of two other speeches to renege on what was promised, December visit to Ireland, dishonest behaviour over Chequers, Dishonest Kit Kat policy, 108 times promised to leave by March 2019 to a variety leave promises etc. You had many clear opportunities. It was clear she was a rat and had to be dispatched. You all let it happen.

      • Peter
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:57 am | Permalink

        Correct. They hope we have forgotten or forgiven.

    • Andy
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:55 am | Permalink

      That’s not the point. Leading Brexiteers told us how easy and beneficial all these wonderful new trade deals would be.

      In reality there are none.

      All the deals we’ve done continue what we have – usually on worse terms. Canada has said it is pointless doing a deal as Brexiteers are already offering tariff free access on virtually everything they need.

      Genuinely if there was any economic case for Brexit in 2016 it has long since evaporated – to the point where any of those still spouting it now just sound like lunatics.

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:31 am | Permalink

        Andy, Genuinely, if you think being a vassal province of the EU empire is good for our independence, democracy, and prosperity, it is you who is the lunatic.

        • Andy
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

          We’re not a vassal province. But thanks to your Brexit we will be.

          • NickC
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

            Andy, You never learn do you? Read Declaration 17 (Lisbon) where it is clearly stated that EU law has primacy over all UK law. That makes us a vassal province – good only for extracting money and being told what to do.

      • Timaction
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:28 am | Permalink

        Economic case??????? Its about our sovereign democratic independence as well as economics but federalists just lie and deceive!!!

        • Andy
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

          So why then do people keep making economic arguments? Incidentally your claim that Brexit is about sovereignty also does not stack up – as has been repeatedly shown by how little Brexiteers like sovereignty.

          Brexit for most Brexiteers is all about immigration. You know it. I know it. But most of you are too cowardly to talk about it. Why?

          • NickC
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

            Andy, That’s one strawman after another. If you’re trying to make even a distantly credible case you must address what we Leaves actually think and want. Not what you imagine or contrive as a sound-bite.

            Independence is the key. Everything else flows from re-gaining UK independence – control of our own democracy, economy, courts, laws, money, fish, trade, and borders. And in a democracy, the people are sovereign. Never again should our politicians hand over our sovereignty: it’s not theirs to give.

            We generally believe that we will be economically better off out. But I suspect most of us would still have voted to Leave even if that were not the case. Without an extra layer of government stealing our fish and our money, we start off on a good footing. Control of our borders is also critical – England is the densest populated nation in the EU.

            If you actually want to know – all you have to do is ask, even after months of your spite and bile.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

            Another pathetic smear from you.
            One minute you make hateful remarks about senior citizens of this country, now you infer all that want an independent UK are somehow racist.
            As the election approaches you are the one getting more extremist.

    • Richard1
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:41 am | Permalink

      It would be good if you would check facts and perhaps think before posting. 2/3 of the trade deals we currently have through the EU have been novated to the UK, covering 70% of applicable trade. Perhaps you could apologise the asserting on numerous occasions that this would not happen?

      It has always been abundantly clear that the UK cannot negotiate new trade deals with third countries until we have actually left the EU. That will have to start in February. Perhaps you are right and all these countries will say no interest in an FTA with the UK. More likely, based on statements to date, is you will be as wrong as you have been on novation of the EU deals. Then we can ask you for another apology.

      • Andy
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

        We have copied across some – not all – some of the EU deals. Many on worse terms. None on better terms. You are claiming that as a success.

        You want me to apologise? Grow up. This mess belongs entirely to people like you and we will never let you forget it.

        • NickC
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

          Andy, They are not on worse terms: most are identical. And the deals do not depend on the EU they depend on the trading partner. You said the deals would not happen, that is why you should apologise.

          This mess is solely down to Remains like you who have thrown every trick in the book, and some that are not, at overturning our valid, legal, democratic, decision to Leave. If the government had followed my (and many others) advice we would have been out (and I mean fully out) by July 2017.

        • Edward2
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

          Presumably you like the current trading terms so why dont you like those terms continuing?

    • Fedupsoutherner
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

      Helena What is the point of you reading this blog if nothing sinks in? You really are a bore going on about things that are impossible all the time people like you make us stay in the EU for ever and a day. I can’t put on paper what I would like to do to people like you who have overturned democracy in this country.

  9. Ian Wragg
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    But there isn’t going to be a real Brexit with Boris,s awful WA. We are going to be locked into years of negotiations whilst the EU screws every concession out of us, nullifying the real Brexit.
    Don’t tell me we won’t extend the transition period because we know Boris is a serial lier.

    • Ian Wragg
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:49 am | Permalink

      We already have Macron saying we must have shared access to UK fishing waters, Spain joint sovereignty over Gibraltar and Germany not including services. We can see the results even now when you refuse to contemplate no deal.

      • Garland
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:21 am | Permalink

        You are 100% right Ian. We have seen that every step of the way the UK folds. It will fold again on fish, on Gib, on everything. Why? Because the UK is smaller and weaker than the EU. Haven’t you learned that yet? Haven’t you learned that Brexit means only a weaker Britain and humiliation in the eyes of the world?

        • Leslie Singleton
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:39 am | Permalink

          Dear Garland–Not according to my American friends who think we are mad even to consider staying in

          • margaret howard
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

            Leslie Singleton

            ” my American friends who think we are mad even to consider staying in”

            I bet they are already rubbing their hands in expectation to sell us their dairy/meat products which the EU has banned because they fall way below the EU’s high standards.

            And we will be even more beholden to them than we already are earning us the soubriquet of ‘America’s poodle’. They say ‘jump’ and we answer ‘how high’.

            Any more war games? What fun!

          • Edward2
            Posted November 26, 2019 at 1:06 am | Permalink

            Buy USA products if you want to Margaret.
            They will be labelled.
            You have free choice.

        • NickC
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:34 am | Permalink

          Garland, Your theory might be correct if say, S Korea was mightier than the EU. Advertising that your political hero is a bully doesn’t help your case.

        • ian wragg
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:52 am | Permalink

          What utter garbage, we as a nation are very strong but unfortunately we are led in the main by very weak politicians who despite their rhetoric would prefer we stay shackled to the EU.
          You and your soul mate Andy may see us as a week and supplicant nation but I certainly don’t.

        • Fred H
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:19 am | Permalink

          nothing to do with smaller and weaker. Our politicians and the Establishment have no balls. Total cowards. Farage seems the only person with a will to fight.

