Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Johnny Bognor]

I never said that the EU would cease to be an important trading partner. The long term trend has been a fall in the share of exports. The growth in exports to ROW has been double that of exports to the EU. So the gap has been widening and continues to widen...

 

No one knows the extent of the Rotterdam effect, so at 45%, they are already overstated.

 

The widening may accelerate over time ... to what extent, who knows..

 

But as it grows, our reliance reduces and our negotiating position improves..

Edited 21 July, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[shurlock]

As services make up 80% of the British economy, I suspect there's a very good reason indeed he's excluded it.

 

Financial services are a big part of that 80%, and the bad news for him is that the City isn't going to give up passporting rights or other hard-won business - which means access to the single market, which means no limits on freedom of movement.

 

As for what actually happens with manufacturing ith kipperderry's favoured tack of a disorderly exit from the EU and a reliance simply on WTO, here's the Brexiters' favourite rabid economist, Patrick Minford:

 

 

 

So almost no manufacturing, which currently employs 2.6 million people. And services, with a present trading surplus with the EU, would be seriously hobbled by no single market access, yet expected to pick up all the slack. It's a ludicrous fantasy, well explained here:

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-britain-alone-scenario-how-economists-for-brexit-defy-the-laws-of-gravity/

 

Kipperderry should also be threatening Johnny Bog with dire RAAAGGGEEE!! at the latter's suggestion that the Brexit deal should include for now freedom of movement. That's the problem with Brexiters: there are so many varieties of them, many in simple denial that the referendum question asked wasn't the one they thought it was.

 

Slip sliding away...

 

Very true - services are critical to the UK economy.Note also that trade in services is subject to a complex suite of impediments that are more difficult to negotiate than tariffs - one reason why the exports-to-sales ratio in service sector is much lower than that in the manufacturing sector. Even the EU has struggled with the trade in services, though its light years ahead of progress at a global level, as evidenced by the virtual neglect of services in the Doha Round.

 

The LSE article is interesting -I know one of the coauthors. It rightly emphasises the fundamental importance of distance and gravity on trade - an empirical regularity that is as predictable as night follows day; yet is completely ignored by the stone-age assumptions of Minford's models and those of other occultists.

Edited 21 July, 2016 by shurlock

[buctootim]

Johnny missed out the main part from PWC's briefing.

 

"One important factor that contributes to London’s success as an international financial centre is its access to the Single Market via passporting for financial services. This applies across the EU, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, and gives UK-based financial institutions unfettered access to the rest of the Single Market.

 

It seems, at present, that the only way for London to continue to benefit from passporting would be for the UK to join the EEA when it leaves the EU. But given this scenario would probably mean free movement of labour continuing to apply, the UK making a contribution to the EU budget and EU-wide regulations still having to be applied in the UK, this could be a difficult outcome to achieve politically. So, what would losing (some) access to the Single Market mean for London?

 

PwC’s analysis shows that, everything else remaining equal, the loss of passporting could see London lose its place as the EU’s strongest financial centre as it would fall into 2nd place in the league table behind Dublin. Its gap with Luxembourg, Paris and other EU cities could also narrow significantly. Though factors such as a change in government policy, the extent of spare capacity which could support an inflow of FS activity or the presence of bodies like the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) in Paris or the European Central Bank (ECB) in Frankfurt, could also see one of the other financial centres PwC has identified emerge as a new star performer.

 

Richard Boxshall commented:

 

“London’s position as an international financial centre is not by any means purely dependent on EU passporting. Other factors such as access to skills and a strong and stable legal system should see it remain as a leading global financial hub in the years ahead. But the potential loss of EU market access poses a challenge for many financial services firms. Business leaders based in London should focus their efforts on lobbying UK Government and EU politicians to retain as much EU access as possible, including retaining EU passporting rights.”

[Verbal]

(...And posted on the correct thread!)

 

Time for kipperderry et al to write RAGING BTL comments under this article in The Independent, mysteriously entitled 'Why it's time the accept the fact that Brexit may never happen.'

 

Kipper plus mates had practice here (and failed) but might want to tackle a familiar problem:

 

The EU will not give the UK a deal in which Britain gets access to the single market but opts out of the "freedom of movement" requirement that lets EU migrants into the country. In fact, the EU cannot give this deal to the UK because it would represent an existential threat to the EU itself: If one country gets access to the single market while controlling its own immigration borders, then every country in the EU will want to do the same.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/why-its-time-to-accept-the-fact-that-brexit-may-never-actually-happen-a7148816.html

[Johnny Bognor]

Johnny missed out the main part from PWC's briefing.

