David Davis resigns

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:42 am

Lots of laughter from Dingo McTantrum - he went to bed a happy chappie..
Nice to see.
He won, he's got over it.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:51 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:No one ever said the right has a monopoly on morons.

Well, you'd know all about that............

I consider my stance to be more selfish than moronic but I do believe in sticking to one's principles.

Some folks voted to remain, more voted, on a very vague basis, to leave.

The Remainers preferred the status quo, the Leavers wanted to gamble. That's fine but now it's gone tits up, I'd just hope those Leavers, like most gamblers, are happy to pay the price and are hit the hardest. Seems fair to me.

It won't happen but there you go. We'll all get hammered to some extent.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 7:08 am

I don't see how someone can be 'financially bomb proof' if they live in this country and plan to stay here.

We're all selfish to varying degrees. We have to be. If we don't look after ourselves, who will? However in elections I tend to consider the bigger picture, looking for general stability along with progress in areas I feel important. This is also in my interests as I can then live my life in my own way. However, of course, I own stuff so I want to keep it. If I've got nothing, or less then nothing, I may think differently.

Regarding leave/remain, things have not 'gone tits up', yet. We haven't left or had any direct effects of leaving. It's still all talk and negotiations. As this is done in the glare of the media it will always look messy.

Bismarck was supposed to have said that laws are like sausages - you must not look at them being made, just benefit from the result.

Claret-On-A-T-Rex · Post by **Claret-On-A-T-Rex** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:06 am

evensteadiereddie wrote:Lots of laughter from Dingo McTantrum - he went to bed a happy chappie..
Nice to see.
He won, he's got over it.

Wrongo? I've found life on this message board much more fun since I blocked the fool due to his bad spelling, grammar and nonsensical, infantile arguments.
The fact he still tries to engage me despite this only shows how obsessed he is.
LOOK WRONGO, this is what I see of your posts...

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:37 am

Claret-On-A-T-Rex wrote:Wrongo? I've found life on this message board much more fun since I blocked the fool due to his bad spelling, grammar and nonsensical, infantile arguments.
The fact he still tries to engage me despite this only shows how obsessed he is.
LOOK WRONGO, this is what I see of your posts...

You block me do you!?

And yet! And yet! Despite my "bad spelling, grammar and nonsensical, infantile arguments."

You still feel the need to respond to me!

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:42 am

JohnMac wrote:And people said Cameron was an idiot, he certainly knew what lay down the road.

He programmed the bloody sat nav and then got out and let May drive...

mkmel · Post by **mkmel** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:51 am

Well May is an awful and totally incompetent driver

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:52 am

We've got the politicians we deserve frankly

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 10:59 am

Gove resigning today as well

Thats everybody who campaigned for Brexit now leaving because they want to get as far away from it as they can so they can claim it was nothing to do with them.

Someone needs to invent a new word for the likes of Gove and Johnson, cos shitgibbons just doesn't cover it.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:50 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Gove resigning today as well
.

On what possible grounds could Gove quit today after his high profile interview on Marr on Sunday when he defended every aspect of May's deal?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:52 am

nil_desperandum wrote:On what possible grounds could Gove quit today after his high profile interview on Marr on Sunday when he defended every aspect of May's deal?

Opportunism

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:55 am

He's missed press conferences this morning with no explanation given.

He's weighing up whether he loses or gains more by staying in the cabinet, and crucially he wants to be different from Johnson.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:22 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:He's missed press conferences this morning with no explanation given.

He's weighing up whether he loses or gains more by staying in the cabinet, and crucially he wants to be different from Johnson.

Looks like it was a genuine diary clash and he’s supporting May (for the moment). Looks like he’s remembered what knifing Boris in the back during the last leadership contest did for his chances!

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:24 pm

Cheers

We are in a place were everything little thing is scrutinised for hidden meanings!

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:25 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Opportunism

My thoughts are that he anticipated Johnson's resignation and assumed that he would be offered Foreign Secretary.
Having unreservedly backed May on Sunday, but not having been rewarded yesterday, I guess he will have to come up with some scheme to now walk away from the cabinet that doesn't entirely conflict with his Marr interview.
For all his personal defects, he's a clever chap so I'm sure he'll come up with something that will convince the gullible majority. (Although I'm not sure it is a majority anymore)

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:42 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:My thoughts are that he anticipated Johnson's resignation and assumed that he would be offered Foreign Secretary.
Having unreservedly backed May on Sunday, but not having been rewarded yesterday, I guess he will have to come up with some scheme to now walk away from the cabinet that doesn't entirely conflict with his Marr interview.
For all his personal defects, he's a clever chap so I'm sure he'll come up with something that will convince the gullible majority. (Although I'm not sure it is a majority anymore)