        • Timaction
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:35 am | Permalink

          The UK is smaller and weaker! No, no,no. It’s the legacies who are smaller and weaker. Just walk away from this political project. Why should we give them our fish? Can we take their coal or vineyards. That’s discriminatory in EU’s eyes. Its not supposed to be a shared asset. It’s that they have got used to a free lunch at our expense. £1 billion of English taxpayers money a month for……….a massive trade deficit and nothing more!

    • Simeon
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:16 am | Permalink

      Come come sir. A little faith. Assuming BJ is a big fat liar who can’t be trusted as far as he can be kicked for a moment, then we at least have a chance that he will do something other than what he promises. In at least a couple of all the possible universes that theoretically exist, we will actually leave the EU for real. 4 Real man! And in one of those universes, BJ will suffer some non-fatal but utterly incapacitating mishap that sees him replaced at no. 10 by our kind host who will then lead us to the sunlit-uplands. All – contrary to appearances, and all sound reasoning, which does indeed suuggest that we are completely and utterly fracked – is not lost.

      • Simeon
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:20 am | Permalink

        Apologies for my off-colour language. One thing we most certainly are not is ‘fracked’. Oh that we were…

      • Peter Wood
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:45 am | Permalink

        Chuckle… another fan of Douglas Adams!

        But seriously, somebody needs to get to the truth of the difference between BJ’s ‘NEW’ deal, and Mrs. May’s ‘turd’ of a deal. My efforts suggest, as far as the WA deal is concerned, its the same, only the non-binding declaration is changed. So is BJ lying? AGAIN!

        Reply There is a big difference over NI and staying in the customs union.

        • Ian Wragg
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

          Apparently 46 pages have been changed but 450 plus pages remain the same
          Fiscal, environmental, social and many other competences to follow EU rules plus keeping a Level playing field for trade
          NI to stay in the Customs Union and UK government to collect tariffs for a foreign government.
          Give us some credit John.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      Maybe. But Remain will be off the table too.

    • Andy
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      The WA is Brexit. It is what you voted for in 2016. Farage has accepted it is what Brexit means – this is why he took lots of money from potential candidates and then didn’t let them run.

      I told you all when Mrs May signed her deal that is basically what Brexit meant and you all screamed and shouted at me. I was right. The one thing I hadn’t reckoned with was Boris Johnson renegotiating the deal to make it even worse. So bad even May had rejected it.

      Brexit has been such a farce that it is dead on arrival. It is not a question of ‘if’ we undo it, it is a question of when.

      • Richard1
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:35 am | Permalink

        No You were completely wrong. The Boris deal, whilst it does include some unsatis elements during the withdrawal phase, allows an independent trade and regulatory policy. It is fundamentally different from the May deal, in a way you and many others said was inconceivable.

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:42 am | Permalink

        Andy, The WA, whether May’s or Boris’s, is not Brexit. Nor is it a trade deal. No one before the 23 Jun 2016 vote was in any doubt that Brexit meant British exit from the EU treaties – restoring UK control of our laws, trade, money, fish and borders. Far from being right, you couldn’t have been more wrong – or delusional.

        • glen cullen
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

          100% agree the WA isnt brexit

      • Fred H
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:22 am | Permalink

        Andy – you and the thousands in media, politics and have vested interest just might get what you want – total abdication of any balls.

        • Andy
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

          No. I am just laughing at you. I told you Brexit would be rubbish and it is. And it is entirely the fault of people like you. It is fun watching you all get angry.

          • NickC
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

            Andy, It sounds like you are angry. That’s what you’ve always sounded like. And now a little desperate too. Do you finally realise that we are going to Leave, however badly? Perhaps if the Tories can only form a government in coalition with the Brexit party you can say goodbye to your eurotrash empire. And good riddance.

          • Edward2
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:55 pm | Permalink

            The only angry person I see on here is you Andy.
            As the inevitable election result approaches you seem to be getting even more angry.
            Hilarious to watch.

          • Fred H
            Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

            Andy … I mean you might get remain after all, and you and yours will have to sit toothless to watch and endure economic and political wilderness for the UK. At least I will not have to endure it, but you will, although with no NHS you might throw off the mortal coil sooner than you think.

      • DavidJ
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

        The WA is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the Brexit that we voted for. There was no half in / half out option on the ballot paper. The only people it will benefit are the remainers hoping to keep us in.

        • NickC
          Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

          DavidJ, Spot on.

  10. Sea Warrior
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    I want to see the next government look at every fiscal decision through the two lenses of GDP/CAPITA and impact on the deficit. A simple focus on GDP growth isn’t that helpful.

  11. Lifelogic
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    Tim Stanley in the telegraph today is surely right.

    “The Tories have conceded too much to Labour – While they should win a majority this time, they have not made the case for frugality and freedom.”

    Perhaps, post the election, they will do the sensible thing and cut back on the bloated, inept & misguided state sector that damages and suffocates the productive economy so much. Move to far lower tax and allow people have freedom and choice as to how they spend their own money. Taxpayers broadly do not want the government to spend it for them (nearly always very inefficiently indeed and on things that they largely did not really want anyway). A great deal is even spent doing positive damage.

    • Nig l
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:03 am | Permalink

      When you say ‘tax payers’ please say ‘this taxpayer.

      • NickC
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:44 am | Permalink

        Nig1, Why should he say “this taxpayer” when he means “taxpayers”. Don’t you want your taxes spent efficiently? If so you are in a decided minority.

      • Mark Cookman
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:24 am | Permalink

        no grumble from ‘this taxpayer’ on Lifelogic as spokesman

      • Lifelogic
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

        Do you really want to give more of your money to government to spend it for you on (what they, usually wrongly, think you might want)? Do many tax payers really think this?

    • Timaction
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:48 am | Permalink

      Go walk around any Council or public service/quango/Home Office etc offices and see the number of people absent from their desks “working from home”, or on computers looking at social media and other non work sites, until a senior manager walks by. I have and its depressing. We need radical reform. This includes the way we are governed and our voting system and the ineptitude of Governments and their civil serpents. When are the “Kit Kats being prosecuted? When is Ollys Knighthood being taken back. It can’t be right that I have no choice other than legacy parties in this election yet they hungrily ravish my taxes for foreign aid, health and public services that have no control on who gets them. Totally out of touch legacies.

  12. Mark B
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:36 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    So the conservatives are spending vast amounts of money all the while the same people will be cutting taxes that would normally fund such largess. Something does not seem right ? 😉

    The UK was right to rein in the excessive public deficits reached at the end of the last decade.

