politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nightmare on Brexit Street

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nightmare on Brexit Street

SUNDAY TIMES main story #tomorrowspaperstoday pic.twitter.com/2ZeWg3lkJV

Read the full story here

edmundintokyo

I think I like the odds of Brexit being modestly delayed - after March, 2019, but not cancelled or pushed way off into 2021 or whatever. The rest of the EU are unwilling to let the British string it out forever while the cabinet argues with itself, but a shitshow on the British border with France is also a shitshow on the French border with Britain.

CarlottaVance

Second! Like Remain & Corbyn.....

CarlottaVance

Companies, government departments, all sorts of organisations prepare 'worst case' scenarios....whats the impact of a 'worst case global thermonuclear war' on this scenario? Probably started between N Korea & Japan (waves at EiT...) At least we know Mrs May would use the bomb....

Wonder why the other scenarios weren't leaked.......All this will do is motivate those already opposed to Brexit, and convince those who didn't believe Project Fear in the first place that they're being lied to again.....Watch the polls move....not.

SquareRoot

Scare story. I think its bowlocks

Cicero

In fact, there is a pretty substantial body of evidence to suggest that Crashout is what is going to happen. The "we need a kick up the arse" school of thought is surprisingly large. The Cabinet has spent weeks considering which unworkable strategy they want to have as their fairy dust outcome. The EU is losing patience and is moving on to deal with problems that are,for them, more urgent. The U.K. Has been dithering for so long that no one on either side has any idea what to work for. There are simply not enough trained civil servants to deal with any complexity, even if there was political will amongst the Tories to advocate a complicated outcome. The ministers are beyond incompetent and the PM presides over a deadlocked government and a deadlocked Parliament.

So many unthinkable things have gone by: loss of Triple A, the beginnings of the Beexit depression, erosion of moderate politics and all the rest of it. We are now in boiled frog territory- people do not have any conception of how bad Crashout is: everything Project Fear/Truth has said and then some, but nobody believes it. I think you have to have a 30% chance of the worst case scenario. Personally the shear irresponsibly of it all makes me shocked and angry.

edmundintokyo

CarlottaVance said:

Companies, government departments, all sorts of organisations prepare 'worst case' scenarios....whats the impact of a 'worst case global thermonuclear war' on this scenario? Probably started between N Korea & Japan (waves at EiT...) At least we know Mrs May would use the bomb....

Yes, each city has issued specific instructions like "bury your head under your futon". This ia also a good strategy for coping with Brexit.

archer101au

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested before.

Therefore, the question is whether the EU will introduce border controls and then what impact that will have. For 80%+ of exports, I don't imagine that a delay at customs in Europe is going to be fatal - they simply have to plan for the delay. The EU cannot, of course, refuse to allow UK exports to enter at all. It is against WTO rules.

Then, if the EU do block time critical items (eg foodstuffs) then we simply retaliate. Assuming we have declared unilateral free trade with everyone, we are allowed to retaliate to someone else's actions under WTO. And as we know, the EU import a lot of stuff to the UK.

So, no, the port will not collapse and food will not run out and medical supplies will still be delivered. UK exports to the EU will be impacted but in many cases it will simply present as a time delay. And the UK government have 40bn up their sleeves to compensate affected exporters. At some stage, the EU will stop being silly and agree a trade deal or, if not, formalise sensible agreements for WTO trade.

Either way, not seeing doomsday.

ydoethur

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?

That said it would also be a bit surprising that we would run out of petrol given the EU doesn't produce much (only a little from Denmark) so supplies should be unaffected. We do however import quite a lot of crude oil from Norway which may I suppose be the basis of that report. They should have pointed out as well however that this would cause significant problems elsewhere, particularly in the Benelux countries where we export a large chunk of our own oil (although it isn't used for petrol).

Does the Times report actually do that? I refuse to hand over money to anything associated with the loathsome Murdoch so I haven't read it in full.

JackW

How could any reasonable observer think a BREXIT Doomsday PM Jezza would come to pass, especially with the the outstanding skill shown the Conservative government in negotiating our withdrawal from the EU since the referendum ....

Oh bugger !!!!!!!!!!!

Alanbrooke

Cicero said:

In fact, there is a pretty substantial body of evidence to suggest that Crashout is what is going to happen. The "we need a kick up the arse" school of thought is surprisingly large. The Cabinet has spent weeks considering which unworkable strategy they want to have as their fairy dust outcome. The EU is losing patience and is moving on to deal with problems that are,for them, more urgent. The U.K. Has been dithering for so long that no one on either side has any idea what to work for. There are simply not enough trained civil servants to deal with any complexity, even if there was political will amongst the Tories to advocate a complicated outcome. The ministers are beyond incompetent and the PM presides over a deadlocked government and a deadlocked Parliament.

So many unthinkable things have gone by: loss of Triple A, the beginnings of the Beexit depression, erosion of moderate politics and all the rest of it. We are now in boiled frog territory- people do not have any conception of how bad Crashout is: everything Project Fear/Truth has said and then some, but nobody believes it. I think you have to have a 30% chance of the worst case scenario. Personally the shear irresponsibly of it all makes me shocked and angry.

so your generation of management cant even do the most basic things. How totally crap you must be, it's easy to understand why the electorate voted to stop you in your tracks and change direction.

Nul points

williamglenn

Alanbrooke said:

Cicero said:

In fact, there is a pretty substantial body of evidence to suggest that Crashout is what is going to happen. The "we need a kick up the arse" school of thought is surprisingly large. The Cabinet has spent weeks considering which unworkable strategy they want to have as their fairy dust outcome. The EU is losing patience and is moving on to deal with problems that are,for them, more urgent. The U.K. Has been dithering for so long that no one on either side has any idea what to work for. There are simply not enough trained civil servants to deal with any complexity, even if there was political will amongst the Tories to advocate a complicated outcome. The ministers are beyond incompetent and the PM presides over a deadlocked government and a deadlocked Parliament.

So many unthinkable things have gone by: loss of Triple A, the beginnings of the Beexit depression, erosion of moderate politics and all the rest of it. We are now in boiled frog territory- people do not have any conception of how bad Crashout is: everything Project Fear/Truth has said and then some, but nobody believes it. I think you have to have a 30% chance of the worst case scenario. Personally the shear irresponsibly of it all makes me shocked and angry.

so your generation of management cant even do the most basic things. How totally crap you must be, it's easy to understand why the electorate voted to stop you in your tracks and change direction.

Nul points

I assume you’ve volunteered to work for DExEU or are you waiting for them to come to you?