I don’t think he’ll resign. He’ll be looking for other resignations to trigger a leadership contest at which point he can put himself forward having done the right thing and supported May. He’ll be figuring that he lost a lot of goodwill in the Conservative party when he double crossed Boris in the last leadership contest, so will be looking to present himself as trust worthy and loyal.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:47 pm

martin_p wrote:I don’t think he’ll resign. He’ll be looking for other resignations to trigger a leadership contest at which point he can put himself forward having done the right thing and supported May. He’ll be figuring that he lost a lot of goodwill in the Conservative party when he double crossed Boris in the last leadership contest, so will be looking to present himself as trust worthy and loyal.

Trustworthy and loyal ?
Best of luck with that one eh - less chance than when Judas Iscariot put himself forward as captain in the Apostles Football team.

martin_p · Post by **martin_p** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:59 pm

TVC15 wrote:Trustworthy and loyal ?
Best of luck with that one eh - less chance than when Judas Iscariot put himself forward as captain in the Apostles Football team.

Well I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw him (the recent series of The Tracey Ullman Show nailed him), but it’s what he’ll be thinking.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 10, 2018 9:21 pm

Even on his way out Johnson couldn't keep from lying about the EU.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck ... ion-letter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:20 pm

PMQ’s this morning... Emily Thornbery describing recent events in the Tory Party..’Reservoir Dogs’ as directed by the Chuckle Brothers..

You had to be there.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:25 pm

I'm taking a day off depressing brexit news today because of the football.

But christ on a bike, the suns story about stockpiling processed food in the event of a No deal brexit is frankly terrifying.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:47 pm

If we really are so beholden to the EU that we stockpile processed food it just goes to show why we MUST get out.

Crikey, imagine a major problem on the continent like mass civil riots. How we we to cope while they deal with it? We have to be sovereign and independent rather than dependent. We have forgotten how to run ourselves.

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:01 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:We have to be sovereign and independent rather than dependent. We have forgotten how to run ourselves.

If the last couple of years are anything to go by, I'd say we're incapable of running ourselves.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:09 pm

Stick to NHS contracts Crosspool

They are basically admitting that "Project Fear" will happen in the event of a "No deal" because it will be impossible for the supply chain to operate under its current rules.

You can spin that if you want, but that is reality.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 1:25 pm

Can we have a bit more clarity on this "reality"? What are they saying?

1. That it will be illegal to import food.
2. That is will be legal, but no-one in the EU will sell to us.
3. That it will be impractical to get food into the country under the new rules because there are no businesses with the capability do carry out international trade;
4. That the government will find itself unable to process the import arrangements and will refuse to put in any temporary measures;
5. Other?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:16 pm

I'll try to speak very slowly for the hard to understand Brexiteers

- This is "Project Reality"

- Foodstuffs move through a supply chain, including both the single market and the customs union.

- A "No deal" Brexit stops that dead and we have to have checks at the border, which will all take time, more than the 6 seconds it takes now

- With me so far? Any words too long? Good

- The nation will continue to consume food at the current rate (well no, we'll be a mass panic buying stage by then so the stockpiled food stuffs will already be into play) but the supply will not be able to come in at the current rate.

- Still with me ? Good

Simply put, we are consuming food faster than we can get it into the supply chain. Ok?

This is actually the government releasing this (remember "Project Fear"?) and making plans to see what they can do to minimise the damage.

The logistic part of me is fascinated about how they are going to do this, the rest of me is thinking just one word

"****"

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 3:57 pm

Why does a "no deal" Brexit mean that we have to have checks at the border? Is there a rule that every single tin of peaches that comes into the country must be checked, or is it done on a spot check basis? Because with other types of taxes (eg. VAT) the transaction can happen without a government inspector standing by. Will this be physically impossible after Brexit?

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:06 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I'll try to speak very slowly for the hard to understand Brexiteers

- This is "Project Reality"

- Foodstuffs move through a supply chain, including both the single market and the customs union.

- A "No deal" Brexit stops that dead and we have to have checks at the border, which will all take time, more than the 6 seconds it takes now

- With me so far? Any words too long? Good

- The nation will continue to consume food at the current rate (well no, we'll be a mass panic buying stage by then so the stockpiled food stuffs will already be into play) but the supply will not be able to come in at the current rate.