    The UK did not, the UK Government did. Spending for Scotland was increased after the 2015 GE. Only England experienced true austerity. And in anycase, was it not the EU that made us reduce our deficits ? 😉

    As for the rest in this piece on the benefits on BREXIT, all I can say is; We don’t believe you !” 😉

    If we go through with the WA we are locked into regulatory alignment. That and that alone scuppers most of the above. As for fishing ? Nothing has changed. The EU still get access to our waters as before.

    Alexander Johnson’s manifesto along with his WA and PD put the word CON in the CONservative Party.

    • JoolsB
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      Spot on Mark. Funny how whilst English services were cut to the bone year after year, Hammond could always manage to find a few extra billions at every budget for the rest of the UK. And as usual UK MPs squatting in English seats never uttered one word of protest as they won’t if England ends up with the SNP propping up a minority Labour Government dictating policies that only affect England.

      • Mark B
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:52 am | Permalink

        If there is an Labour / SNP coalition then expect Indy’ Ref’ 2.0. Only this time I hope one Gordon Brown does not get Corbyn, Johnson and Swinson to sign another piece of paper, committing the UK (England) to paying the Scots more to Remain. I want them out ! We can then spend the next four years dilly-dallying and telling them (Scots) that they did not know what they were voting for, what independence really means, and that they are just a bunch of racist bigots who should be offered another, Peoples-people vote.

    • Hope
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:55 am | Permalink

      Not just acces to our waters, the EU controls quotas in favour of other EU countries to our waters and will continue to do so under Johnson’s oven ready Surrender.

    • David
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:55 am | Permalink

      Very true the WA is worse than staying in the EU.

  13. Dominic
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:52 am | Permalink

    People who perform a task in return for a wage or termed employees not workers. That’s Marxist ideology and infers a ‘victim of capitalist exploitation’. We are exhausted by the modern political class’s obsession with ‘victim’ based politically driven legislation. We know it’s a contrivance and malicious

    Most of those who contribute to this blog continually call for reform not more spending or as my father calls it ‘spending to grease the wheels of State politics’. More spending is an admission of defeat. Reform is a statement of intent to confront vested interest (Labour and the unions). The former involves zero possibility of conflict. The latter involves a battle that would define this nation.

    Unfortunately for the nation, we have a political class who since 1990 have taken the convenient option that involves zero conflict and allows the avoidance of taking decisions that necessarily leads to grievance as vested interests fight back to retain their privileges and political power

    Let the Tories keep sliding leftwards in what is a victory for the left and then we’ll pick up the pieces of that lack of conviction and principle in around 25 years time

    • eeyore
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:41 am | Permalink

      “Let the Tories keep sliding leftwards in what is a victory for the left …”. Two points:

      1. When a political vacuum opens up (ie votes become available) someone will fill it. Maybe the Tories will move to the right in the coming decade and Labour will be dragged rightward after them, as happened in the 1990s.

      2. Those involved with power always need more. No government wants less money, no politician less politics and no civil servant less administration. Our duty as voters is to remind them whose interests they really serve.

    • Mark B
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      Great post.

      We saw what consensus politics did for the UK in the 60’s and 70’s. It took the shock of the Winter of Discontent to usher in much needed and urgent change. It hurt. It hurt a lot of people but, it would have hurt anyway such was the state of the UK industry.

      Difficult, painful but necessary decisions were made. It required strong leadership and an iron will, coupled with a belief. What do we have to day ? Little women in men’s suits.

      • Timaction
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:53 am | Permalink

        We need a “Thatcher” or a “Churchill” or a “Farage” but we have do or die “Johnstone” and before him, “We will be leaving on the 31st March 2019” Mayhab. No point in voting in the present corrupted system! Not fit for the 21st Century and we can all see it!

  14. Simeon
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Sir John,

    I sense you’re coming round to the idea of BJ’s Brexit, or at the very least have made peace with the idea that this is what Brexit is. (Well, it was either that or nasty Mr Corbyn in no. 10, and we really couldn’t have that.) If so, good for you. It’s clear just how much your party means to you, and to be able to continue to be a part of it must be a great relief. On a personal level, I’m happy for you.

    I’m happy for me too. I look forward to pocketing those extra few pounds HMRC will not be relieving me of. (Assuming I can trust BJ and his manifesto. I can do that, can’t I?) I think I’ll pop them in my piggy bank, just in case that nice Mr Johnson needs a little bit extra from me next time to pay for all those lovely presents he’s getting me for Christmas. (He will be getting me something nice, just like he promised, won’t he? I just know he’s not going to die in a ditch on his way to Argos, or Poundstretcher, or the local garbage dump, or wherever it is he’s sourcing me festive gift…)

    Here’s to a Corbyn-neutral Christmas! Cheers everyone!

    Reply I have not changed my views on Brexit which have been clearly stated here.

    • Simeon
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply,

      Sir John, thank you as ever for replying. I do appreciate your willingness to come out and bat, and indeed to face some pretty tasty chin music.

      I do not doubt either that you have clearly stated your views on Brexit here, or that they remain the same. I was not suggesting otherwise. However, you will appreciate that your own personal view is not really the issue. There is virtually no prospect of a one-man rebellion being decisive if and when WA2 arises once more. In that respect, it is unnecessary to ask how you would vote.

      What does matter is your party’s policy, which clearly does not agree with your views. Indeed, so many of your party’s policies in areas other than Brexit do not agree with your views – which is much to your credit! And yet you continue to come out and bat for the Tory XI.

      It is puzzling, to say the least.

      • Fred H
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

        Simeon …….often I find myself thinking, please Sir John join the Brexit party ( better still take it over). I cannot see our host reconciling himself to the downhill slide of the party he has supported all these years.

        • Simeon
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 7:22 am | Permalink

          With the utmost respect to our kind host, I think his time to lead a political party has past. It’s a shame his party stuck with Major back in the mid ’90s. But had he, and other Tory MPs (and figures from other parties also?) with similar convictions, joined the Brexit party six months ago, I believe Brexit could have actually happened. At the very least, there would be a serious challenge to the bankrupt orthodoxy.

  15. Everhopeful
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:24 am | Permalink

    When lowering “rates” is mentioned I assume that means interest rates? If it does it seems like a rather casual dismissal of all those who assumed they would be able to survive on at least “normal” interest rates on savings/pensions etc. Haven’t rates been historically low for 10 years? Doesn’t that cut spending power? No “grey pound” ?