Alanbrooke

williamglenn said:

Alanbrooke said:

Cicero said:

In fact, there is a pretty substantial body of evidence to suggest that Crashout is what is going to happen. The "we need a kick up the arse" school of thought is surprisingly large. The Cabinet has spent weeks considering which unworkable strategy they want to have as their fairy dust outcome. The EU is losing patience and is moving on to deal with problems that are,for them, more urgent. The U.K. Has been dithering for so long that no one on either side has any idea what to work for. There are simply not enough trained civil servants to deal with any complexity, even if there was political will amongst the Tories to advocate a complicated outcome. The ministers are beyond incompetent and the PM presides over a deadlocked government and a deadlocked Parliament.

So many unthinkable things have gone by: loss of Triple A, the beginnings of the Beexit depression, erosion of moderate politics and all the rest of it. We are now in boiled frog territory- people do not have any conception of how bad Crashout is: everything Project Fear/Truth has said and then some, but nobody believes it. I think you have to have a 30% chance of the worst case scenario. Personally the shear irresponsibly of it all makes me shocked and angry.

so your generation of management cant even do the most basic things. How totally crap you must be, it's easy to understand why the electorate voted to stop you in your tracks and change direction.

Nul points

I assume you’ve volunteered to work for DExEU or are you waiting for them to come to you?

be gone or I'll set the bus on you

CarlottaVance

Great correction:

https://twitter.com/GaryBurgessCI/status/1002851695687340032

Although I suspect Mr Eastwood might have more to complain about.....

ydoethur

CarlottaVance said:

Great correction:

https://twitter.com/GaryBurgessCI/status/1002851695687340032

Although I suspect Mr Eastwood might have more to complain about.....

A violent, hard shagging, fat old star past his prime...

...was confused with Clint Eastwood?

FF43

A lack of food in supermarkets focuses minds. Even if it's just a visualization exercise. This story was leaked, I suspect, to focus minds which are totally spaced out. It's simple to avoid an immediate jump off the cliff. We agree the EU demands for the withdrawal agreement, including especially the Irish border backstop then we get another two years grace of standstill "transition".

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

It's almost as if May is incredibly stupid/incompetent not to have such contingency planning.

ydoethur

FF43 said:

A lack of food in supermarkets focuses minds. Even if it's just a visualization exercise. This story was leaked, I suspect, to focus minds which are totally spaced out. It's simple to avoid an immediate jump off the cliff. We agree the EU demands for the withdrawal agreement, including especially the Irish border backstop then we get another two years grace of standstill "transition".

That could be true, and would be a reasonable excuse.

However, the danger with stories like this, if they are intended to be hyperbolic, is that when they fail to come to pass people start thinking everything else is a lie as well.

So when something does come up that has real implications for our future, they just go 'meh' and carry on regardless. Indeed, arguably they're doing that now after the EU referendum campaign, the election of Trump and Corbyn's near miss. All of these were prophesied to be disasters (and indeed have been) but because they weren't quite as disastrous as predicted to their supporters it feels like they have been either neutral or even a success.

The boy who cried wolf is a very sensible story.

FF43

ydoethur said:

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?

That said it would also be a bit surprising that we would run out of petrol given the EU doesn't produce much (only a little from Denmark) so supplies should be unaffected. We do however import quite a lot of crude oil from Norway which may I suppose be the basis of that report. They should have pointed out as well however that this would cause significant problems elsewhere, particularly in the Benelux countries where we export a large chunk of our own oil (although it isn't used for petrol).

Does the Times report actually do that? I refuse to hand over money to anything associated with the loathsome Murdoch so I haven't read it in full.

There was an article about this in one of the pharma magazines. The problem it identified is that although medicines would get special treatment, they would be held up in the general chaos at the border. Some medicines have very short shelf lives.

ydoethur

FF43 said:

ydoethur said:

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?

That said it would also be a bit surprising that we would run out of petrol given the EU doesn't produce much (only a little from Denmark) so supplies should be unaffected. We do however import quite a lot of crude oil from Norway which may I suppose be the basis of that report. They should have pointed out as well however that this would cause significant problems elsewhere, particularly in the Benelux countries where we export a large chunk of our own oil (although it isn't used for petrol).

Does the Times report actually do that? I refuse to hand over money to anything associated with the loathsome Murdoch so I haven't read it in full.

There was an article about this in one of the pharma magazines. The problem it identified is that although medicines would get special treatment, they would be held up in the general chaos at the border. Some medicines have very short shelf lives.

Thanks. Do you have a link by any chance?

CarlottaVance

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

It's almost as if May is incredibly stupid/incompetent not to have such contingency planning.

The EU keeps saying 'the UK will be a third country'. We should plan on that basis. Including immigration. IF the EU offers a good trade deal, then we could look at a more flexible Immigration plan - but to offer it before hand is simply madness. Like with defence - we offer an unconditional plan and the EU banks it and says 'we don't trust you over Galileo'......

logical_song

archer101au said:

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested before.

Therefore, the question is whether the EU will introduce border controls and then what impact that will have. For 80%+ of exports, I don't imagine that a delay at customs in Europe is going to be fatal - they simply have to plan for the delay. The EU cannot, of course, refuse to allow UK exports to enter at all. It is against WTO rules.

Then, if the EU do block time critical items (eg foodstuffs) then we simply retaliate. Assuming we have declared unilateral free trade with everyone, we are allowed to retaliate to someone else's actions under WTO. And as we know, the EU import a lot of stuff to the UK.

So, no, the port will not collapse and food will not run out and medical supplies will still be delivered. UK exports to the EU will be impacted but in many cases it will simply present as a time delay. And the UK government have 40bn up their sleeves to compensate affected exporters. At some stage, the EU will stop being silly and agree a trade deal or, if not, formalise sensible agreements for WTO trade.

Either way, not seeing doomsday.

"if we simply drop border controls" will that equate to free movement?

logical_song

SquareRoot said:

Scare story. I think its bowlocks

Well, you would, wouldn't you?

AlastairMeeks

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

FF43

ydoethur said:

FF43 said:

ydoethur said:

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?

That said it would also be a bit surprising that we would run out of petrol given the EU doesn't produce much (only a little from Denmark) so supplies should be unaffected. We do however import quite a lot of crude oil from Norway which may I suppose be the basis of that report. They should have pointed out as well however that this would cause significant problems elsewhere, particularly in the Benelux countries where we export a large chunk of our own oil (although it isn't used for petrol).

Does the Times report actually do that? I refuse to hand over money to anything associated with the loathsome Murdoch so I haven't read it in full.

There was an article about this in one of the pharma magazines. The problem it identified is that although medicines would get special treatment, they would be held up in the general chaos at the border. Some medicines have very short shelf lives.

Thanks. Do you have a link by any chance?