- Still with me ? Good

Simply put, we are consuming food faster than we can get it into the supply chain. Ok?

This is actually the government releasing this (remember "Project Fear"?) and making plans to see what they can do to minimise the damage.

The logistic part of me is fascinated about how they are going to do this, the rest of me is thinking just one word

"****"

It would actually be good for the nation if we had less access to food for a while.

It could have a massive impact in prevention of obesity and type two diabetics.

Every cloud and all that.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:11 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I'll try to speak very slowly for the hard to understand Brexiteers

- This is "Project Reality"

- Foodstuffs move through a supply chain, including both the single market and the customs union.

- A "No deal" Brexit stops that dead and we have to have checks at the border, which will all take time, more than the 6 seconds it takes now

- With me so far? Any words too long? Good

- The nation will continue to consume food at the current rate (well no, we'll be a mass panic buying stage by then so the stockpiled food stuffs will already be into play) but the supply will not be able to come in at the current rate.

- Still with me ? Good

Simply put, we are consuming food faster than we can get it into the supply chain. Ok?

This is actually the government releasing this (remember "Project Fear"?) and making plans to see what they can do to minimise the damage.

The logistic part of me is fascinated about how they are going to do this, the rest of me is thinking just one word

"****"

Who says we HAVE TO have checks ?

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:11 pm

12.25 I'm taking a day off depressing brexit news today because of the football.

13.09 Stick to NHS contracts Crosspool

They are basically admitting that "Project Fear" will happen in the event of a "No deal" because it will be impossible for the supply chain to operate under its current rules.

You can spin that if you want, but that is reality.

16.16
I'll try to speak very slowly for the hard to understand Brexiteers

- This is "Project Reality"

- Foodstuffs move through a supply chain, including both the single market and the customs union.

- A "No deal" Brexit stops that dead and we have to have checks at the border, which will all take time, more than the 6 seconds it takes now

- With me so far? Any words too long? Good

- The nation will continue to consume food at the current rate (well no, we'll be a mass panic buying stage by then so the stockpiled food stuffs will already be into play) but the supply will not be able to come in at the current rate.

- Still with me ? Good

Simply put, we are consuming food faster than we can get it into the supply chain. Ok?

This is actually the government releasing this (remember "Project Fear"?) and making plans to see what they can do to minimise the damage.

The logistic part of me is fascinated about how they are going to do this, the rest of me is thinking just one word

How's that day off going ? Try not to miss the match tonight

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:15 pm

Dsr, why do you think the government are doing this?

I mean, seriously?

You need to face facts - a "No deal" Brexit means we have no existing trade agreements with the EU, which means we automatically default to WTO rules.

"If the UK defaults to WTO rules (using copied-and-pasted versions of the EU’s tariffs in the short term), the EU would still have to maintain its side of the border. That would require check goods coming into the EU from the UK.

That’s because the EU’s existence as a free trade area depends on its ability to demonstrate to the WTO that it can control its external borders properly."

And of course, there is no chance whatsoever in that event that we wouldn't do exactly the same, because the other issue which has resulted in Brexit (control of our borders) would make it politically impossible not to do it.

I'm pretty happy at the moment it has to be said, the ERG are gambling that the 100 or so conservative MPs can force a "Hard Brexit" against 500 odd who don't want one.

That makes the chances of "No Brexit" at all a lot better than they were before.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:16 pm

Point taken claretonthecoats1882!

I'm now in "worrying about the football" mode

claretonthecoast1882 · Post by **claretonthecoast1882** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:18 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Point taken claretonthecoats1882!

I'm now in "worrying about the football" mode

See, now you have something to be concerned about.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:29 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Dsr, why do you think the government are doing this?

I mean, seriously?

You need to face facts - a "No deal" Brexit means we have no existing trade agreements with the EU, which means we automatically default to WTO rules.

"If the UK defaults to WTO rules (using copied-and-pasted versions of the EU’s tariffs in the short term), the EU would still have to maintain its side of the border. That would require check goods coming into the EU from the UK.

That’s because the EU’s existence as a free trade area depends on its ability to demonstrate to the WTO that it can control its external borders properly."

And of course, there is no chance whatsoever in that event that we wouldn't do exactly the same, because the other issue which has resulted in Brexit (control of our borders) would make it politically impossible not to do it.

I'm pretty happy at the moment it has to be said, the ERG are gambling that the 100 or so conservative MPs can force a "Hard Brexit" against 500 odd who don't want one.

That makes the chances of "No Brexit" at all a lot better than they were before.