    Do I believe in Brexit any more? Not when I consider the strange, strange carry on in Parliament over the past 3 years.
    Not when I consider the Alice in Wonderland sudden acceptance of a rehashed May-Deal.
    Hope I’ve got it wrong but….
    All I can see is more building ( only necessary because of UN/EU insisting on mass immigration into Europe), more overcrowding, more borrowing.

    Does anybody ever give a thought for unfortunate young couples ( escaping our destroyed cities) caught up in dodgy financial package mortgages…never-pay-off-in-a-lifetime loans on leasehold, chucked-up shacks??
    And no..nice 1950-style jobs with a career structure and pay rises and security no longer exist…so there will be no trip up the property ladder for them. Just sitting there as the surrounding houses abandoned by those who can not keep up repayments become more and more run down by a succession of tenants.

    Those who want to keep us in the EU should take a hike around the country and just LOOK with open eyes. It has not worked in 45 years and it is getting worse.

  16. BW
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    Nothing in the manifesto for the millions of women born in the 50’s robbed of their pensions. With insufficient time to plan alternatives. £40000 plus they have lost. Think of that as spending power on the high street. Oddly enough we still find money to give to anyone who jumps of a truck on the M20.

    • David
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:54 am | Permalink

      Why should women retire before men? They were told that this was ending in the 90s.

      • BW
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

        Because those born in the 50’s were not given sufficient time to adjust.

        • a-tracy
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

          Why don’t the media, the tv news and others actually go back through the archives and actually show just how often this was discussed from 1993 onwards, how many newspaper articles were written about it. How many programs, GMTV, they all informed people about it.

    • a-tracy
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:36 am | Permalink

      The first act to equalise women’s and men’s pension age was 1995, it was widely broadcast at the time, in fact people like me were up in arms about it. If 25% of women don’t watch the news or read newspapers were they robbed and if so who by, the Labour party took over in 1997, they didn’t overturn this act, they were responsible for informing people during the next decade. The Pensions Act came into being in Labour’s period in office 2007 to increase everyone’s pension age to 66, 67 and 68 google Hansard. Lord Turner’s Pension commission spent 3 years under the Labour government.

      Corbyn isn’t going to be able to get this money just from the top 5% in order to placade his unionised workforce who were the main women who could retire in their 50’s with final salary pensions. The Labour party already ‘robbed’ to use your words private pension holders who don’t pay into their coffers, how much more is his Labour government planning to take from them?

    • JoolsB
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

      Of which I am one and have had to take up work again and drag my 73 year old husband out of retirement to help make ends meet as his private pension was hit by Labour’s economic crisis. Neither of us will even benefit from the Tories NI rises in allowances. I am a year older than Theresa May but she’ll be alright on her £100,000 taxpayer provided pension along with all the other MPs and those in the public sector on their final salary gold plated pensions which the rest of us are made to pay for but can only dream of for ourselves.

  17. agricola
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    Yes government should lay the table in such a way that the diners, the UK population and invited guests, should wish to invest. By doing so wealth is created for companies and individuals who spend money they now have, creating further commercial activity.

    Yesterday I chatted with one small industrialist who confirmed that he and his customers were holding back awaiting the resolution of Brexit. They want a clear idea of what the future market place will look like, before making their plans for the future.

    Another relative of his, a retired dentist and lifelong socialist finds himself between a rock and a hard place. He cannot intellectually vote marxist or anti semetic. They are not his idea of christian socialism. He does not wish a Lib/Dem government to become drug dealers because canabis is a gateway drug with negative consequences for many, while acknowledging in the short term it deprives criminals of the trade. This puts him off voting for them. He accepts that against a lifetime of voting Labour he may have to bite the bullet and vote Tory.

    I find myself in the same dilema for different reasons. A lifelong Conservative voter with a Tory remain MP who will have only signed up to WA2 for career and ministerial continuation. Instinctively knowing WA2 is bad, just like WA1, and being aware that the Irish border is a totally artificial EU construct, that what I see as essential componets of a sovereign state may be negotiated away as part of a FTA negotiation, I find myself a very worried voter. I cannot for the life of me understand why a Conservative government should be selling a camel dressed as a horse to it’s supporters when with a majority they can have the horse. Is it out of weakness or is it a Baldrick inspired cunning plan.

    • Hope
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

      How many times do you have to be punched on the nose before you realise the person does not like You?

      • Mark B
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:17 pm | Permalink

        EXACTLY !!!

    • NickC
      Posted November 26, 2019 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

      Agricola, That was a wonderful summary of the dilemmas which voters face.

  18. Martin in Cardiff
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:38 am | Permalink

    However unimpressive growth figures might be, John will, I think, claim that they are better than if the UK had remained in the European Union.

    That would be impossible to prove conclusively to be false, and so such claims may be made very freely.

    We will have to wait until significant sections of commerce identify the very specific damage that exit has done for a body of evidence to be gathered.

    I predict that it will soon become overwhelming.

    Reply Not so. You also have to identify all the extra business at home and to non EU countries that Brexit enables.

    • Richard1
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:32 am | Permalink

      We will have to compare post-Brexit UK with the EU to make a judgment. In the 3 years since referendum, contrary to received opinion, the UK has performed more or less in line with the EU. The pressure on the next govt to demonstrate outperformance will be positive.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:44 am | Permalink

      If Martin’s prediction is wrong he can pretend it was not a prediction …

      “No, those things were not predicted … “

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

        No, I won’t.

        My earlier post to which you kindly link is true.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 10:06 am | Permalink

          No, it was not true, and you should be ashamed of yourself for persisting with a proven falsehood.

        • NickC
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

          Martin, Exceptional! Your posts are usually untrue.

    • NickC
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:12 am | Permalink

      Martin, No one “knows” the future. Yet you and other Remains continually prophesy certain doom for our quest for independence. You are still doing it here – pretending that “significant sections of commerce” will definitely reveal the overwhelming “damage that exit has done”. And based on what?

      Post WW2 before the UK joined the EEC, we had more GDP growth and less instability than after. That can happen again. Changes will occur – businesses will have to adapt – but overall the evidence shows we will be better off out. Certainly your certainty of damage not offset by gains is delusional.

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

        No, but people know pretty well, for instance like the steel workers now do – as their market evaporates because of the tariffs that the European Union would impose on their products – that leaving the European Union is not in their particular interests.

