Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Lowbankclaret]

What facts?

That you need to be on the electoral role to vote.

[If it be your will]

It’s Johnson’s very own surrender bill. Cost? Pffft, just 1.8 Million fellow citizens.

I must say, I'm somewhat surprised by this. Didn't picture you to be a big Unionist. I'm not, particularly.

(Or are you just trying to wind up the nationalists? Go on, you can tell me...)

[Devils_Advocate]

I must say, I'm somewhat surprised by this. Didn't picture you to be a big Unionist. I'm not, particularly.

(Or are you just trying to wind up the nationalists? Go on, you can tell me...)

Why dont you read the rest of his post and then you'll see why this approach from Johnson doesn't bode well for unionists ans non-unionists alike

[Paul Waine]

Are you telling me there are people who've had a paper driving licence since 1998 and it's still legible?

I'm impressed.

Hi GDJ, I've got one of those - a few years before your "since 1998." They came in plastic folders, "back in the day." Only comes out of the plastic when car hire want to see the details inside the folds.

I also used it earlier in the week as proof of address - along with passport photo - to sign up for internet access to GP stuff.

[willsclarets]

I must say, I'm somewhat surprised by this. Didn't picture you to be a big Unionist. I'm not, particularly.

(Or are you just trying to wind up the nationalists? Go on, you can tell me...)

Why is it being about being unionist or otherwise? Aside from every other conceivable argument against brexit, of which there are many, a regret I have is not being more aware of the blatant issues this was always going to cause in Ireland, and was rarely discussed. Relative timelines in modern history are short, and yet again we as a collective have come up short in our disregard for Ireland.

[Spijed]

Tom Newton Dunn
@tnewtondunn
Excl: Big split opens up among Tory Eurosceptics over whether to back Boris’s Brexit deal, as Owen Paterson brands it “absurd” and “unacceptable”. Iain Duncan-Smith also said to have “exploded” at No10 officials.

[Jakubclaret]

Aside from the fact that this wasn't even supposed to be a wall but a glittering open gate, why don't you at least engage with one specific mechanisms of trade to see what a no brexit does to it? Your school of thought seems to be "Regardless of the consequence I believe in Brexit - we'll sort it" rather than "I believe this is an opportunity for the UK, and here's why" You say remainers are "ingrained with one way of thinking", but I don't see any solutions being offered to the problems remainers are posing. There should be answers right? Where are they?

Let's take one issue. What about the implications of just in time production systems being decimated, for example? There are deeply embedded supply chains that thousands of UK businesses depend on; supply chains that cross several borders across the EU. Free trade is NOT frictionless trade. Extra custom checks and delays, along with the fact that it involves huge infrastructure changes and systems (lots of lovely new paperwork that HAS to be right, and often isn't, resulting in more delays) This has a massive impact on importers and exporters. One examples from Honda UK: The Japanese-owned firm stated that every 15 minutes of customs delay would cost it up to £850,000 a year, and that it would take 18 months to set up new procedures and warehouses if Britain left the customs union. Even then, with 2m daily component movements, just minor delays at the Channel Tunnel and Dover would force hundreds of its trucks to wait for the equivalent of 90 hours a day.

Don’t be so melodramatic, painting the worst possible picture it’s nothing new from project fear, ok I’ll play along, have you never considered or do you not have any faith in the officials & workers who work in the transport/haulage industry, people who are more qualified & specialise in that particular industry than you or I? do you not think the professionals haven’t anticipated or prepared themselves in the event of a no deal brexit? Of course initially teething problems are likely but not insurmountable. I honestly think you are doing a disservice in your forecasted assessment to the people who work in that particular industry, tweaking any established system will bring problems of course nobody is denying this, I think you are exaggerating the problem & not making any allowances for anybody to adapt.

[CrosspoolClarets]

In the absence of much news tonight, here is an article by Iain Duncan Smith posted on Brexit Central. Some interesting views on free trade.

A short primer for Philip Hammond on the benefits of free trade deals

The news concerning the negotiations is at present confusing. Different sides put out different leaks and we all remain none the wiser. However the EU is at least engaging seriously with the UK and for the present that has given a number of people hope that something can be agreed.

How strange, then, that at this very point, Philip Hammond chose to take aim at the effect of free trade deals on the UK economy and assert there was “a lack of substance in the free trade narrative”. In that, he drew on what many economists believe were flawed assumptions underlying the Treasury forecast, particularly when it comes to Free Trade. For there is a great deal of substance underlying the belief in the beneficial effects of Free Trade, too much of which has been ignored.