 

"One important factor that contributes to London’s success as an international financial centre is its access to the Single Market via passporting for financial services. This applies across the EU, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, and gives UK-based financial institutions unfettered access to the rest of the Single Market.

 

It seems, at present, that the only way for London to continue to benefit from passporting would be for the UK to join the EEA when it leaves the EU. But given this scenario would probably mean free movement of labour continuing to apply, the UK making a contribution to the EU budget and EU-wide regulations still having to be applied in the UK, this could be a difficult outcome to achieve politically. So, what would losing (some) access to the Single Market mean for London?

 

PwC’s analysis shows that, everything else remaining equal, the loss of passporting could see London lose its place as the EU’s strongest financial centre as it would fall into 2nd place in the league table behind Dublin. Its gap with Luxembourg, Paris and other EU cities could also narrow significantly. Though factors such as a change in government policy, the extent of spare capacity which could support an inflow of FS activity or the presence of bodies like the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) in Paris or the European Central Bank (ECB) in Frankfurt, could also see one of the other financial centres PwC has identified emerge as a new star performer.

 

Richard Boxshall commented:

 

“London’s position as an international financial centre is not by any means purely dependent on EU passporting. Other factors such as access to skills and a strong and stable legal system should see it remain as a leading global financial hub in the years ahead. But the potential loss of EU market access poses a challenge for many financial services firms. Business leaders based in London should focus their efforts on lobbying UK Government and EU politicians to retain as much EU access as possible, including retaining EU passporting rights.”

Lot of sense here. But it assumes all things being equal. The fact is they won't be. That is the problem with these forecasts.

 

For example, reductions in corporation tax have already been considered. This makes the UK more attractive. Our more flexible labour markets will also be attractive. Not to mention the skills that are here.

 

Without passporting, there would be damage, but some of this could be offset.

 

As your man dickie says, it's not dependent on passporting alone

 

I do find it contradicting that most regressives don't like the fact that the financial services sector is so important to our economy, whilst many of them are now fighting for it

Edited 21 July, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[buctootim]

Lot of sense here. But it assumes all things being equal. The fact is they won't be. That is the problem with these forecasts.

 

For example, reductions in corporation tax have already been considered. This makes the UK more attractive. Our more flexible labour markets will also be attractive. Not to mention the skills that are here.

 

Without passporting, there would be damage, but some of this could be offset.

 

As your man dickie says, it's not dependent on passporting alone

 

I do find it contradicting that most regressives don't like the fact that the financial services sector is so important to our economy, whilst many of them are now fighting for it

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

Two things. How will our Labour market be more flexible than our competitors if they can hire / relocate staff around the EU at a moments notice and we require a visa?

 

There is no contradiction. The UK economy is overly reliant on financial services. The fact it is so important to us is the reason to both protect it and to develop alternative industries.

Edited 21 July, 2016 by buctootim

[Johnny Bognor]

Two things. How will our Labour market be more flexible than our competitors if they can hire / relocate staff around the EU at a moments notice and we require a visa?

 

There is no contradiction. The UK economy is overly reliant on financial services. The fact it is so important to us is the reason to both protect it and to develop alternative industries.

 

Well you can rule France out as an alternative as starter for 10. Their Government cant get anyone to work more than a 35 hour week lol

[derry]

Any reason you've excluded services? Not quite Baldrick-levels but...

 

The imports and exports are for goods. This argument is about £100b annual deficit on goods that support manufacturing jobs in the EU used as leverage, especially in Germany.

[derry]

(...And posted on the correct thread!)

 

Time for kipperderry et al to write RAGING BTL comments under this article in The Independent, mysteriously entitled 'Why it's time the accept the fact that Brexit may never happen.'

 

Kipper plus mates had practice here (and failed) but might want to tackle a familiar problem:

 

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/why-its-time-to-accept-the-fact-that-brexit-may-never-actually-happen-a7148816.html

 

Probably the best result, a clean break, out two years after A50 with no fudged agreements. I'd take that any day of the week.