Not at the moment. You stumble across something on the web and think that's interesting. If I find it I'll post it or DM you.

archer101au

FF43 said:

A lack of food in supermarkets focuses minds. Even if it's just a visualization exercise. This story was leaked, I suspect, to focus minds which are totally spaced out. It's simple to avoid an immediate jump off the cliff. We agree the EU demands for the withdrawal agreement, including especially the Irish border backstop then we get another two years grace of standstill "transition".

Why bother? Why pay 40bn when there is no difference in the outcome? Nothing is going to change in terms of getting a deal with the EU. If we can't come to an agreement now, might as well take the 'cliff edge' now rather than in two years. And we are 40bn better off to help people who might be affected.

tlg86

FF43 said:

ydoethur said:

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?

That said it would also be a bit surprising that we would run out of petrol given the EU doesn't produce much (only a little from Denmark) so supplies should be unaffected. We do however import quite a lot of crude oil from Norway which may I suppose be the basis of that report. They should have pointed out as well however that this would cause significant problems elsewhere, particularly in the Benelux countries where we export a large chunk of our own oil (although it isn't used for petrol).

Does the Times report actually do that? I refuse to hand over money to anything associated with the loathsome Murdoch so I haven't read it in full.

There was an article about this in one of the pharma magazines. The problem it identified is that although medicines would get special treatment, they would be held up in the general chaos at the border. Some medicines have very short shelf lives.

Held up at which border and by whom? Surely they'd only be held up by our own people? Or is there a suggestion that the EU will ban exports to the UK? Generally I thought countries were worried about what was coming in rather than what was going out.

archer101au

logical_song said:

archer101au said:

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested before.

Therefore, the question is whether the EU will introduce border controls and then what impact that will have. For 80%+ of exports, I don't imagine that a delay at customs in Europe is going to be fatal - they simply have to plan for the delay. The EU cannot, of course, refuse to allow UK exports to enter at all. It is against WTO rules.

Then, if the EU do block time critical items (eg foodstuffs) then we simply retaliate. Assuming we have declared unilateral free trade with everyone, we are allowed to retaliate to someone else's actions under WTO. And as we know, the EU import a lot of stuff to the UK.

So, no, the port will not collapse and food will not run out and medical supplies will still be delivered. UK exports to the EU will be impacted but in many cases it will simply present as a time delay. And the UK government have 40bn up their sleeves to compensate affected exporters. At some stage, the EU will stop being silly and agree a trade deal or, if not, formalise sensible agreements for WTO trade.

Either way, not seeing doomsday.

"if we simply drop border controls" will that equate to free movement?

No. Unilateral feee trade - only affects goods imports. In fact, proper immigration controls could be imposed immediately.

ydoethur

FF43 said:

ydoethur said:

FF43 said:

ydoethur said:

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?

That said it would also be a bit surprising that we would run out of petrol given the EU doesn't produce much (only a little from Denmark) so supplies should be unaffected. We do however import quite a lot of crude oil from Norway which may I suppose be the basis of that report. They should have pointed out as well however that this would cause significant problems elsewhere, particularly in the Benelux countries where we export a large chunk of our own oil (although it isn't used for petrol).

Does the Times report actually do that? I refuse to hand over money to anything associated with the loathsome Murdoch so I haven't read it in full.

There was an article about this in one of the pharma magazines. The problem it identified is that although medicines would get special treatment, they would be held up in the general chaos at the border. Some medicines have very short shelf lives.

Thanks. Do you have a link by any chance?

Not at the moment. You stumble across something on the web and think that's interesting. If I find it I'll post it or DM you.

Thanks again.

Sandpit

logical_song said:

archer101au said:

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested before.

Therefore, the question is whether the EU will introduce border controls and then what impact that will have. For 80%+ of exports, I don't imagine that a delay at customs in Europe is going to be fatal - they simply have to plan for the delay. The EU cannot, of course, refuse to allow UK exports to enter at all. It is against WTO rules.

Then, if the EU do block time critical items (eg foodstuffs) then we simply retaliate. Assuming we have declared unilateral free trade with everyone, we are allowed to retaliate to someone else's actions under WTO. And as we know, the EU import a lot of stuff to the UK.

So, no, the port will not collapse and food will not run out and medical supplies will still be delivered. UK exports to the EU will be impacted but in many cases it will simply present as a time delay. And the UK government have 40bn up their sleeves to compensate affected exporters. At some stage, the EU will stop being silly and agree a trade deal or, if not, formalise sensible agreements for WTO trade.

Either way, not seeing doomsday.

"if we simply drop border controls" will that equate to free movement?

No. “Free Movement” in the language of the EU refers to the intitlement to a National Insurance number, to welfare and healthcare. It’s not something that happens at borders.

ydoethur

logical_song said:

archer101au said:

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested before.

Therefore, the question is whether the EU will introduce border controls and then what impact that will have. For 80%+ of exports, I don't imagine that a delay at customs in Europe is going to be fatal - they simply have to plan for the delay. The EU cannot, of course, refuse to allow UK exports to enter at all. It is against WTO rules.

Then, if the EU do block time critical items (eg foodstuffs) then we simply retaliate. Assuming we have declared unilateral free trade with everyone, we are allowed to retaliate to someone else's actions under WTO. And as we know, the EU import a lot of stuff to the UK.

So, no, the port will not collapse and food will not run out and medical supplies will still be delivered. UK exports to the EU will be impacted but in many cases it will simply present as a time delay. And the UK government have 40bn up their sleeves to compensate affected exporters. At some stage, the EU will stop being silly and agree a trade deal or, if not, formalise sensible agreements for WTO trade.

Either way, not seeing doomsday.

"if we simply drop border controls" will that equate to free movement?

Free movement of people, yes. Although in practice we have border controls at most locations anyway due to the sheer logistics of our being an island. You can't simply drive to Bolougne, and you have to show some form of ID to get on the transport. But that would I think have been the case given we're outside Schengen anyway.

Northern Ireland and Gibraltar are the exceptions - that said, one periodically has border controls anyway due to Spanish hissy fits and the other is governed under different rules by the Common Travel Area.

Free movement of labour is however a somewhat different concept and isn't related to border controls.

JackW

@ydoethur - A very binary post ....

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

Calling @Foxy

I can see the logic of the headline regarding food and petrol, both of which we are net importers of. However, I am very surprised at the claim about medicines as I thought we were a net exporter of those. Am I wrong, is the Times wrong or is this about the raw ingredients needed to produce them?....

You can be a net exporter of a category of goods without producing everything in that category - which is, of course the case with pharmaceuticals.
The same applies to ingredients for pharmaceutical manufacturing (over which there was a vaguely similar scare a few years ago) -
https://www.chemistanddruggist.co.uk/news/mhra-averts-uk-drugs-shortage-relaxing-eu-importing-rules

IanB2

archer101au said:

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested before.