        You can compile your own list of such classes of people as they arise.

        • Edward2
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 7:54 am | Permalink

          Tell us what has happened to the UK steel industry whilst we have been members of the EU.

        • NickC
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

          Martin, The UK steel industry shrinks because of recent world surpluses of steel at low prices. Your EU empire prevented the UK subsidising our steel industry.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

      Thank you John.

      I’ll leave that to ONS, thanks.

    • margaret howard
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

      Reply to reply

      “Reply Not so. You also have to identify all the extra business at home and to non EU countries that Brexit enables”

      Can you name some?

      • NickC
        Posted November 26, 2019 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

        Margaret H, All the businesses that have prepared for Brexit and will survive and prosper, plus all the businesses that change their products and services to suit the new conditions, plus all the new businesses set up to exploit the new conditions.

        What? You think we’ll all be like you and sit on our hands just wailing because we’re no longer controlled by your EU empire?

  19. Steve Reay
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:40 am | Permalink

    Afraid Boris didn’t go far enough with NHS parking. Parking eye is a disgraceful company.

    • JoolsB
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

      Yet another thing only we mugs the English have to pay for. It’s already free in Scotland, Wales & NI.

  20. BW
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:44 am | Permalink

    Sir John. Manifestos aside, just for a minute. With the election very close, Boris has said that all conservatives standing at the election have signed up to his agreement. Most commentators see little difference in the Boris deal and the May deal. Worst of all it keeps us answerable and subservient to the ECJ.
    At the moment I don’t want The Boris deal. I wanted a clean break.
    Is there a succinct answer on why you have moved to support this deal. As I see it it is the Boris deal or nothing which is not the best reason to give a vote.

    Reply I will set out the position on Brexit when I have completed my study of the Manifesto. I strongly support it where it says we will not extend beyond December 2020 and will take back control of our laws, our money and our borders.

    • Richard1
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:30 am | Permalink

      It is fundamentally different from the May deal as it allows an independent trade and regulatory policy. The May deal committed to never pursuing that.

      • Mark B
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:01 am | Permalink

        Only for the Mainland UK. Northern Ireland has been partitioned off to the EU (RoI). That was the price we had to pay and, that is only the start. Spain have mooted that they want joint sovereignty over Gib’. The French are demanding, as are others, to unfettered access to our waters with no reciprocation to our fishermen. No independent foreign policy as, if the EU disagree on something, we have to follow them.

        Your saviour is our destroyer.

      • glen cullen
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:00 am | Permalink

        if it walks like a duck etc…..its the same deal

      • Ian Wragg
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:43 am | Permalink

        But the WA states we keep a Level playing field which prevents us from diverging. This will be overseen by the ECJ.
        The WA is toxic and really an association agreement similar to the Ukraine awaiting membership.
        Don’t forget NI will still be under EU control via the customs union.

    • The Prangwizard
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:13 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply.

      The problem is we don’t believe it. And I for one don’t like reading naive comments.

    • agricola
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:31 am | Permalink

      If Boris is telling the truth, you JR and all conservative candidates have signed up to WA2. From everything you have said and written to date you still believe in a clean break via the WTO route. I believe in and agree with you that a clean break is the only way to go if we wish to maintain the integrity of our sovereignty. That being said, the ratification of WA2 will not be a walk in the park. A Conservative majority renders WA2 as surplus to requirements. A clean break gives us our sovereignty in every detail. The burdens that have been allowed in WA2, son of WA1, are rendered null and void. There are no aspects of our sovereignty, like fishing rights, that are subject to negotiation. They can be licenced if we wish but under our control. An FTA becomes a ring fenced entity, that the EU either want or not. It is not subject to us giving the EU anything other than free access to our market or what is left of it, after lengthy negotiation time. We having discovered that much of what we buy from the EU can be bought more competitively from elsewhere in the World.

      For those who excite themselves over the Irish border I would say that there is no piece of information required by either side that cannot be distributed electronically to any agency involved. If criminality is suspected then it can be checked at any stage by either side. At the end of the day cross border trade is less significant for the UK than it is for the Irish.

      On past performance, extention promises to the end of 2020 are meaningless. Politicians are in overdraft on extention promises. In any case is is not required on voyage if you follow my logic from a position of majority.

    • L Jones
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:46 am | Permalink

      We never did need any sort of ”deal”, trade or otherwise, to leave the EU. This smoke-and-mirrors stuff is being pursued, excluding any discussion about simply leaving, and talking ”deals” afterwards. We all know trade will continue.
      It is outrageous that our government will still go on giving the EU our money for months, if not years, to come. Talk of ‘2020’ reminds us that the can is well and truly being given a huge kick down the road.
      We should have been out of the EU’s clutches by now. Mr BJ didn’t have the courtesy to address us directly on 1 November about his regrets that he’d had to break his promises – until that day I almost believed in him. It’s taken a GE to galvanise him into seeking our support, yet again promising Brexit after even more months (2020 for crying out loud!) of kowtowing to his EU ”friends” and offering them his new-old-new-old ”WA” as if we are the supplicant. It’s not Brexit. No wonder they’re pleased with him.

      Well, I’m not.

      • DavidJ
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

        My thoughts too; well said.

    • Fred H
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:34 am | Permalink

      reply to reply …. you don’t say WHEN ‘we will take back control of our laws, our money and our borders. ‘

      No mention of continuing to pay the EU for years to come, claims on our territorial waters, ECJ being the supreme court in certain matters, many subjects yet to be discussed in the PD.

      • dixie
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

        no mention of defence in the manifesto either, as part of the “oven-ready” rubbish or otherwise.

        Reply Yes, a boost announced for defence spending along * with material on NATO , 5 Eyes etc

        • dixie
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 8:45 am | Permalink

          I stand corrected (pp 51-53) – never trust Adobe search

    • Timaction
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:57 am | Permalink

      ………………………. we will not extend beyond December 2020 and will take back control of our laws, our money and our borders………………

      Sorry Sir John, you believe that? I have a bridge I can sell to you! Do or die!

  21. Alec
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    So the solution is to print more money to convince people they’re getting richer whilst actually extorting even more stealth taxes. I remember the dim and distant past when some politicians advocated sound money and small government. That certainly wouldn’t happen now and absolutely not under socialist Boris. The politicial system is offering nothing at all except a few bribes for the gullible and a fake brexit.