[Jonnyboy]

Well you can rule France out as an alternative as starter for 10. Their Government cant get anyone to work more than a 35 hour week lol

 

Plenty of them do, they just get it back as extra paid leave and other perks.

[Johnny Bognor]

Plenty of them do, they just get it back as extra paid leave and other perks.

 

Hmmm but a big factor is bankers bonuses which would be restricted in the EU. Ease up on the bonuses... money talks... the best talent stays

Edited 21 July, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Whitey Grandad]

Well you can rule France out as an alternative as starter for 10. Their Government cant get anyone to work more than a 35 hour week lol

 

They can afford to work less and have more leisure time. Their productivity is way beyond ours.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/feb/18/uk-productivity-gap-widens-to-worst-level-since-records-began

[shurlock]

What about today's PMIs, huh? Hopefully they're just a blip.

[buctootim]

What about today's PMIs, huh? Hopefully they're just a blip.

 

Just remainers project fear innit?

[shurlock]

Just remainers project fear innit?

 

But but but the FTSE 100's up....

[Johnny Bognor]

Just remainers project fear innit?

 

The media talk everything down, confidence gets knocked shocker.

 

Add in in the political uncertainty (although the tories have got their sh it together now) with virtually no opposition to hold the government to account, its hardly a surprise...

Edited 22 July, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Johnny Bognor]

But but but the FTSE 100's up....

 

You're not allowed to talk about 100 anymore. Because since the referendum, we are only supposed to talk about the 250, to find a scenario to match a narrative. Pre referendum the No one ever mentioned the 250, which is incidentally only 1% off of the pre referendum position. Hardly the disaster all the experts were predicting...

Edited 22 July, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[buctootim]

You're not allowed to talk about 100 anymore. Because since the referendum, we are only supposed to talk about the 250, to find a scenario to match a narrative. Pre referendum the No one ever mentioned the 250, which is incidentally only 1% off of the pre referendum position. Hardly the disaster all the experts were predicting...

 

Stock prices have held up because the pound has fallen so much British companies appear cheap to overseas buyers, not because of the fundamentals of the economy or domestic confidence.

[aintforever]

Stock prices have held up because the pound has fallen so much British companies appear cheap to overseas buyers, not because of the fundamentals of the economy or domestic confidence.

 

But when they fall it's nightmare, all due to Brexit.

[Johnny Bognor]

Stock prices have held up because the pound has fallen so much British companies appear cheap to overseas buyers, not because of the fundamentals of the economy or domestic confidence.

 

Of course, but the regressives were quick to scream about the markets crashing and when they didnt, they went hunting for more scare stories. ...

 

The PMI data is not good, dont get me wrong, but Its hardly the shock of the century is it??? PMI also doesnt always reflect reality of the economy at large. Take the 911 attacks. PMI plummeted, but the following economic activity was very very different. Whats important is not the PMI in itself but how we might react, how the government and BOE react...

[Whitey Grandad]

You're not allowed to talk about 100 anymore. Because since the referendum, we are only supposed to talk about the 250, to find a scenario to match a narrative. Pre referendum the No one ever mentioned the 250, which is incidentally only 1% off of the pre referendum position. Hardly the disaster all the experts were predicting...

 

And how do they look in Dollar terms?

[shurlock]

The PMI could well be an initial overreaction but the idea that remainers and the media are responsible or partly responsible for failing to talk the country up...that's up there for flippant denial.

[OldNick]

Personally, retail business is worse than during the financial crisis. Friends in other businesses eg Estate Agency, also are finding it pretty dire.

[Whitey Grandad]

Personally, retail business is worse than during the financial crisis. Friends in other businesses eg Estate Agency, also are finding it pretty dire.

Yes, everywhere seems to be very quiet at the moment and has been for a couple of months or so. Eventually it should begin to pick up once inventories are exhausted but any form of discretionary spending is likely to struggle.

[OldNick]

Yes, everywhere seems to be very quiet at the moment and has been for a couple of months or so. Eventually it should begin to pick up once inventories are exhausted but any form of discretionary spending is likely to struggle.

We had the best run for 40 years and then 3 weeks before the referendum and since the tap has been turned right off.

The economic news is slowly starting to come in and the effects of the vote will take a few months to really show what a mess we are in, or not, as the Brexiters tell us our glory years will be upon us. The europeans dont seem to be begging us to change our minds, which is surprising I had hoped they may have asked us to think again offer us new terms and we do any vote on that. A German client said to me last week 'Why have you left? You have terms that none of the others have.'