Therefore, the question is whether the EU will introduce border controls and then what impact that will have. For 80%+ of exports, I don't imagine that a delay at customs in Europe is going to be fatal - they simply have to plan for the delay. The EU cannot, of course, refuse to allow UK exports to enter at all. It is against WTO rules.

Then, if the EU do block time critical items (eg foodstuffs) then we simply retaliate. Assuming we have declared unilateral free trade with everyone, we are allowed to retaliate to someone else's actions under WTO. And as we know, the EU import a lot of stuff to the UK.

So, no, the port will not collapse and food will not run out and medical supplies will still be delivered. UK exports to the EU will be impacted but in many cases it will simply present as a time delay. And the UK government have 40bn up their sleeves to compensate affected exporters. At some stage, the EU will stop being silly and agree a trade deal or, if not, formalise sensible agreements for WTO trade.

Either way, not seeing doomsday.

It is this sort of 'trying to mend a computer with a hammer' that has created this mess in the first place.

Whenever people use the terms 'clearly' or 'simply', it is rarely because the thing is actually clear or simple.

SquareRoot

logical_song said:

SquareRoot said:

Scare story. I think its bowlocks

Well, you would, wouldn't you?

Yup I guess I would. Most of the stories emanating from either side may have a grain of truth in them, but its mainly postulating from both sides of the argument.

AlastairMeeks

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

Icarus

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

hamiltonace

The issue with medicines is the regulatory environment not the physical border per see. We manufacture products in accordance with the European medical device regulations. If we are no longer part of Europe we no longer have to comply or can comply until a new system is put in place. Thus the products we make can be physically shipped to Europe but cannot be used as they will be misbranded. In the same way the UK has no way to check what products can be used in the UK legally. It has one option to stop all sales and the other option to allow all sales. It is unclear which is worse. In Africa up to half of all drugs are counterfeits, if the rule is I can sell what I want then I can instantly make millions by switching from registered products to counterfeits. I would not do this but others would. Thus my business would fold as I cannot sell in the UK and I cannot sell internationally. The only option is to become Irish and ship all product out of UK and probably not back into the UK.

Morris_Dancer

Miss Vance, indeed. May's pathetic, endless dithering is no good.

Nigelb

archer101au said:

Well, it seems that the civil service conclude that we can avoid ALL of the issues they mention if we simply drop border controls for a period, as I suggested .....

The leaked document is a scenario, not a prediction. One might assume it was leaked out of fear that insufficient planning was taking place to mitigate this particular (not quite worst case) scenario.
‘Dropping border controls’ might suffice, but how much work has been done on the implications of that ? (Note WTO rules require that we would have do do so for all our trading partners, but just the EU.)

OldKingCole

I’m always suspicious of ‘worst case’ scenaria although, sadly, experience suggests that they CAN happen.

OldKingCole

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I thought the piece on it the Guardian yesterday was good. I wonder who is going to play Cyril Smith, who, IIRC from his autobiography, tried, as Liberal Chief Whip, to cheer Jeremy up by teasing him about shooting dogs, and couldn’t understand why it wasn’t thought funny!

Nigelb

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Vance, indeed. May's pathetic, endless dithering is no good.

Hence these sort of stories...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/02/replace-theresa-may-with-michael-gove-tory-donor-says-brexit-uk-news

Theuniondivvie

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

We really need news leaked that the government has preemptively printed a large stock of ration book to get into the nostalgic swing of things. Vera Lynn is, as ever, ready to serve.

JackW

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

NickPalmer

AlastairMeeks said:

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

Yes, it's actually good strategy - both for the reason you say and because it means that ANY deal will look like a triumph.

Bromptonaut

hamiltonace said:

The issue with medicines is the regulatory environment not the physical border per see. We manufacture products in accordance with the European medical device regulations. If we are no longer part of Europe we no longer have to comply or can comply until a new system is put in place. Thus the products we make can be physically shipped to Europe but cannot be used as they will be misbranded. In the same way the UK has no way to check what products can be used in the UK legally. It has one option to stop all sales and the other option to allow all sales. It is unclear which is worse. In Africa up to half of all drugs are counterfeits, if the rule is I can sell what I want then I can instantly make millions by switching from registered products to counterfeits. I would not do this but others would. Thus my business would fold as I cannot sell in the UK and I cannot sell internationally. The only option is to become Irish and ship all product out of UK and probably not back into the UK.

An example of what Sir Ivan calls “behind the border” barriers, AIUI.

https://policyscotland.gla.ac.uk/blog-sir-ivan-rogers-speech-text-in-full/

OldKingCole

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

Iin 1979 one of my junior staff came back from her (fairly late as I recall) lunch break to report that “they’ve let Jeremy Thorpe off”!
Which, on reflection, was probably more accurate than she realised.

Bromptonaut

CarlottaVance said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

It's almost as if May is incredibly stupid/incompetent not to have such contingency planning.

The EU keeps saying 'the UK will be a third country'. We should plan on that basis. Including immigration. IF the EU offers a good trade deal, then we could look at a more flexible Immigration plan - but to offer it before hand is simply madness. Like with defence - we offer an unconditional plan and the EU banks it and says 'we don't trust you over Galileo'......

Yes, that’ll work.

OldKingCole

Bromptonaut said:

hamiltonace said:

The issue with medicines is the regulatory environment not the physical border per see. We manufacture products in accordance with the European medical device regulations. If we are no longer part of Europe we no longer have to comply or can comply until a new system is put in place. Thus the products we make can be physically shipped to Europe but cannot be used as they will be misbranded. In the same way the UK has no way to check what products can be used in the UK legally. It has one option to stop all sales and the other option to allow all sales. It is unclear which is worse. In Africa up to half of all drugs are counterfeits, if the rule is I can sell what I want then I can instantly make millions by switching from registered products to counterfeits. I would not do this but others would. Thus my business would fold as I cannot sell in the UK and I cannot sell internationally. The only option is to become Irish and ship all product out of UK and probably not back into the UK.

An example of what Sir Ivan calls “behind the border” barriers, AIUI.

https://policyscotland.gla.ac.uk/blog-sir-ivan-rogers-speech-text-in-full/

This issue was discussed a few months ago when we pulled out of the EMA andthe process started for it to move to Amsterdam. A lot of work which the British did for it will go somewhere else, too.

JackW

OldKingCole said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

Iin 1979 one of my junior staff came back from her (fairly late as I recall) lunch break to report that “they’ve let Jeremy Thorpe off”!
Which, on reflection, was probably more accurate than she realised.

Or not ... as the judge said :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyos-M48B8U

SouthamObserver

NickPalmer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

Yes, it's actually good strategy - both for the reason you say and because it means that ANY deal will look like a triumph.