Looking back, it’s worth reminding ourselves of the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 when tariffs on imported grain were eliminated. This move led to decades of growth that persisted until after the turn of the century. Singapore unilaterally eliminated all tariffs and other trade barriers with the result that their GDP per capita grew from 72 percent that of the UK in 1992 when they agreed their first free trade deal with ASEAN to 155 per cent that of the UK today. The same story has been repeated by New Zealand and Australia. The Australian government recently commissioned an independent report that showed the enactment of liberal trade policies had boosted Australian GDP by a remarkable 5.4 per cent.

Furthermore, Free Trade modelling by economists independent of the government and other quasi-governmental bodies produce benefits from Free Trade Agreements significant greater than the astonishingly low 0.2% of GDP that Mr Hammond claimed. The well-known World Trade Model at Cardiff University – a model which has over the years achieved a great deal of success in its forecasting – predicts a long-term boost to the UK economy of 4 per cent of GDP. Even the Centre for Business Research at Cambridge University estimated a boost to UK GDP of up to 2 per cent.

It is, of course, all about the assumptions you make. That the Treasury model could be so far apart from these real world and independent modelling results rests on their key assumptions.

First, there was the strange assumption that the UK would stay aligned to the EU’s existing tariffs barriers. Then hidden deep within the 156-page Treasury forecasting report and technical annex of last November were three other assumptions that collectively reduced what otherwise would have been the output of the model by a staggering multiple of sixteen. They were that despite the UK’s long-standing liberal stance on trade, the UK would eliminate only half of the existing EU non-tariff barriers in negotiations with non-EU countries; on top of that, they assumed the UK would be able to achieve Free Trade deals amounting to up to only half of our non-EU trade; finally they assumed that undefined ‘implementation difficulties’ (subjective or what?) would result in a paltry quarter of any Free Trade deal ever being implemented.

Interestingly, this report didn’t even consider that achieving a Free Trade deal with the United States alone would be equivalent economically to achieving Free Trade deals with the entire world, something on which most Free Trade modellers agree. This is because the vast US economy could supply virtually every good that the UK currently imports. Moreover, the US market trades pretty much at world market prices that are lower than those in the EU market because of the EU’s enormous protectionism. The reality of this is that the US is a microcosm of the rest of the world, something not considered by the Treasury report.

Then there is the interesting question of immigration. The Treasury model assumes there will be zero immigration in future from EEA countries, a remarkably ‘helpful’ assumption because it allowed the authors to forecast a reduced population which in turn reduces GDP. Yet this is counter to announced government policy. Of course, the final induced hit to the UK’s GDP is that the report left out any savings from the UK no longer paying its annual contribution to the EU budget – £19 billion gross.

As we head, I hope, towards a Free Trade deal with the EU, it is worth reminding ourselves that Free Trade has brought huge benefits to the world in recent decades. Importantly it has reduced global child poverty by half and improved the living standards of the poor. How strange then that some Conservatives should seek to denigrate the positive effects of Free Trade for the UK post-Brexit, whilst saying they support it elsewhere. I have no doubt that the UK will benefit enormously from Free Trade. As a natural Free Trader and the fifth largest economy in the world and the fifth largest export destination, we will also re-inject a new dynamic into the global economy.

Perhaps the last word should be from Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman (no fan of Brexit, I hasten to add), who said about the Treasury forecasts: “I have worried in all this about motivated reasoning on the part of people who oppose Brexit…” Or as Boris Johnson would put it, the ‘doomsters and the gloomsters.’

[Lancasterclaret]

People who know trade have been laughing at that all day

[Devils_Advocate]

Out of interest did IDS share any sources for these "independent" economists models so they can be reviewed and scrutinised or are we just accepting the "moral" and "principled" word of IDS?

[Jakubclaret]

If I presented you with the challenge of a fifteen foot wall, over time you’ll come up with a means of scaling it. But if I give you the challenge and tell you that if you don’t adapt right away and scale it immediately you’ve lost, you probably won’t bother. That is a no deal Brexit. And as for deregulating our way to prosperity, which regulations are you keen for us to shed?

Well recently 2 scientists have been critical of the EU rules regarding drug licensing & have warned cancer deaths are more likely due to the trials being so expensive, it’s quite concerning for people who do have it or for people not yet diagnosed.

[Paul Waine]

People who know trade have been laughing at that all day

Hi Lancs, we've got to assume it's some of your experts who were laughing. Do they just "know trade" or do they also understand economics? I think we can agree there's an enormous difference.