  22. Dominic
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:28 am | Permalink

    ‘and to allow people to keep enough of the money they earn’. So the State ‘allow’s’ us to keep our own money does it? I always thought we allowed the State to deduct an amount of money from our earnings rather than the other way around. This simple sentence and the inference contained therein reveals precisely what the Tory party’s become. A party that embraces an all dominant political State with the real world individual as a mere vessel

    We all yearn for a Thatcher MK2 before this sinister political class takes control of all aspects of our lives

  23. Fred H
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    What a disappointment in the Boris launch and the substance of it. Getting Brexit done means another several years of being trussed up by the continuing EU rules and costs. Growth is only going to happen after people get over the thoroughly shameful backtrack over the essential requirements of leaving the EU. I fear most will feel distinctly underwhelmed, if not disillusioned.

  24. Mike Wilson
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    And, as always, the basic premise of the whole article is the apparent desirability of ‘GROWTH’. And the alleged and assumed need to cut base rate from its current exorbitant rate! I’m surprised, Mr. Redwood, that you don’t suggest the government borrows money at low rates and gives it to people to spend. Why not borrow enough money to take over every mortgage in the country? You could borrow say 2 trillion at 0.5% and take over every mortgage in the country with borrowers paying 1%. Think of the money the government would make! Think of all the new disposable income being spent in the economy – creating GROWTH! – that mortgagees would have to spend. This, clearly, is an idea of some genius. Why don’t you propose the nationalisation of mortgages?

    • Edward2
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

      You forget the costs of administering these mortgages and the cost of a percentage defaulting.

      • Mike Wilson
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:49 pm | Permalink

        The costs of administering are trivial. There are plenty of mortgages around these days at 1.99%. Any defaults would turn the property in question immediately into a council house on which rent would be charged. It’s win-win and doubles all round.

        • Edward2
          Posted November 26, 2019 at 1:11 am | Permalink

          Costs of bad debts and administration are certainly not trivial.
          Set yourself up and make money if you think 0.5% will make you rich.
          Big difference compared to 1.99% over 25 years plus fees for a perfect borrower.
          Plainly you do not have any experience of this sector.

  25. Gurty Thrumpwhistle
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    Sky News is giving out 10 winners one plastic throw-away coffee cup each
    It is having John Bercow as an Election Night guest
    Every day and in every way Sky News gets better and better

  26. Mike Stallard
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    Boris Johnson has promised to give a lot of money to the NHS, the Police and Education. I do hope it all goes to nurses and doctors and paramedics and teachers and policemen and police women. I do hope it won’t just be swallowed up in vast pay increases for “the good and great” and also in growing the bureaucracy (aka “the end of austerity”).
    At the same time, the Conservative Manifesto promised, for the next five years, not to increase the three major taxes.
    I do hope that this is correct…

  27. NickC
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:27 am | Permalink

    JR, Capitulating to the EU in so many areas, as the Boris WA does, entrenches a future trade deal that does the same. The EU will never agree a fair trade deal with the UK. Ever.

    Reply Then we should not sign one.

    • Simeon
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:01 am | Permalink

      But you can bet your bottom Euro we will, despite our kind host’s protestations, because our kind host is but one very small voice in a choir singing from BJ’s hymn sheet, songs of praise to the Remainer establishment and the European Project.

    • agricola
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:35 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply
      Or wait around while the circus performs.

    • MPC
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:55 am | Permalink

      Having skimmed the Conservative manifesto the commitment not to extend beyond end 2020 is clear and in bold type. So we still need a risk management plan for the possibility of leaving without an FTA in 2020. If that were to be comprehensive it would persuade the pessimistic Remainers including those who contribute to this site. If the Tories achieve a decent majority there’s no reason why the govt cannot put pressure on the EU: stress to them that we’re leaving fully by Dec 2020 and therefore ‘the clock is ticking'(!); insist on alternate meetings with the EC in Brussels and London; be polite but firm and reasonable: the manifesto states we will ‘ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters – we could agree say a 5-10 year period to full control on an annual percentage increase basis, which would enable us to build our domestic fishing fleet capacity.

      • Fred H
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

        with a majority the Conservatives under Boris’ regular claims SHOULD announce LEAVE forthwith – no more discussions and sleight of hand and lies….OUT DAMNED SPOT.

        Trust them, and him? Not likely.

      • miami.mode
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

        MPC, if we leave at the end of 2020 without a deal, we will still have signed up to WA2. If Boris Johnson says all prospective Conservative MPs must agree to it, have they all had the small print explained to them?

    • NickC
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:20 am | Permalink

      JR, Indeed, we should not. But on past performance we will.

    • Fred H
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:40 am | Permalink

      I’m understanding that all Conservatives standing for election support the manifesto AND Boris’ WA mk2. I won’t ask you the direct question. I don’t have a Brexit candidate after my vote, and hope I will be able to ‘lend’ you mine.

    • forthurst
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

      Reply to Reply

      Michel Barnier has already pored cold water on a negotiation being completed by the end of 2020. When the secret negotiations carry on into 2021, at one point does JR acknowledge that the Tory Party is a Remain party and has successfully hoodwinked the electorate again?

      Reply Not true

      • Fred H
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

        Why would the EU be reasonable and ‘and in a friendly spirit’ assist UK in completing the PD areas by 31/12/2020? We will be back in the confrontation – LEAVE( with no deal) OR extend ad infinitum……

        A shafting worse than the WA mk2.

  28. Irene
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    Strange that you use the word ‘workers’ to describe 31 million people in salaried employment. You have created a divide between employers and employees with your sloppy language. I’ve never really thought of myself as a worker, even though I began my working life as an employee. Perhaps employers are shirkers, while employees are workers. Never considered it in those terms before now. You have shone a light on how MPs view things.

    Reply I vary words used to provide variety to the prose. I see every employee as a valued person, part of a team to deliver good service.

    • Higher than sum
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:47 am | Permalink

      I’ve always considered ‘salaried’ staff as those workers not bright enough to get paid properly for working overtime and allowing employers the use of their money for more than a week without charging them for the loan.
      I see your point, though I need to stand on a rotten old box and look down.

    • Dominic
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:54 am | Permalink

      I don’t believe Mr Redwood views the world through a collectivist prism. I believe he is a honorable person but as a politician his and many like him have become seduced by socialist language. Socialist Labour and their political language is a virus. It treats people as mere political capital to be abused for political ends.