That works as a short-term tactic. However, looking like a triumph on agreement day and it feeling like one six months later are two very different things. It does seem as if the way is being paved for the softest of soft Brexits, but what will the Tory Brexit loons make of that should it come to pass? All this for little more than blue passports? Really?

Recidivist

hamiltonace said:

The issue with medicines is the regulatory environment not the physical border per see. We manufacture products in accordance with the European medical device regulations. If we are no longer part of Europe we no longer have to comply or can comply until a new system is put in place. Thus the products we make can be physically shipped to Europe but cannot be used as they will be misbranded. In the same way the UK has no way to check what products can be used in the UK legally. It has one option to stop all sales and the other option to allow all sales. It is unclear which is worse. In Africa up to half of all drugs are counterfeits, if the rule is I can sell what I want then I can instantly make millions by switching from registered products to counterfeits. I would not do this but others would. Thus my business would fold as I cannot sell in the UK and I cannot sell internationally. The only option is to become Irish and ship all product out of UK and probably not back into the UK.

A fairly simple mutual recognition agreement would solve nearly all the short term problems I would have thought. The long term damage to UK based R&D and investment is the thing to worry about.

Foxy

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

SouthamObserver

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

Let’s all just give thanks that whatever happens Lord Lawson will be OK in his mansion in France.

Foxy

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

I was out watching the Rolling Stones at Coventry last night. Jagger and Richards still have a lot of energy, so the presevative power of lots of money and debauchery is confirmed

Great show btw, better than when I saw them in 1982 at the old Wembley. Perhaps the extra 35 years of practice did the trick.

JackW

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

Clearly the post BREXIT food shortages are part of the Conservative governments drive to eliminate obesity. Infant foods also to be severely rationed to enable Tory members to eat leaner, healthier babies ....

Sean_F

OldKingCole said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

Iin 1979 one of my junior staff came back from her (fairly late as I recall) lunch break to report that “they’ve let Jeremy Thorpe off”!
Which, on reflection, was probably more accurate than she realised.

IIRC, Thorpe could have shot Scott down in front of ten witnesses and been acquitted. People detested Scott.

hamiltonace

Recidivist said:

hamiltonace said:

The issue with medicines is the regulatory environment not the physical border per see. We manufacture products in accordance with the European medical device regulations. If we are no longer part of Europe we no longer have to comply or can comply until a new system is put in place. Thus the products we make can be physically shipped to Europe but cannot be used as they will be misbranded. In the same way the UK has no way to check what products can be used in the UK legally. It has one option to stop all sales and the other option to allow all sales. It is unclear which is worse. In Africa up to half of all drugs are counterfeits, if the rule is I can sell what I want then I can instantly make millions by switching from registered products to counterfeits. I would not do this but others would. Thus my business would fold as I cannot sell in the UK and I cannot sell internationally. The only option is to become Irish and ship all product out of UK and probably not back into the UK.

A fairly simple mutual recognition agreement would solve nearly all the short term problems I would have thought. The long term damage to UK based R&D and investment is the thing to worry about.

This would be ideal as in Switzerland. However it needs to be negotiated. The USA and Europe started to negotiate over 10 years ago on mutual recognition.

Mortimer

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

The Golden Rule of Brexit suggests that Remainers whooping about being a vassal state might be somewhat previous.

I'm yet to see whether their hopes and dreams will be dashed by:

1) A comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU recognising equivilence
2) Transition (longer) to MaxFac with us out of the regulatory orbit of the EU
or 3) The unveiling of an agreement somewhere between the two but that sees most of our red lines respected

I'm pretty sure that the customs union vote in Parliament will disappoint them, however...

Sean_F

CarlottaVance said:

Great correction:

https://twitter.com/GaryBurgessCI/status/1002851695687340032

Although I suspect Mr Eastwood might have more to complain about.....

In Hampton Court Palace, there's a mural showing an angel with John Prescott's face.

Sean_F

JackW said:

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

Clearly the post BREXIT food shortages are part of the Conservative governments drive to eliminate obesity. Infant foods also to be severely rationed to enable Tory members to eat leaner, healthier babies ....

I expect it will be like 28 Days Later, or Threads, so I'll stock up with food and guns.

Icarus

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

Icarus Manor sold (took 7years!!). All good helped by a reverse forecast on the Derby yesterday. Mrs Icarus wanted to know why hadn't put £500 instead of £5!

FF43

Recidivist said:

hamiltonace said:

The issue with medicines is the regulatory environment not the physical border per see. We manufacture products in accordance with the European medical device regulations. If we are no longer part of Europe we no longer have to comply or can comply until a new system is put in place. Thus the products we make can be physically shipped to Europe but cannot be used as they will be misbranded. In the same way the UK has no way to check what products can be used in the UK legally. It has one option to stop all sales and the other option to allow all sales. It is unclear which is worse. In Africa up to half of all drugs are counterfeits, if the rule is I can sell what I want then I can instantly make millions by switching from registered products to counterfeits. I would not do this but others would. Thus my business would fold as I cannot sell in the UK and I cannot sell internationally. The only option is to become Irish and ship all product out of UK and probably not back into the UK.

A fairly simple mutual recognition agreement would solve nearly all the short term problems I would have thought. The long term damage to UK based R&D and investment is the thing to worry about.

There won't be a mutual recognition agreement. The EU won't trust a third party on equivalence. It requires conformance on its rules, current and future, subject to ECJ oversight. Bear in mind though that this is a problem for the post Brexit settlement as we get a two year standstill "transition". The pressing issue is the withdrawal agreement and the Irish border backstop, without which we don't get a transition.

Foxy

Mortimer said:

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

The Golden Rule of Brexit suggests that Remainers whooping about being a vassal state might be somewhat previous.

I'm yet to see whether their hopes and dreams will be dashed by:

1) A comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU recognising equivilence
2) Transition (longer) to MaxFac with us out of the regulatory orbit of the EU
or 3) The unveiling of an agreement somewhere between the two but that sees most of our red lines respected

I'm pretty sure that the customs union vote in Parliament will disappoint them, however...

I suspect that parliament will vote down CU in June, but they may well acquiesce later.

I have prepared my household finances and circumstances to cover all eventualities from car crash Brexit to reversal of A50. One of the advantages of my profession is that I will never be short of work!

I do expect Brexit to end with a whimper not a bang. Just everyone wondering what all the fuss was about, followed by years of gentle decline.

CarlottaVance

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1003180815440908288?s=20

Not sure it’s within his gift...

DecrepitJohnL

Foxy said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

I was out watching the Rolling Stones at Coventry last night. Jagger and Richards still have a lot of energy, so the presevative power of lots of money and debauchery is confirmed

Great show btw, better than when I saw them in 1982 at the old Wembley. Perhaps the extra 35 years of practice did the trick.

Bands have become their own tribute bands. That's why the shows are better now.