There is no scenario in the real world in which the government will make a political decision to let people starve rather than miss a few tariffs. There is no doubt that the government would let the food through unchecked, rather than be blamed because the supermarkets (and food banks) have run out of food. It will not happen. It is "politically impossible" that a government would think that way.

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:52 pm

dsr wrote:There is no scenario in the real world in which the government will make a political decision to let people starve rather than miss a few tariffs. There is no doubt that the government would let the food through unchecked, rather than be blamed because the supermarkets (and food banks) have run out of food. It will not happen. It is "politically impossible" that a government would think that way.

They’ve had two years and still haven’t got close to sorting it, because they’ve chosen the path of brinkmanship instead. Fear of appearing weak in the rabid press, by making concessions on the simplest things such as status of EU nationals in the U.K. So riven with disunity from within, the real red lines she should have drawn should have been around her own extremists to keep them out of the conversation altogether. Nothing will satisfy them but the hardest possible Brexit anyway.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:59 pm

I'm off politics today Dsr

Do some research on WTO rules theres a good chap

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:04 pm

It shouldn't be an issue, we won't have electricity to cook stuff with at that point.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:07 pm

Apologies to all

Who says we have to have checks

Peak Brexit ladies and gentlemen, Peak Brexit

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:16 pm

dsr wrote:Why does a "no deal" Brexit mean that we have to have checks at the border? ?

dsr - you seem to be a bright chap, and always construct a good argument, but we've had this conversation several times, and no matter how many times you pose the question the answer remains the same.
If we want to operate under WTO rules then we have to have hard borders and checks, and this includes Ireland. It's absolutely nothing to do with the EU. May and the govt. have already reiterated that there won't be a border in Ireland, so she has to make a deal which avoids this, but if the EU don't agree to a deal then she has a problem. (In fairness at least she recognises this, hence the flawed Chequers agreement.)

Who says we have to have checks ?

Andy - see above for the answer, which again I think you should already be aware of from previous threads.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:50 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:dsr - you seem to be a bright chap, and always construct a good argument, but we've had this conversation several times, and no matter how many times you pose the question the answer remains the same.
If we want to operate under WTO rules then we have to have hard borders and checks, and this includes Ireland. It's absolutely nothing to do with the EU. May and the govt. have already reiterated that there won't be a border in Ireland, so she has to make a deal which avoids this, but if the EU don't agree to a deal then she has a problem. (In fairness at least she recognises this, hence the flawed Chequers agreement.)

WTO rules do not say that every single import must be checked individually. It says there must be customs posts and checks, and there will be; goods arriving are sampled to ensure complaince. But the proportion of goods checked will be at the discretion of the government, obviously with WTO supervision and potential WTO sanctions of the job isn't being done right.

But if the government is faced with two choices:
1 - stick with a very strict interpretation of WTO rules and let the people starve, with front page photos of empty shelves and empty food banks, and headlines blaming the government; or
2 - relax the rules, skip the border checks, argue the toss later with the WTO;
then there is no way on earth they will choose option 1. However much Lancaster tells you that option 2 is politically impossible, option 1 would be politically worse.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:04 pm

Cloud cuckoo land dsr

There is a two way border, what the **** do you think will be happening on the other side?

We are in deep **** if two bright blokes like you and CC don't get this rather simple point to be perfectly honest.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:30 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Cloud cuckoo land dsr

There is a two way border, what the **** do you think will be happening on the other side?

We are in deep **** if two bright blokes like you and CC don't get this rather simple point to be perfectly honest.

Go on, make your simple point. What will be happening on the other side, and how will that affect our food imports?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:36 pm

Its a two way border.

They have to have checks they currently do not have with a No deal scenario because of WTO rules.

And again, you are basically saying that we won't control our own borders. Anything and anyone can come in.

I really don't get that bit in particular dsr. Its is everything that Brexit is supposed to be about, and its going to be ignored?

The actually important part of this is that the government get all this. Thats why they are planning to stockpile food.

So I get it, the EU gets it, the UK government gets it, but you don't.

Don't you think its just possible that you might not be as clued up on this as you need to be?

I know "Brexit means Brexit" sounds ace and its almost as good as "The will of the people" but the actually reality is the issue here.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:44 pm

And I actually applaud the govt here.

If we are going to go for a No deal, then the only thing worse than a No deal will be a No deal with no planning and no infrastructure put in place to deal with it*

*we've left it far too late btw, but at least plans might be in place so if it does go all tits up we won't be starting from scratch**

**though it will still be far worse than it needs to be because we haven't started early enough

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:54 pm

Now I understand. I was thinking that that article was talking short term food shortages that could be solved by short term solutions. And when I was saying that the government could skip the checks, I wasn't saying that under Brexit there will never be any checks on anything for evermore - I was saying that they could relax the checks just to speed up the imports in the short term.