[Johnny Bognor]

The PMI could well be an initial overreaction but the idea that remainers and the media are responsible or partly responsible for failing to talk the country up...that's up there for flippant denial.

The British Bedwetting Corporation has done it's best (using our money), to peddle and push the bad news. Billions wiped off shares? Yes true, but these Billions have been added back, not that the BBC would scream it from the roof tops. This effects consumer confidence which has a knock on effect to business confidence. .. the regressives are just as culpable....

 

Just look at this thread. The regressives looking at all the negatives. Whilst people like me are trying to focus on the practicalities and the positives.

 

Take comments on Stirling by the regressives. Yes it will lead to inflationary pressures. But there are positives too...

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[OldNick]

The British Bedwetting Corporation has done it's best (using our money), to peddle and push the bad news. Billions wiped off shares? Yes true, but these Billions have been added back, not that the BBC would scream it from the roof tops. This effects consumer confidence which has a knock on effect to business confidence. .. the regressives are just as culpable....

 

Just look at this thread. The regressives looking at all the negatives. Whilst people like me are trying to focus on the practicalities and the positives.

 

Take comments on Stirling by the regressives. Yes it will lead to inflationary pressures. But there are positives too...

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

If we all wish to be negative then I agree that helps turn it to fact. As a retailer, exporter and dealing with trade contacts I can feel the sense of gloom in the business sector. As has been pointed out the PMI report is pretty disturbing, but surely not unexpected. If in my small clique of business friends is anything to go by next month will be worse.

I really hope you and the other brexiters are correct, I doubt you are though,that we will pull through quickly.

 

It seems we may have this uncertainty for 2 years and that is going to cause its own harm to the economy.

The BOE will have to talk us up as the markets will look at any negatives to pull the plug.

 

There could also be the factor of the Euros , poor weather (up to now), Wimbledon and soon the Olymics to have an effect on consumer spending.

[Whitey Grandad]

If we all wish to be negative then I agree that helps turn it to fact. As a retailer, exporter and dealing with trade contacts I can feel the sense of gloom in the business sector. As has been pointed out the PMI report is pretty disturbing, but surely not unexpected. If in my small clique of business friends is anything to go by next month will be worse.

I really hope you and the other brexiters are correct, I doubt you are though,that we will pull through quickly.

 

It seems we may have this uncertainty for 2 years and that is going to cause its own harm to the economy.

The BOE will have to talk us up as the markets will look at any negatives to pull the plug.

 

There could also be the factor of the Euros , poor weather (up to now), Wimbledon and soon the Olymics to have an effect on consumer spending.

 

Confidence is a very fragile object. It takes years to build it up yet it cab be shattered in a few moments. I see no signs at the moment that any of this recalcitrance is merely down to negative talk and no amount of talking up is going to persuade businesses to part with their hard-earned money for new ventures in the current climate. This uncertainty could very well pertain for the next five or six years.

[John B]

Lot of sense here. But it assumes all things being equal. The fact is they won't be. That is the problem with these forecasts.

 

For example, reductions in corporation tax have already been considered. This makes the UK more attractive. Our more flexible labour markets will also be attractive. Not to mention the skills that are here.

 

Without passporting, there would be damage, but some of this could be offset.

 

As your man dickie says, it's not dependent on passporting alone

 

I do find it contradicting that most regressives don't like the fact that the financial services sector is so important to our economy, whilst many of them are now fighting for it

 

So why have we left the EU if our economy is going to suffer which it is we are going into low or negative growth nave no plan and no economic confidence and no idea when we will even invoke Article 50

[Lord Duckhunter]

So why have we left the EU if our economy is going to suffer which it is we are going into low or negative growth nave no plan and no economic confidence and no idea when we will even invoke Article 50

 

We only had the vote a month ago ffs. Of course the government have a plan and also will have some idea of when they're going to trigger A50. Just because the remoaners on here aren't in the loop and Mrs May hasn't personally contacted them and laid out the plan ,doesn't mean there isn't one . This is becoming a joke thread , it is far too early to draw any conclusions . How long did it take for Euro loons like clegg and other experts to realise that staying out of the euro was a good thing , a bit longer than 1 month . This thread should be shut and reopened in a year , or at least put in muppet show until June '17

[Johnny Bognor]

So why have we left the EU if our economy is going to suffer which it is we are going into low or negative growth nave no plan and no economic confidence and no idea when we will even invoke Article 50

 

Can you remind me of the plan had we stayed in???