Why were they laughing? Was it because the Treasury, under Hammond, thought they could get away with assumptions that were, let's say, over-cautious? That's what "well we don't know, but let's say 50%" sounds like to me. (I'm going to assume IDS has got the research/references to back up his analysis).

My work includes reviewing economic forecast models; change an assumption here, make another change there, it's pretty easy to get the result you first thought of.

[Paul Waine]

Out of interest did IDS share any sources for these "independent" economists models so they can be reviewed and scrutinised or are we just accepting the "moral" and "principled" word of IDS?

Hi DA, IDS quotes Cardiff Univ's World Trade Model and Cambridge Univ's Centre for Business Research. It might be worth you taking a look at those models to check out whether IDS is quoting them accurately. (I'd expect some "midnight oil" is being burnt in some of the "fact check" organisations at this very moment).

For me, it can wait until the morning.

[Lancasterclaret]

Hi Lancs, we've got to assume it's some of your experts who were laughing. Do they just "know trade" or do they also understand economics? I think we can agree there's an enormous difference.

Why were they laughing? Was it because the Treasury, under Hammond, thought they could get away with assumptions that were, let's say, over-cautious? That's what "well we don't know, but let's say 50%" sounds like to me. (I'm going to assume IDS has got the research/references to back up his analysis).

My work includes reviewing economic forecast models; change an assumption here, make another change there, it's pretty easy to get the result you first thought of.

Well, I'm fairly confident that Jakubclaret knows more about trade than Iain Duncan Smith. Which means he doesn't know anything.

Look, you want to swallow the crap they are coming out with about Brexit being better for the UK, then that is up to you.

But you need to back it up. And in three years, no one has been able to do.

It remains a decision made with the heart, not with the head, and there will be consequences because of that.

[Tall Paul]

Seems like an appropriate time to post this:

[Tall Paul]

Don’t be so melodramatic, painting the worst possible picture it’s nothing new from project fear, ok I’ll play along, have you never considered or do you not have any faith in the officials & workers who work in the transport/haulage industry, people who are more qualified & specialise in that particular industry than you or I? do you not think the professionals haven’t anticipated or prepared themselves in the event of a no deal brexit? Of course initially teething problems are likely but not insurmountable. I honestly think you are doing a disservice in your forecasted assessment to the people who work in that particular industry, tweaking any established system will bring problems of course nobody is denying this, I think you are exaggerating the problem & not making any allowances for anybody to adapt.

These officials and workers you're talking about are the ones who are telling us that no deal Brexit would be terrible for them. There was even a statement from Honda in the post you quoted and replied to.

Also, didn't you say you'd answer a question on deregulation "later"?

[Jakubclaret]

Well, I'm fairly confident that Jakubclaret knows more about trade than Iain Duncan Smith. Which means he doesn't know anything.

Look, you want to swallow the crap they are coming out with about Brexit being better for the UK, then that is up to you.

But you need to back it up. And in three years, no one has been able to do.

It remains a decision made with the heart, not with the head, and there will be consequences because of that.

Trades is important, but let’s not pretend in a post brexit scenario all of a sudden the Germans, french etc are suddenly going to decide hey let’s all have the idea that we are not going to purchase anything from UK as we domestically are unlikely to do the same to them, so what items may cost a few pence or pounds extra, it’s nothing inflation doesn’t do anyway, people with common sense have the mindset they’ll be winners & losers across the board.

[Lancasterclaret]

Trades is important, but let’s not pretend in a post brexit scenario all of a sudden the Germans, french etc are suddenly going to decide hey let’s all have the idea that we are not going to purchase anything from UK as we domestically are unlikely to do the same to them, so what items may cost a few pence or pounds extra, it’s nothing inflation doesn’t do anyway, people with common sense have the mindset they’ll be winners & losers across the board.

I think you've proved my point far better than I could

[Jakubclaret]

These officials and workers you're talking about are the ones who are telling us that no deal Brexit would be terrible for them. There was even a statement from Honda in the post you quoted and replied to.

Also, didn't you say you'd answer a question on deregulation "later"?

You must have missed my post in reply regarding drug licensing stifling academic research thus making trials more expensive & 2 scientists warning about cancer deaths are more likely due to the EU directives forced.

[Devils_Advocate]

You must have missed my post in reply regarding drug licensing stifling academic research thus making trials more expensive & 2 scientists warning about cancer deaths are more likely due to the EU directives forced.