      Whereas Thatcher viewed human beings as real world individuals in their own right this political class have embraced the language of the academic with their societal narrative (which of course is a political narrative)

      I still believe the Tory party can be saved from the socialist virus that’s infected them. A belief that each person must sacrifice their separateness to the sheep-herding orthodoxy of the leftist political class

      Well, I for one refuse to be treated like sheep to be herded with a manipulate and deceitful political ideology

    • Irene
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:00 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply: I accept your desire to vary the words you use. However, even according to the website, there is a vast difference between a ‘worker’ and an ’employee’, with a worker being afforded far fewer rights during their contract of employment (whether written or not) than the rights made available to an employee. I doubt that there are 31 million workers based on the descriptions of the employment status under employment law and tax law.

      Reply I have switched it back! It was not significant.

    • agricola
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:41 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply.
      I often struggle to vary my expression to relieve potetial repitition. Much could be learnt from the Japanese with respect to the value of teamwork, and making everyone an integral part of it.

  29. Newmania
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    ..and after Brexit created this growth they they all lived happily ever after .

    Goodnight children

    • graham1946
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

      Yes, sorry it’s not recession as Remainers all predicted – must be very frustrating for you after wishing your country ill for so long.

  30. Gareth Warren
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    Here I sense the real benefits from brexit are delayed due the WA, if it is at least concluded in 2020 we can finally get on.

    The good news is Trump appears to be in office for another 4 years so we will get a good trade deal there.

    I hope the many trade deals that are on hold due to the EU can be publicised more, with them in public view it will make it difficult to delay the EU trade deal further and in effect hold the governments feet to the fire.

    Once we are truly free of the EU I can see the issue settled for 40+ years – longer than the EU will be around.

  31. Kevin
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    The Conservative Party wants to “get Brexit done”. Bearing in mind that we voted for a Leave the EU Brexit”, here is a summary of what I understand to be the reasons why they will not get it done:
    1) The WA’s transition period, during which the UK would be subject to new EU laws that would at that point be passed by a completely foreign government.
    2) Clause 77 of the PD, which requires the parties to uphold “the common high standards” applicable at the end of the transition period in “relevant tax matters”. This being the transition period during which the EU would have legislative authority over the UK.
    3) “Article 174 [of the WA], keeps the supremacy of the European Court over our own law”. This is a tweet from Jacob Rees-Mogg (during Mrs. May’s premiership).
    4) Article 129(6) of the WA, which requires the UK to refrain from any action likely to impede EU action based on an EU foreign policy decision. Amongst other things, it is suggested that this article makes Britain subservient to the French vote in the U.N. Security Council.
    5) What are the implications of Boris’ Deal for trade between N. Ireland and the rest of the UK?
    6) Clause 72 of the PD requires the parties to cooperate on the development of measures for the regulation of fisheries, “in a non-discriminatory manner”. It is argued that this would effectively keep us in the CFP.
    7) You have anticipated that the UK’s financial obligations under the WA would be much higher than £39 billion.
    8) Presumably, we will continue to pay the EU about £13 billion net p.a. during the transition period?
    9) According to the Brexit Party, under the WA the UK is leaving £7 billion of our money with the EIB.
    10) According to the same source, under Boris’ Deal we are said to be, for a period of 12 years, potentially liable to the tune of up to £40 billion in the event of a Eurozone financial crisis, which amount could rise to as much as €500 billion under a system of joint and several guarantees.

    • agricola
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

      Kevin, we need a forensic analysis article by article of this withdrawal agreemant and the Political Declaration before we sign up to anything. Nigel Farage promised this through every door in the UK before we vote. Perhaps the Mail on Sunday could publish it as a supplement. I am very cynical of the conservative party ever revealing where they intend to lead us once elected.

      Reply The Withdrawal Treaty is a public document and has been discussed here

      • Hope
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

        Read the Spectators forty horrors of the Mayhab Servitude plan and look how many still exist. Look at Martin Howe’s articles before he was offered a Canada you for a safe seat ad he details the horrors of the servitude plan as well. It is still a polished turd by Johnsons own words. Certainly not new, slightly altered or as the EU stated clarified! But not new. That was and is a lie.

  32. glen cullen
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    I agree there should be a boost, however I can only see a £39bn dent on the 31st Jan with this WA

  33. Atlas
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    I note with dismay that the Conservatives do not realize the anger among women voters who were born in the 1950s over the shameful way they have been treated over their pensions. These ladies are of the age that actually go out and vote and they may not be supporting the Conservatives for this reason. The Labour Party has found a rich seam of genuine discontent to mine.

    • steve
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:34 pm | Permalink


      I could be wrong on this but while I was listening to Anne Widdecombe on LBC the other day, I seem to remember a caller who gave similar sentiment to yours. I think Ms Widdecombe said that the women’s pension issues were examined when she was in government, but the EU refused to play ball.

      As I say I could be mistaken but have it in the back of my mind that was what she said.

      • hefner
        Posted November 26, 2019 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

        No you’re wrong, there is quite a bit of debate right now in France as the French government is trying to unify the 40+ different retirement regimes into an universal one with increase in the pension age from 62 to 65 to 67, depending of the present age of workers/employees. So clearly right now it is a French matter, nothing enforced by the EU as such.

    • a-tracy
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

      And what about the women born in the 1960’s…. they haven’t had a gradual reduction like those in the 1950’s we’ve gone from 60 to 67. Many of us started work at 16!
      And what about the 20 years worth of students paying back a graduate tax on their student loans of 9% for 30 years….how do they cope with fresh graduates who won’t have the tax undercutting them!
      And what about private pension holders who have already been robbed by the last Labour government….how do we make that money back!
      There’s all sorts of grievances and Corbyn plans to make grievances worse!!

  34. Lynn Atkinson
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    Boris colluded with Bercow and Benn to overturn our highest order of law – Constitutional law by giving Royal assent to their illegally passed ‘bill’.
    Now we must be a vessel state for a year or until they decide to stop adding extensions. Boris word is worthless as he has proved, so I have absolutely no expectation of leaving the ‘transition period’ after a year.
    We will ‘lead the world into the post-Democratic era’ which is the aim and ambition of ALL our parliamentary party leaders.
    I can’t find anybody who wants to vote for any of the political elitists. And I’m canvassing daily. We all believe it’s past a political solution and we are going to have to fight for it. In the north millions will not vote. This does NOT mean they are apathetic. Boris MUST Fitch his evil WA. I’m personally praying that he does not hold his seat!