The other change is in the economics of the music industry. Tours used to be loss leaders to sell records. Now tours are lucrative because stadiums are bigger and ticket prices are astronomic, whereas almost no-one buys records any more and Spotify and the other streaming services pay less.

In olden times, bands on tour used to perform the new album, which no-one knew, because that was what they wanted to sell, and two or three standards, but in new arrangements because they were bored by the old ones. Then tribute acts came along and did the "greatest hits" in precisely the same arrangements as on the records.

So to chase sackloads of spondulicks, bands re-form and get back on the road, playing the standards from decades ago.

Or at least, that is how a producer explained it to me a couple of years back.

Sandpit

Icarus said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

Icarus Manor sold (took 7years!!). All good helped by a reverse forecast on the Derby yesterday. Mrs Icarus wanted to know why hadn't put £500 instead of £5!

I’m sure Mrs Icarus would have had a different view if you’d lost a £500 bet!

SunnyJim

Remainer dominated Civil Service in 'Brexit Doomsday' shock.

How crushingly predictable.

felix

OldKingCole said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I thought the piece on it the Guardian yesterday was good. I wonder who is going to play Cyril Smith, who, IIRC from his autobiography, tried, as Liberal Chief Whip, to cheer Jeremy up by teasing him about shooting dogs, and couldn’t understand why it wasn’t thought funny!

I suspect the Cyril Smith character may need a 'green' party solution to encompass his notorious girth.

felix

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1003180815440908288?s=20

Not sure it’s within his gift...

He can't give his own as they were lost many years ago.

AlastairMeeks

When even the loyalists are losing faith...

https://twitter.com/ConHome/status/1003173269875384320?s=20

Sandpit

DecrepitJohnL said:

Foxy said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

I was out watching the Rolling Stones at Coventry last night. Jagger and Richards still have a lot of energy, so the presevative power of lots of money and debauchery is confirmed

Great show btw, better than when I saw them in 1982 at the old Wembley. Perhaps the extra 35 years of practice did the trick.

Bands have become their own tribute bands. That's why the shows are better now.

The other change is in the economics of the music industry. Tours used to be loss leaders to sell records. Now tours are lucrative because stadiums are bigger and ticket prices are astronomic, whereas almost no-one buys records any more and Spotify and the other streaming services pay less.

In olden times, bands on tour used to perform the new album, which no-one knew, because that was what they wanted to sell, and two or three standards, but in new arrangements because they were bored by the old ones. Then tribute acts came along and did the "greatest hits" in precisely the same arrangements as on the records.

So to chase sackloads of spondulicks, bands re-form and get back on the road, playing the standards from decades ago.

Or at least, that is how a producer explained it to me a couple of years back.

Yup, from the 1950s to about five years ago artists made most of their money selling records. Then almost overnight people stopped buying music as it’s all now online, and artists now have to make money the old fashioned way by actually performing.

To be fair to the Strolling Bones, they’ve been on tour every few years for half a century now, obviously gives them Satisfaction.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Meeks, not surprising. Regardless of the way one voted, May's efforts have been lacklustre at best.

Easy to say with hindsight, but it would have been wiser to throw her overboard after she managed to become the first woman in history to be caught out by her own ambush.

Foxy

DecrepitJohnL said:

Foxy said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

I was out watching the Rolling Stones at Coventry last night. Jagger and Richards still have a lot of energy, so the presevative power of lots of money and debauchery is confirmed

Great show btw, better than when I saw them in 1982 at the old Wembley. Perhaps the extra 35 years of practice did the trick.

Bands have become their own tribute bands. That's why the shows are better now.

The other change is in the economics of the music industry. Tours used to be loss leaders to sell records. Now tours are lucrative because stadiums are bigger and ticket prices are astronomic, whereas almost no-one buys records any more and Spotify and the other streaming services pay less.

In olden times, bands on tour used to perform the new album, which no-one knew, because that was what they wanted to sell, and two or three standards, but in new arrangements because they were bored by the old ones. Then tribute acts came along and did the "greatest hits" in precisely the same arrangements as on the records.

So to chase sackloads of spondulicks, bands re-form and get back on the road, playing the standards from decades ago.

Or at least, that is how a producer explained it to me a couple of years back.

Ticket prices have certainly gone up. Last night cost 10 times what I paid for Wembley in 1982, while I reckon inflation should have merely trebled them.

Leicestershire's own Glastonbudget is Tribute band heaven. Great fun too:

https://twitter.com/oasish/status/1000650221553115136?s=19

Who cares what is ersatz nowadays? Oasish are better than Oasis...

Foxy

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1003180815440908288?s=20

Not sure it’s within his gift...

I do hope so! it would be a lovely gesture to mark 200 years of Greek independence.

Sean_F

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Meeks, not surprising. Regardless of the way one voted, May's efforts have been lacklustre at best.

Easy to say with hindsight, but it would have been wiser to throw her overboard after she managed to become the first woman in history to be caught out by her own ambush.

Strange as it may seem, her poll ratings are not bad at all.

Benpointer

Foxy said:

Mortimer said:

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

The Golden Rule of Brexit suggests that Remainers whooping about being a vassal state might be somewhat previous.

I'm yet to see whether their hopes and dreams will be dashed by:

1) A comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU recognising equivilence
2) Transition (longer) to MaxFac with us out of the regulatory orbit of the EU
or 3) The unveiling of an agreement somewhere between the two but that sees most of our red lines respected

I'm pretty sure that the customs union vote in Parliament will disappoint them, however...

I suspect that parliament will vote down CU in June, but they may well acquiesce later.

I have prepared my household finances and circumstances to cover all eventualities from car crash Brexit to reversal of A50. One of the advantages of my profession is that I will never be short of work!

I do expect Brexit to end with a whimper not a bang. Just everyone wondering what all the fuss was about, followed by years of gentle decline.

"I do expect Brexit to end with a whimper not a bang. Just everyone wondering what all the fuss was about, followed by years of gentle decline. "

Sounds like a metaphor for life.

TOPPING

DecrepitJohnL said:

Foxy said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

I was out watching the Rolling Stones at Coventry last night. Jagger and Richards still have a lot of energy, so the presevative power of lots of money and debauchery is confirmed

Great show btw, better than when I saw them in 1982 at the old Wembley. Perhaps the extra 35 years of practice did the trick.

Bands have become their own tribute bands. That's why the shows are better now.

The other change is in the economics of the music industry. Tours used to be loss leaders to sell records. Now tours are lucrative because stadiums are bigger and ticket prices are astronomic, whereas almost no-one buys records any more and Spotify and the other streaming services pay less.

In olden times, bands on tour used to perform the new album, which no-one knew, because that was what they wanted to sell, and two or three standards, but in new arrangements because they were bored by the old ones. Then tribute acts came along and did the "greatest hits" in precisely the same arrangements as on the records.