Are you sure they are not just being melodramatic cos painting the worst possible picture is nothing new from project fear

[Tall Paul]

You must have missed my post in reply regarding drug licensing stifling academic research thus making trials more expensive & 2 scientists warning about cancer deaths are more likely due to the EU directives forced.

I did see it, but didn't realise it was your answer given that you'd said you didn't have time earlier then came up with something lacking any substance or detail.

[Lancasterclaret]

We have to remember that none of these deals being mooted appear to cover the most important part of our economy.

Services.

[Jakubclaret]

I did see it, but didn't realise it was your answer given that you'd said you didn't have time earlier then came up with something lacking any substance or detail.

I think it’s quite important that people who suffer cancer could potentially be dying in greater numbers due to the treatment becoming more expensive.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... ys-report/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/11903 ... is-Johnson" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TheFamilyCat]

God loves a trier Jakub.

Even ringo has long since given up trying to argue a case for brexit, beyond "the single largest expression of democracy blah, blah, blah".

[CrosspoolClarets]

People who know trade have been laughing at that all day

Like Shanker Singham - Director of the International Trade and Competition Unit (ITCU) of the Institute of Economic Affairs? He tends to write similar stuff.

I can’t comment on the benefit of wider deals, I don’t have the data, but I can comment on IDS criticism in his article of Treasury forecasts.

As I have said many times, I only voted leave after reading the Treasury report and appendices cover to cover, concluding that it was a biased farce. The assumptions were a joke - not least the assumption that migration would drop to zero.

So IDS criticising a more recent Treasury document has to me a sense of realism.

I’ve said this many times too - the truth as to the impact on our economy will be in between the figures being discussed by both camps. A manageable initial dip, growth in the future, but plenty of other life benefits from leaving too which offset the economics.

[nil_desperandum]

I think it’s quite important that people who suffer cancer could potentially be dying in greater numbers due to the treatment becoming more expensive.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... ys-report/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/11903 ... is-Johnson" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And yet it's our own government that advises stockpiling bodybags to ensure we are prepared for brexit.

[Jakubclaret]

fated-313.gif

If you wish to have a sensible debate I'm willing to engage, I don't think this is the appropriate way of going about it.

[Lancasterclaret]

Like Shanker Singham - Director of the International Trade and Competition Unit (ITCU) of the Institute of Economic Affairs? He tends to write similar stuff.

I can’t comment on the benefit of wider deals, I don’t have the data, but I can comment on IDS criticism in his article of Treasury forecasts.

As I have said many times, I only voted leave after reading the Treasury report and appendices cover to cover, concluding that it was a biased farce. The assumptions were a joke - not least the assumption that migration would drop to zero.

So IDS criticising a more recent Treasury document has to me a sense of realism.

I’ve said this many times too - the truth as to the impact on our economy will be in between the figures being discussed by both camps. A manageable initial dip, growth in the future, but plenty of other life benefits from leaving too which offset the economics.

If only you'd said all that stuff about dips in 2016 eh?

But none of you did.

Remember, that was us telling you what would happen, and you dismissed it as "Project Fear"

Now?

You embrace it like it was all your own idea from the start.

[TheFamilyCat]

If you wish to have a sensible debate I'm willing to engage, I don't think this is the appropriate way of going about it.

A sensible debate such as saying "let's just leave, it'll be reyt"?

[aggi]

Like Shanker Singham - Director of the International Trade and Competition Unit (ITCU) of the Institute of Economic Affairs? He tends to write similar stuff.

I can’t comment on the benefit of wider deals, I don’t have the data, but I can comment on IDS criticism in his article of Treasury forecasts.

As I have said many times, I only voted leave after reading the Treasury report and appendices cover to cover, concluding that it was a biased farce. The assumptions were a joke - not least the assumption that migration would drop to zero.

So IDS criticising a more recent Treasury document has to me a sense of realism.

I’ve said this many times too - the truth as to the impact on our economy will be in between the figures being discussed by both camps. A manageable initial dip, growth in the future, but plenty of other life benefits from leaving too which offset the economics.

What specifically are they? I'd be interested in seeing a list.

[Lancasterclaret]

What specifically are they? I'd be interested in seeing a list.

I suspect some of them will involve unspecified advantages like feeling better about ourselves as a country and "isn't it great to be able to breathe free air again?"

[martin_p]

What specifically are they? I'd be interested in seeing a list.

Me too. I don’t like surprises so it’d be good to know in advance about all the life benefits I have coming my way.