  35. L Jones
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    Sir John, you seem to be standing up for Brexit. As we’d expect, from this pledge (

    ”Between July 2018 and March 2019 we asked MPs to StandUp4Brexit by rejecting Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement and delivering the Brexit that was promised at Lancaster House and in the Conservative manifesto. That means leaving the Single Market, Customs Union and ECJ overrule.”

    ”In June 2019 we started a fresh pledge, which, in addition, asks MPs to commit to leaving the EU on 31st October and abandoning Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement as dead….”

    There then follow a few dozen MPs, including you, our host, who are named as pledging to do this. I think many of us would find it hard to square this ”pledge” with what we know about BJ’s new-old-new-old ”WA” – that it is undeniably Mrs M’s ”deal” in all but a tweak or two – yet you’re all (reportedly) going to support it. I can’t be alone in my dismay at the idea of our MPs being forsworn.

    It all mounts up to our having to take everything ”pledged” in the present election with a large pinch of salt.

  36. Fred H
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 12:15 pm | Permalink


    A response from a Local Election Officer. (not about me and not Wokingham).
    I can confirm that you are both excluded from the open register, in line with your requests.

    However, the law requires us to supply, on request, political parties and/or candidates with details of postal and/or proxy voters; and with the entirety of the electoral register, which they are then allowed to use for electoral purposes only. This extends only to register information so does not, as examples, include any phone numbers or email addresses or dates of birth that we may hold, with the exception of the dates of birth of people who will shortly become 18.
    For what it is worth, I have long argued that this should be clearer to the electorate in the statutory wording about the versions of the register which is included on some of the forms we have to use, but am not aware of any plans to change the law to amend that wording.
    I am sorry that I can’t be more helpful, but hope that this explains the position.

  37. DavidJ
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    “Bank of England has refused to consider cutting rates or creating more liquidity…”

    Surely it is wrong for the BoE to be governed by a foreigner with “no dog in the race”?

  38. Fred H
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:39 pm | Permalink


    This is becoming ridiculous. Today Royal Mail delivered our 6TH – yes 6TH different FULL COLOUR A2 – YES ENORMOUS pamphlet from the Libnodemocrats featuring Swansong (with baby).

    Is this specifically targeting ‘remoaner’ seats ? (Wokingham) – – or are the funds being used illegal?

    • Hope
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

      Handy if you have a log burner, you start with paper then kindling.

      • Fred H
        Posted November 25, 2019 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

        they could be useful in a future legal case ‘over-spend in electioneering’?
        Unlike the Libnodemocrats I don’t want to damage the environment -by burning.

  39. Alan Joyce
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    In your diary of the 20th November ‘Cutting Taxes’, you said you disagreed with those of us who had previously pointed out that the cancelled or postponed Corporation Tax cut from 19% to 17% was probably in order to comply with EU policy to avoid tax competition between member states and help secure a FTA with the EU.

    I am not necessarily disagreeing with your own views on the reasons behind the abandonment of this tax cut but I would say that the cancelled cut is but one of the ways that Mr. Johnson will seek to keep the UK tethered closely to the EU so that he can have his FTA.

    Ambrose Evans-Pritchard has produced an excellent article in today’s Daily Telegraph entitled ‘Timid Tories reject low-tax dream in manifest tilt towards Europe’. I urge your readers to seek it out and discover what direction Mr. A E-P. thinks the UK is headed under Mr. Johnson. I found it quite revealing not to say rather disappointing if what he says is accurate.

  40. miami.mode
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    For over-75s, 2020 pension increase £5.05 per week less £1.01 tax = £4.04 less BBC licence fee (approx.) £3.00 = £1.00 per week growth. Don’t spend it all at once!

    PS. Probably negative after Council Tax increase.

  41. agricola
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

    “Only two Articles in the main Withdrawal Agreement have changed from the 2018 text, and the changes are minor”. Quote the House of Commons library. ” This means that the changes are minor”.

    Can I suggest that you all read,……. House of Commons Library……The UK’s EU Withdrawal Agreement monday july 8th 2019. It mainly focuses on changes for Northern Ireland which were I a citizen of NI I would find difficult to digest.

    Everything else we gleaned about the May agreement of 14th November 2018 still remains as part of the Boris deal.

    Personally I find “Lets get Brexit done” a very cynical mantra. Let’s leave the EU cleanly would be more honest. Pushing through Boris’s Brexit as a Christmas present will do the Conservative Party irreperable damage once the parcel is opened.

    • Polly
      Posted November 25, 2019 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

      To establish the true intent of the EU insofar as practical interpretation of the WA is concerned, I would have thought Brits must find out who specified the extremely complex and demanding terms and conditions.

      Perhaps Sir John Redwood could answer this question please…………

      Who exactly is responsible for the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement ?


  42. Polly
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

    If this is true, it’s exactly the scenario I forecast which is that Brussels will make Brits give up most or all of their new freedoms to achieve the holy grail of a ”free trade deal”… leaving Brits back exactly where they started…………

    ”Brussels plans to hit Britain with a demand for access to UK fishing waters the day after Brexit, it has emerged.”

    ”Sources said the plan was to make EU access to British waters a condition for any trade deal and to make the demand public on, or as close as possible, to February 1, if Boris Johnson wins a majority in the general election.”

    “That will be the day that reality hits home,” one EU diplomat told The Telegraph.”

    Clever negotiating and an excellent WA for the EU, very poor and weak so far by Brits who must sharpen up for their own good.


    • NickC
      Posted November 26, 2019 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      Polly, Where did you “forecast” it? And haven’t most Leaves “forecast” (ie analysed) this too?

  43. David Magauran
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

    Dear Sir John,

    Are you going to do a comprehensive critique of the ‘deal’ Boris Johnson proposes, as you did for Mrs May’s ‘deal’, or just stay silent?

    Reply Read my speech on Second reading of the Bill to implementv it.

  44. Eh?
    Posted November 25, 2019 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    I admit I am ignorant of a positive case for Wapsi women. I just imagined women via political parties, all, and all activists through long campaigning got equality and were allowed to retire the same as men ( at 65 ) with that extra five years in which they would be working at the height of their working skills possibly their highest annual income.
    So, what is it? What are they claiming and why?

    • a-tracy
      Posted November 26, 2019 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

      Women didn’t want equality when it put their state pension back five years. They want their state pension back from the age of 60 to 65 because they had to start retiring at 62, 63, 64 then 65. They have however missed the cliff edge 1960’s women have who have to work to 67 the same as men.

  • 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