So to chase sackloads of spondulicks, bands re-form and get back on the road, playing the standards from decades ago.

Or at least, that is how a producer explained it to me a couple of years back.

Good post.

Icarus

Sandpit said:

Icarus said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

Icarus Manor sold (took 7years!!). All good helped by a reverse forecast on the Derby yesterday. Mrs Icarus wanted to know why hadn't put £500 instead of £5!

I’m sure Mrs Icarus would have had a different view if you’d lost a £500 bet!

I only tell when I win!!

NickPalmer

SouthamObserver said:

NickPalmer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

Yes, it's actually good strategy - both for the reason you say and because it means that ANY deal will look like a triumph.

That works as a short-term tactic. However, looking like a triumph on agreement day and it feeling like one six months later are two very different things. It does seem as if the way is being paved for the softest of soft Brexits, but what will the Tory Brexit loons make of that should it come to pass? All this for little more than blue passports? Really?

There are three main camps of Brexiteers who will react differently to a soft Brexit "because unfortunately a massive change is not possible without further preparation". The seriously ideological will be pleased that we've withdrawn, and will patiently await the arrival of a future government which can exploit the new freedom. They'll be a little disappointed but mostly recognise that May has difficulties. The mild Brexiteers will feel that's OK, we separated out but it's nice and soft, well done May. The ordinary punters who voted Leave will feel a bit sold out, but actually many most don't care that much about Europe, and think politicians are crooks anyway. Some will revert to not voting at all.

I think it will boost May in the short term, and have surprisingly little effect in the medium term. In the long term it will damage us - less influence, no real exit strategy from the satellite deal. But by that time May will be enjoying retirement and eyeing developments with only mild interest.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. F, that's a function of the Leader of the Opposition being a complete cretin and the most spoken of potential successor (Boris) being ambition undiluted by competence.

kle4

NickPalmer said:

SouthamObserver said:

NickPalmer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

Yes, it's actually good strategy - both for the reason you say and because it means that ANY deal will look like a triumph.

That works as a short-term tactic. However, looking like a triumph on agreement day and it feeling like one six months later are two very different things. It does seem as if the way is being paved for the softest of soft Brexits, but what will the Tory Brexit loons make of that should it come to pass? All this for little more than blue passports? Really?

There are three main camps of Brexiteers who will react differently to a soft Brexit "because unfortunately a massive change is not possible without further preparation". The seriously ideological will be pleased that we've withdrawn, and will patiently await the arrival of a future government which can exploit the new freedom. They'll be a little disappointed but mostly recognise that May has difficulties. The mild Brexiteers will feel that's OK, we separated out but it's nice and soft, well done May. The ordinary punters who voted Leave will feel a bit sold out, but actually many most don't care that much about Europe, and think politicians are crooks anyway. Some will revert to not voting at all.

I think it will boost May in the short term, and have surprisingly little effect in the medium term. In the long term it will damage us - less influence, no real exit strategy from the satellite deal. But by that time May will be enjoying retirement and eyeing developments with only mild interest.

I think youre a little optimistic in how the seriously ideological will react, not least in being patient.

Tykejohnno

Eagles - if it was just a trade organisation we would be still in but you forgot to mention the political union bit,that's why it's hard to leave.

hamiltonace

Benpointer said:

Foxy said:

Mortimer said:

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It’s kind of DExEU to give Leavers advance notice of the good news that Britain will be able to start to rebuild its resistance to antibiotics and tackle the obesity crisis.

There will be plenty of food post Brexit, though perhaps not much salad, and most anti-biotics have long shelf lives, so a good stock up inadvance should do the trick.As @Hamiltonace suggests the problem is regulatory. We would survive, but the impact on perceptions of government competence will be heavy.

In reality, we would suck it up and sign on the dotted line for the EU27 deal as a vassal state. Not too bad an outcome in my view, as we keep the benefits of EU membership including CU and SM, while firing all the UKIP MEPs.

The Golden Rule of Brexit suggests that Remainers whooping about being a vassal state might be somewhat previous.

I'm yet to see whether their hopes and dreams will be dashed by:

1) A comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU recognising equivilence
2) Transition (longer) to MaxFac with us out of the regulatory orbit of the EU
or 3) The unveiling of an agreement somewhere between the two but that sees most of our red lines respected

I'm pretty sure that the customs union vote in Parliament will disappoint them, however...

I suspect that parliament will vote down CU in June, but they may well acquiesce later.

I have prepared my household finances and circumstances to cover all eventualities from car crash Brexit to reversal of A50. One of the advantages of my profession is that I will never be short of work!

I do expect Brexit to end with a whimper not a bang. Just everyone wondering what all the fuss was about, followed by years of gentle decline.

"I do expect Brexit to end with a whimper not a bang. Just everyone wondering what all the fuss was about, followed by years of gentle decline. "

Sounds like a metaphor for life.

Whether we like it or not Brexit has already changed this country. So far it has diminished the power of our government. I am not sure this is a bad outcome. In many ways I tend to trust the Europeans more than the British to look after my company. They are more into production and less into consumption. I can live without having an mep to represent me and TM not being at the European meetings.

Sean_F

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. F, that's a function of the Leader of the Opposition being a complete cretin and the most spoken of potential successor (Boris) being ambition undiluted by competence.

If two of you are being chased by a bear, you don't have to outrun the bear. You just have to outrun the other person.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. F, that's true. But if you have bubonic plague and a gash to the neck, it's still not been a stellar day.

SandyRentool

Sean_F said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. F, that's a function of the Leader of the Opposition being a complete cretin and the most spoken of potential successor (Boris) being ambition undiluted by competence.

If two of you are being chased by a bear, you don't have to outrun the bear. You just have to outrun the other person.

Which tends to be easier when the other person has shot themselves in the foot.

Scott_P

SandyRentool said:

Which tends to be easier when the other person has shot themselves in the foot.

https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1002825477873074177

Is post-Brexit Britain wearing nikes, or flip-flops...

HYUFD

Firstly, while WTO terms Brexit would be difficult I doubt it would be the Armageddon scenario suggested here.

Secondly, if there was no deal far from the Tories being 'walloped' by Corbyn, Boris or Mogg might even win a general election shortly after with the full weight of the Leave vote behind them while diehard Remainers vote LD as the only way to reverse Brexit or stay in both the single market and customs union and Corbyn Labour would get squeezed in the middle.

archer101au

FF43 said:

Recidivist said:

A fairly simple mutual recognition agreement would solve nearly all the short term problems I would have thought. The long term damage to UK based R&D and investment is the thing to worry about.