[Tall Paul]

I think it’s quite important that people who suffer cancer could potentially be dying in greater numbers due to the treatment becoming more expensive.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... ys-report/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/11903 ... is-Johnson" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don’t be so melodramatic, painting the worst possible picture it’s nothing new from project fear, ok I’ll play along, have you never considered or do you not have any faith in the officials & workers who work in the medical research industry, people who are more qualified & specialise in that particular industry than you or I?

[Erasmus]

'Other life benefits' might be residing with the angels in heaven or a more favourable rebirth. But if it refers to the here and now, this is such a nebulous idea and I simply can't imagine myself, my family or my community ever experiencing anything that might fall under this heading. It really is just a fantasy notion at a time when what people need is 'real life benefits' like better health care, well funded community services and social care for the elderly.

[TheFamilyCat]

Don’t be so melodramatic, painting the worst possible picture it’s nothing new from project fear, ok I’ll play along, have you never considered or do you not have any faith in the officials & workers who work in the medical research industry, people who are more qualified & specialise in that particular industry than you or I?

Weird isn't it how those who have been banging on about project fear are the ones who are making the greatest exaggerations?

[Lancasterclaret]

'Other life benefits' might be residing with the angels in heaven or a more favourable rebirth. But if it refers to the here and now, this is such a nebulous idea and I simply can't imagine myself, my family or my community ever experiencing anything that might fall under this heading. It really is just a fantasy notion at a time when what people need is 'real life benefits' like better health care, well funded community services and social care for the elderly.

Oh, we are getting all that as well.

How?

Don't worry about that, concentrate on this wonderful Brexit deal we got you in 2018, sorry, no, this Brand new one in 2019.

[Paul Waine]

Well, I'm fairly confident that Jakubclaret knows more about trade than Iain Duncan Smith. Which means he doesn't know anything.

Look, you want to swallow the crap they are coming out with about Brexit being better for the UK, then that is up to you.

But you need to back it up. And in three years, no one has been able to do.

It remains a decision made with the heart, not with the head, and there will be consequences because of that.

Hi Lancs, it would be great if you can back up your statement re Jakubclaret and IDS respective knowledge of trade. But, OK that's where you are placing your confidence.

And, in 3 years, well, I'm confident if we were all prepared to learn something about economics, then there would be many that would say more wealth will be generated by trading relationships with the whole world, than limiting those relationships to just our near neighbours - and that's without getting into a discussion about which parts of the world are more likely to grow in future years.

However, you didn't address any of my comments. Any chance you can take a look at doing that?

[Mala591]

It seems rather 'bizarre' that all the talk of the current Brexit 'deal' is really all about what happens after 14 months if 'free trade' negotiations fail.

The really tough 'free trade/zero tariff' negotiations haven't even started yet. Are the general public aware of this? Do they care any more?

Doesn't bode well does it...

[AndrewJB]

I must say, I'm somewhat surprised by this. Didn't picture you to be a big Unionist. I'm not, particularly.

(Or are you just trying to wind up the nationalists? Go on, you can tell me...)

If you're a prime minister, it has to be for the whole country. We don't know what the actual agreement is yet, but if the Tory propaganda machines are talking about Northern Ireland being a "problem child" then I think we can guess that Johnson has climbed down from May's position of keeping the country together. For all of his bluster about getting a better deal through the force of his personality (what kind of a person says that?), he appears to have changed May's deal slightly to make it worse. His plan will store up problems for the future, and it's just for political capital now - so he can live up to his impossible pledge of taking Britain out of the EU by the 31st. The pledge that won him the leadership of the Tory Party, and made him PM.

[aggi]

It seems rather 'bizarre' that all the talk of the current Brexit 'deal' is really all about what happens after 14 months if 'free trade' negotiations fail.

The really tough 'free trade/zero tariff' negotiations haven't even started yet. Are the general public aware of this? Do they care any more?

Doesn't bode well does it...

I'd say no. The narrative has all been about how we must get out of the EU whilst ignoring the fact that however we leave there's a whole negotiation afterwards and stomping off shouting screw you isn't going to make those negotiations easier in the long term (and eventually we're still going to have to deal with the same issues).

[AndrewJB]

Hi Lancs, it would be great if you can back up your statement re Jakubclaret and IDS respective knowledge of trade. But, OK that's where you are placing your confidence.

And, in 3 years, well, I'm confident if we were all prepared to learn something about economics, then there would be many that would say more wealth will be generated by trading relationships with the whole world, than limiting those relationships to just our near neighbours - and that's without getting into a discussion about which parts of the world are more likely to grow in future years.