[buctootim]

We only had the vote a month ago ffs. Of course the government have a plan and also will have some idea of when they're going to trigger A50.

 

Do they? May told Hollande the reason they wouldnt invoke article 50 immediately was because they needed a few months to work out a plan. Not her fault of course - its that of the witless leavers and those who voted for jump with no idea of where to.

[buctootim]

Can you remind me of the plan had we stayed in???

 

Stay in the single market, have a stable pound, not shatter business confidence.

[Whitey Grandad]

Stay in the single market, have a stable pound, not shatter business confidence.

 

Britain was actually doing quite well and had prospered relatively well inside the EU. The plan was 'steady as she goes'.

[Whitey Grandad]

We only had the vote a month ago ffs. Of course the government have a plan and also will have some idea of when they're going to trigger A50. Just because the remoaners on here aren't in the loop and Mrs May hasn't personally contacted them and laid out the plan ,doesn't mean there isn't one . This is becoming a joke thread , it is far too early to draw any conclusions . How long did it take for Euro loons like clegg and other experts to realise that staying out of the euro was a good thing , a bit longer than 1 month . This thread should be shut and reopened in a year , or at least put in muppet show until June '17

 

You seem to have missed an important point. It is precisely because there isn't a plan, or if there is that nobody has communicated what it involves, that is causing the uncertainty and turbulence at the moment. I'm reminded of that quote from Band of Brothers:

 

“He wasn’t a bad leader because he made bad decisions. He was a bad leader because he made no decisions.”

[Verbal]

We only had the vote a month ago ffs. Of course the government have a plan and also will have some idea of when they're going to trigger A50.

 

Please provide a single piece of evidence that the government "have a plan" - you'll struggle as the government themselves have admitted there isn't one.

 

Other than after 2016, please provide a single piece of evidence that they have an idea about when to trigger Article 50.

 

On a positive note, here's something you can get behind. No doubt along with the 66% of the UK who want access to the single market to be the priority of any negotiation - as against 31% who think it should be about restricting the movement of people - you and all the other Brexiteers on here will support this:

 

http://savethesingle.market

 

I mean, if you don't, there'll be a bloody revolt on the streets, etc., etc.

[aintforever]

Please provide a single piece of evidence that the government "have a plan" - you'll struggle as the government themselves have admitted there isn't one.

 

Other than after 2016, please provide a single piece of evidence that they have an idea about when to trigger Article 50.

 

On a positive note, here's something you can get behind. No doubt along with the 66% of the UK who want access to the single market to be the priority of any negotiation - as against 31% who think it should be about restricting the movement of people - you and all the other Brexiteers on here will support this:

 

http://savethesingle.market

 

I mean, if you don't, there'll be a bloody revolt on the streets, etc., etc.

 

that would be 66% of the people who happened to the part in the BBC poll, not 66% of the British public.

[Whitey Grandad]

that would be 66% of the people who happened to the part in the BBC poll, not 66% of the British public.

 

True, it might actually be more than that.

[aintforever]

True, it might actually be more than that.

 

Yeah, or less. These polls are always wrong.

[Whitey Grandad]

Yeah, or less. These polls are always wrong.

 

Indeed.

 

So how are we going to sort out what sort of Brexit we can all live with? (Serious question)

[aintforever]

Indeed.

 

So how are we going to sort out what sort of Brexit we can all live with? (Serious question)

 

Must be able to do a deal where we have access to the market and some controls on immigration, it will just be a case of how much we pay for it. If they won't budge on free movement then the only option is a clean break - it's what the British people voted for.

 

The EU should respect the democratic will of the UK and try to do a deal for what is best for everyone, not just try desperately to keep their gravy train going at the expense of what is best for everyone in Europe. There is no logical reason why member countries shouldn't have some say in who they let in and still have access to the market - that should apply to every country.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Can you remind me of the plan had we stayed in???