You presumably reckon they're talking much more long term.

You're right, it was a very simple point. Sorry I didn't make it simple enough.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Wed Jul 11, 2018 11:58 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Its a two way border.

They have to have checks they currently do not have with a No deal scenario because of WTO rules.

And again, you are basically saying that we won't control our own borders. Anything and anyone can come in.

I really don't get that bit in particular dsr. Its is everything that Brexit is supposed to be about, and its going to be ignored?

The actually important part of this is that the government get all this. Thats why they are planning to stockpile food.

So I get it, the EU gets it, the UK government gets it, but you don't.

Don't you think its just possible that you might not be as clued up on this as you need to be?

I know "Brexit means Brexit" sounds ace and its almost as good as "The will of the people" but the actually reality is the issue here.

Hi Lancs, where does WTO state what you are claiming?

I can't find anything that fits with your explanations.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/wh ... act2_e.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Anything and anyone can come in." I'm pretty sure WTO only refers to trade, it's got nothing to do with travel, whether for business, leisure or any other purpose and nothing about immigration and the right to move to and live and work in a different country.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:19 am

nil_desperandum wrote:Well, for some absurd reason they've been "seriously ****** off" too.
Never have a "winning" side been so bitter and twisted, (and divided).

I was offered the choice of stay or leave. This entire two year farce is to prevent the EU breaking up should the leavers be proved right, and mitigate the margins.Had the hockey-cockey been an option I may have been offered a formula that fit my views. I wasn't.

So, which area would I be classed a winner?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:20 am

How short term do you think these checks are going to be Dsr?

I mean, seriously?

You haven't a scooby if you think they are going to be short term in the event of a No deal with not enough planning.

No deal means that there isn't a deal.

And if there are food shortages because of that "No deal"? Just how long do you think a "No deal" scenario is going to last in the event of that happening?

Again, reality is going to bite and its going to ******* bite hard

Sorry Paul, I was under the clear implication that a No deal scenario would end freedom of movement.....*checks*

Yup, I'm right, there is absolutely no way that a Brexit supporting government will allow freedom of movement so they would have to check and control the borders.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:28 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:And if there are food shortages because of that "No deal"? Just how long do you think a "No deal" scenario is going to last in the event of that happening?

Again, reality is going to bite and its going to ******* bite hard.

And if the earth gets hit by an asteroid because of Brexit we're going to have a problem as well. But it won't.

There won't be short term food shortages because the government and supermarkets are making plans to avoid it. There won't be long term food shortages because Britain is a rich country and can afford to buy food from elsewhere if the EU won't sell to us. Buying food may have to change, and may become more expensive - if you want to project some sensible fears, project those ones. But don't believe some think tank that says because the system will have to change, the system will utterly collapse. It won't.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:24 am

Not a scooby

Going to go through these points one at a time

There won't be short term food shortages because the government and supermarkets are making plans to avoid it

They are stockpiling processed food ie the stuff that is easiest to store (cans of food, that kind of thing) - not all food, and certainly nothing that is fresh - so yes, there will be short term food shortages.

Wagons stuck in queues at the border can't be doing the next job that they are down to do, so that impacts right down the supply chain. See the recent problems at KFC when the supply chain broke down for example.

There won't be long term food shortages because Britain is a rich country and can afford to buy food from elsewhere if the EU won't sell to us

Again, shows your lack of understanding - we can buy all the food we want from the EU, but its subject to the same border checks that have to be in place in the event of a "No deal" - You blithely saying there won't be checks when its one of the key parts of any Brexiteers belief for the future is ridiculous.

Buying food may have to change, and may become more expensive - if you want to project some sensible fears, project those ones.

Brexit means food becomes more expensive? Isn't that project fear? Oh what do you know, it is! More expensive food hits the poorest in society, you might be fine, I might be fine but millions won't be.

This is just one part of the Brexit **** fest, and this is under the assumption that its the worst possible scenario, ie a "No deal"

If you want Brexit, then make sure the MPs who know as much about the supply chain as DSR know that it has to be done so the country doesn't suffer anymore than it needs to. A "No deal" is the worst possible scenario, and is being pushed by people like Farage, Redwood, JRM etc who won't even notice the change as they are loaded, and will make even more money out of it.

Think about it for a minute at least.