There won't be a mutual recognition agreement. The EU won't trust a third party on equivalence. It requires conformance on its rules, current and future, subject to ECJ oversight. Bear in mind though that this is a problem for the post Brexit settlement as we get a two year standstill "transition". The pressing issue is the withdrawal agreement and the Irish border backstop, without which we don't get a transition.

OK now you are talking utter nonsense. ALL international trade is based on either mutual recognition of regulations OR certification that you comply with regulations of the country that you are exporting to. The EU trusts every country that manufactures drugs and imports them into the EU via one of these methods. What you are suggesting is that the EU would not negotiate recognition with the UK out of spite, or that somehow every country in the World that exports drugs to the EU is subject to ECJ jurisdiction.

The situation is very simple. On Brexit day +1, UK regulations will be the same as EU regulations. The best the EU can do to be difficult is to insist on a re-certification process to ensure that UK exports comply with EU regulations which is a one-off affair (and obviously totally unnecessary since they do already). This would lead to retaliation from the UK so again would be pointless. In due course the EU and UK would agree mutual recognition in the same way they do with everyone else.

In reality, products usually comply with the regulations of multiple countries at once. An asprin could comply with regulations in multiple countries even if all the regulations are different. The EU are not in some unique and privileged position where the rest of the World has to follow their instructions.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/1003190549590003712

JonnyJimmy

I see all the EU Anchors are up

archer101au

NickPalmer said:

SouthamObserver said:

NickPalmer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

Yes, it's actually good strategy - both for the reason you say and because it means that ANY deal will look like a triumph.

That works as a short-term tactic. However, looking like a triumph on agreement day and it feeling like one six months later are two very different things. It does seem as if the way is being paved for the softest of soft Brexits, but what will the Tory Brexit loons make of that should it come to pass? All this for little more than blue passports? Really?

There are three main camps of Brexiteers who will react differently to a soft Brexit "because unfortunately a massive change is not possible without further preparation". The seriously ideological will be pleased that we've withdrawn, and will patiently await the arrival of a future government which can exploit the new freedom. They'll be a little disappointed but mostly recognise that May has difficulties. The mild Brexiteers will feel that's OK, we separated out but it's nice and soft, well done May. The ordinary punters who voted Leave will feel a bit sold out, but actually many most don't care that much about Europe, and think politicians are crooks anyway. Some will revert to not voting at all.

I think it will boost May in the short term, and have surprisingly little effect in the medium term. In the long term it will damage us - less influence, no real exit strategy from the satellite deal. But by that time May will be enjoying retirement and eyeing developments with only mild interest.

I have asked over and over again what form of 'soft Brexit' Remainers think exists that does not involve freedom of movement. Once someone provides an answer, then we can discuss how people may or may not react to this. No deal that includes FOM will produce the sort of reaction that you envisage.

The problem that is occurring in negotiations is that no such deal exists.

Sandpit

Foxy said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Foxy said:

JackW said:

Icarus said:

Jack , have been away from PB for a while good to see you still functioning. Part 3 of Jeremy Thorpe tonight, will Hugh Grant be found guilty?

I might be barking up the wrong tree (unlike Rinka) but I'll take a shot in the dark and say it'll be Jeremy Thorpe at the Old Bailey - "Winning Here"

Thanks for your good wishes. I'm still haunting the old place, much to my surprise. It's either a modern medical miracle or years of devilry and debauchery - Clearly the latter ..

Hope all is well at Icarus Manor ?

I was out watching the Rolling Stones at Coventry last night. Jagger and Richards still have a lot of energy, so the presevative power of lots of money and debauchery is confirmed

Great show btw, better than when I saw them in 1982 at the old Wembley. Perhaps the extra 35 years of practice did the trick.

Bands have become their own tribute bands. That's why the shows are better now.

The other change is in the economics of the music industry. Tours used to be loss leaders to sell records. Now tours are lucrative because stadiums are bigger and ticket prices are astronomic, whereas almost no-one buys records any more and Spotify and the other streaming services pay less.

In olden times, bands on tour used to perform the new album, which no-one knew, because that was what they wanted to sell, and two or three standards, but in new arrangements because they were bored by the old ones. Then tribute acts came along and did the "greatest hits" in precisely the same arrangements as on the records.

So to chase sackloads of spondulicks, bands re-form and get back on the road, playing the standards from decades ago.

Or at least, that is how a producer explained it to me a couple of years back.

Ticket prices have certainly gone up. Last night cost 10 times what I paid for Wembley in 1982, while I reckon inflation should have merely trebled them.

Leicestershire's own Glastonbudget is Tribute band heaven. Great fun too:

ttps://twitter.com/oasish/status/1000650221553115136?s=19

Who cares what is ersatz nowadays? Oasish are better than Oasis...

Oasish are a lot less likely to turn up drunk and stoned, or to have a massive row with themselves and walk off stage after two songs. Can probably sing better too!

HYUFD

SouthamObserver said:

NickPalmer said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So a deal will be done.

This is just made public to keep the nuttier (but not the nuttiest) Leavers focused on the risks of walking away.

Yes, it's actually good strategy - both for the reason you say and because it means that ANY deal will look like a triumph.

That works as a short-term tactic. However, looking like a triumph on agreement day and it feeling like one six months later are two very different things. It does seem as if the way is being paved for the softest of soft Brexits, but what will the Tory Brexit loons make of that should it come to pass? All this for little more than blue passports? Really?

The key is FOM must end, if a soft Brexit can accommodate that it will proceed, if not it won't

OldKingCole

Scott_P said:

SandyRentool said:

Which tends to be easier when the other person has shot themselves in the foot.

https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1002825477873074177

Is post-Brexit Britain wearing nikes, or flip-flops...

If they are wearing sandals they’ll be wearing socks with them.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1003197168730169344

Scott_P

Nicola Murray and DoSAC could make a better fist of Brexit than the current crew

surby

Foxy said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1003180815440908288?s=20

Not sure it’s within his gift...

I do hope so! it would be a lovely gesture to mark 200 years of Greek independence.

Shouldn't it be returned to Stolen Property first ?

NickPalmer

archer101au said:

I have asked over and over again what form of 'soft Brexit' Remainers think exists that does not involve freedom of movement. Once someone provides an answer, then we can discuss how people may or may not react to this. No deal that includes FOM will produce the sort of reaction that you envisage.

The problem that is occurring in negotiations is that no such deal exists.

Yes, interesting that you and HYUFD (who is much softer than you) are making the same point. I think the Government instinct will be to fudge it if they can (almost no MPs are REALLY worried about FOM, they're worried that voters are worried). Not sure how practical it is without going hard. If it's not practical, I think they'll leave it alone and throw up a haze of "transitional", "subject to review", etc. Because UKIP is a busted flush, Conservatives will reckon they can get away with it, and quite possibly they're right, beause they will still be seen as more anti-FOM than Labour in principle.