Brexit Aint Gonna Happen.

[10ClarionSt]

You heard it here first. Personally, I couldn't care less if we're in or we're out. Honest, but it seems to me that elected MP's don't want it to happen. That's my interpretation of the vote last week. They want to stay in Europe with Maggie May as the PM. And they voted for HER cos they don't want to risk being voted out of Parliament. Simples. Brexit aint gonna happen.

[ToraToraTora]

never had you down as a chamberlainista 10CS, live and learn eh?

[ToraToraTora]

BA for minty at 07:17

[cassa333]

I keep saying the problem of Brexit is entirely the making of remainextremists in government.

If the government had planned an orderly WTO exit we wouldn’t be in this mess, business would have clarity and everyone could plan accordingly.

It is ONLY because of the vacuousness of the government that we are so badly placed.

Difficult things become more difficult when one group activity pushes their own agenda onto an agreed course of action.

[naomi24]

I don’t know if anyone else has noticed but Project Fear has, over the past few days, gathered at a rate of knots almost to the point of hysteria!

[jim360]

I would have agreed with v-e -- and did, as people have been keen to point out -- three years ago, or so. The difference is what's happened between. The present approach to Brexit has seen several wasted years; in my view, at least, that's because the process has been rushed far too quickly, and far too little efforts have taken to prepare for Brexit before Theresa May signed A50. Of course, not everyone will agree with me that the process has been pushed through too quicly ("not quickly enough!", I'm sure TTT would say) -- but, whether by rush or by delay, there's no disagreement that the path taken has been a failure.

I would rather see it stopped entirely, of course, but setting that aside, could there be some agreement for delaying the process, to give a proper chance to repair the damage of Theresa May's approach? Leaving tomorrow (or on March 29th) should be obviously bad economically -- no-one who's paid attention can doubt this, especially when there's been no proper contingency planning -- and, while some may think it's worth the economic pain to get it done, I am not sure it's a view shared by even remotely a majority of Brexit supporters, let alone the country.

[jim360]

Depends on your perspective, doesn't it? Project "Reality", I'd prefer to call it. At some point such warnings should be taken somewhat seriously.

[naomi24]

//At some point such warnings should be taken somewhat seriously.//

Not if they're warnings by design.

[jim360]

Granted, if the government is involved in driving the message then it deserves a great deal of scrutiny. But that still leaves the central question: are all these warnings about the dangers of a No Deal Brexit demonstrably wrong, or just convenient to set aside?

[JF85]

Project Fear, promoted by people with knowledge and expertise, or Project Unicorn, promoted by people who think we have had enough of experts (but still think they themselves should be listened to)? It's certainly a tricky one.

[Canary42]

/// Not if they're warnings by design. ///

Like "hordes of immigrants swamping the country" - oh no, that was part of Leavers' Project Panic.

[dannyk13]

Just listened on the radio how to find out how Brexit will affect us on a government website.It will happen,deal or no deal.

[Old_Geezer]

Often predicted still wrong. Although there is still the risk of BINO if the EU shifts slightly on May's "deal".

No deal needs no structure since it just happens if we reach the deadline having not agreed a deal. One trusts the commercial sector has put in the changes they need though, rather than having spent all their time complaining that a changing environment gives them something to do, and threatening to go in the hope that powerful merchants can force elected governments to do their bidding, rather than the nation's.

[naomi24]

//are all these warnings about the dangers of a No Deal Brexit demonstrably wrong, or just convenient to set aside? //

Or conveniently useful tools to put the frighteners on? We've had all sorts, from shortages of everything, to being prevented from flying into Europe, to war. Me sceptical? As if!

[jim360]

You're focusing only on the most extreme scenarios, though. What about, say, the warnings from Airbus or other businesses that imply that in a No Deal Brexit situation they feel they would be better off relocating the majority of their businesses?

I completely get ignoring warnings of war, etc, but a more general risk that businesses will relocate some, most or all of their operations to the EU27 deserves taking at least a little more seriously than that.

[-Talbot-]

Jim360
As lovely a sentiment as that is, wouldn't it be nice to invoke the spirit of some period in British history when we *weren't* nearly destroyed as a nation?


And you have played your part, Jim. (I know... I have little understanding of you)

[Old_Geezer]

"hordes of immigrants swamping the country"

We already see that occurring elsewhere in the EU and also see many making their way up through France to here: so more a case of pointing out what was already in progress than any attempt to panic.

[jim360]

Well, certainly I object to being implicated in nearly destroying the country, if that's what you mean :P

[Old_Geezer]

Threats are one thing, but if they do actually choose to go then that's their option. Employment is supposed to be up here, for each actually deciding to go I believe others will step into the opportunity of having a presence in the UK. And in a democracy the people control, not the merchants.

[jim360]

Is there not a difference between the merchants controlling the country, and the merchants' concerns being properly understood?

It's just quite a gamble, to say the least. Many businesses have warned that a No Deal brexit will force them to reconsider their business structure. If those warnings, or threats, are even partially true, then a great many jobs are at risk. The most severe estimates suggests that the UK economy will take around a 10% hit over the next few years, if we leave on March 29th without a deal, which is hardly to be sniffed at. By definition, the most severe estimate is probably exaggerated, but also is unlikely to be entirely wrong.

Why does this not matter? Why this insistence on chasing a policy in a manner that is extremely likely to be economically damaging, when the same policy could surely also be accomplished without nearly so great a risk but for a little more patience?

[ToraToraTora]

jim: "Why does this not matter? Why this insistence on chasing a policy in a manner that is extremely likely to be economically damaging, when the same policy could surely also be accomplished without nearly so great a risk but for a little more patience? " - how? the "deal" we have on the table is not acceptable and the EU won't amend it. What choice do we have but no deal or at least commit to no deal in the hope that the EU accepts we'll do it if we have to and sees sense and renegotiates a deal that is acceptable.