However, you didn't address any of my comments. Any chance you can take a look at doing that?

We can already trade with the rest of the world while we're in the EU - and in fact have the greater bargaining power of the pooled sovereignty of twenty-eight countries behind us in making new trade relationships (alongside and underpinned by the prosperity we get from trading with our near neighbours).

[aggi]

If you're a prime minister, it has to be for the whole country. We don't know what the actual agreement is yet, but if the Tory propaganda machines are talking about Northern Ireland being a "problem child" then I think we can guess that Johnson has climbed down from May's position of keeping the country together. For all of his bluster about getting a better deal through the force of his personality (what kind of a person says that?), he appears to have changed May's deal slightly to make it worse. His plan will store up problems for the future, and it's just for political capital now - so he can live up to his impossible pledge of taking Britain out of the EU by the 31st. The pledge that won him the leadership of the Tory Party, and made him PM.

In particular when you are representing the Conservative and Unionist Party

[AndrewJB]

That you need to be on the electoral role to vote.

This is how to register to vote if you have no fixed address:

https://www.crisis.org.uk/get-help/info ... -homeless/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

Hi Lancs, it would be great if you can back up your statement re Jakubclaret and IDS respective knowledge of trade. But, OK that's where you are placing your confidence.

And, in 3 years, well, I'm confident if we were all prepared to learn something about economics, then there would be many that would say more wealth will be generated by trading relationships with the whole world, than limiting those relationships to just our near neighbours - and that's without getting into a discussion about which parts of the world are more likely to grow in future years.

However, you didn't address any of my comments. Any chance you can take a look at doing that?

IDS is an intellectual black hole. Jakub is a "its be alright even though I don't want to go into detail" - both essentially say the same thing

Regarding your other point, that would make perfect sense if we didn't already trade with all those economies through EU negotiated deals.

Now I know you think we can better deals because they would be more tailored for our economy, which is a perfectly valid point to hold.

The counter to that is that we are a smaller market than the EU, and therefore less attractive.

One thing economists all agree on is that the bigger market beats the smaller market.

Overall, I suspect our deals will be worse than what we currently have, and significantly worse with our biggest market, the EU.

On the positive side, I can't see how we won't get a deal now, now we are this close.

[RingoMcCartney]

God loves a trier Jakub.

Even ringo has long since given up trying to argue a case for brexit, beyond "the single largest expression of democracy blah, blah, blah".

Wrong.

I've long given up taking seriously the views and opinions of people so psychologically wedded to their evangelical europhile beliefs, even mocking them has become boring.

[Mala591]

If you're a prime minister, it has to be for the whole country. We don't know what the actual agreement is yet, but if the Tory propaganda machines are talking about Northern Ireland being a "problem child" then I think we can guess that Johnson has climbed down from May's position of keeping the country together. For all of his bluster about getting a better deal through the force of his personality (what kind of a person says that?), he appears to have changed May's deal slightly to make it worse. His plan will store up problems for the future, and it's just for political capital now - so he can live up to his impossible pledge of taking Britain out of the EU by the 31st. The pledge that won him the leadership of the Tory Party, and made him PM.

I think that most of the English population (especially the ever increasing number of English atheists) look upon NI as a problem child which must now become more independent and should be encouraged to leave home. A massive financial goodbye 'gift' will obviously smooth the transition.

[Lancasterclaret]

And there we have it

The actual reality of the effects of Brexit

https://twitter.com/telebusiness/status ... 7769892864" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Both the NF in France and the Lega Nord in Italy abandon plans to dump the EURO and the EU.

Well done everybody, you've managed to convince everybody else the benefits of staying in the EU.

[Lancasterclaret]

And for the advocates of how ace an FTA will be (a Canada +), some reality.

https://twitter.com/neilrholmes/status/ ... 3835565056" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[willsclarets]

And there we have it

The actual reality of the effects of Brexit

https://twitter.com/telebusiness/status ... 7769892864" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Both the NF in France and the Lega Nord in Italy abandon plans to dump the EURO and the EU.

Well done everybody, you've managed to convince everybody else the benefits of staying in the EU.

No you must be misunderstood Lancaster, people all over the EU are desperate to get out. Someone on this thread told me so.

[Lancasterclaret]

No you must be misunderstood Lancaster, people all over the EU are desperate to get out. Someone on this thread told me so.

Absolute guarantee that someone will be on to tell us that is not the case, that they personally have talked to people whilst on holiday that told them that the whole of Europe is cheering them on to defeat the EU.