 

I want to know what's the EU' s plan for Brexit & losing our money, influence , and roles in the EU . Why hasn't Merkal published a plan yet , what does she want our relationship to be with Germany , had she got a plan . Why hasn't she published it , why hasn't she posted it on the Bayern Munich fans forum . It's been over a month , what's she been doing ?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Must be able to do a deal where we have access to the market and some controls on immigration, it will just be a case of how much we pay for it. If they won't budge on free movement then the only option is a clean break - it's what the British people voted for.

.

 

Good post . Other countries have access without free movement , we can do the same . Being in the free market is not the be all and end all.But the remoaners on here want a detailed plan, they want to know exactly what the status will be and they want to know now . It's been a whole month ffs , plenty of time to get them answers .

 

People should decide the rights and the wrongs of any deal once it's in place , not in the first month of an extremely complicated process .

[Wes Tender]

that would be 66% of the people who happened to the part in the BBC poll, not 66% of the British public.

 

Quite right. Two thirds of a sample poll of 1004 voters they contacted, not two thirds of voters. And apart from the problems of targeting a representative cross section, the responses depend on the phrasing of the question. One would have expected that after the pollsters had been wrong so often recently, that nobody would pay too much attention to them, especially one commissioned for the BBC. And deep joy, a campaign to remain in the Single Market to go with the incessant petitioning and demonstrations. What a shame for them that there wasn't all this activity by the Remainians during the Referendum, or they might have actually achieved a majority.

[shurlock]

Quite right. Two thirds of a sample poll of 1004 voters they contacted, not two thirds of voters. And apart from the problems of targeting a representative cross section, the responses depend on the phrasing of the question. One would have expected that after the pollsters had been wrong so often recently, that nobody would pay too much attention to them, especially one commissioned for the BBC. And deep joy, a campaign to remain in the Single Market to go with the incessant petitioning and demonstrations. What a shame for them that there wasn't all this activity by the Remainians during the Referendum, or they might have actually achieved a majority.

 

[Whitey Grandad]

Quite right. Two thirds of a sample poll of 1004 voters they contacted, not two thirds of voters. And apart from the problems of targeting a representative cross section, the responses depend on the phrasing of the question. One would have expected that after the pollsters had been wrong so often recently, that nobody would pay too much attention to them, especially one commissioned for the BBC. And deep joy, a campaign to remain in the Single Market to go with the incessant petitioning and demonstrations. What a shame for them that there wasn't all this activity by the Remainians during the Referendum, or they might have actually achieved a majority.

 

There was precious little information from either side. The TV treated the referendum the same way as they do a general election with strict rules on not favouring any particular side. Not very long after the vote there was a programme on BBC about 'what Brexit means for us'. Shouldn't we have had these discussions before?

[SW5 SAINT]

it only remains to be seen when we have a another referendum in three or four years time to rejoin the European Union. Following the disastrous negotiations of David Davis and Liam Fox to secure other deals. Being forced to agreeing to the Euro, accepting free movement of people ,Schengen etc, losing the rebates Margaret Thatcher won for us. All tossed away by the brexiteers.

[CB Fry]

it only remains to be seen when we have a another referendum in three or four years time to rejoin the European Union. Following the disastrous negotiations of David Davis and Liam Fox to secure other deals. Being forced to agreeing to the Euro, accepting free movement of people ,Schengen etc, losing the rebates Margaret Thatcher won for us. All tossed away by the brexiteers.

Whatever happens, that won't.

[Lord Duckhunter]

it only remains to be seen when we have a another referendum in three or four years time to rejoin the European Union. Following the disastrous negotiations of David Davis and Liam Fox to secure other deals. Being forced to agreeing to the Euro, accepting free movement of people ,Schengen etc, losing the rebates Margaret Thatcher won for us. All tossed away by the brexiteers.

 

Only a half bake or a lib dem would believe that's going to happen

[Wes Tender]

There was precious little information from either side. The TV treated the referendum the same way as they do a general election with strict rules on not favouring any particular side. Not very long after the vote there was a programme on BBC about 'what Brexit means for us'. Shouldn't we have had these discussions before?

 

There was plenty of stuff on the TV about the implications either way in the months before the clamp-down in the comparatively short time before the actual polling day. The BBC in particular had their remain propaganda going full tilt up until then, the News programme salivating over every report from some economist or business group about the financial Armageddon that would ensue if we left. Besides, if anybody wished to educate themselves about the arguments either way, they could easily have read a plethora of information on the internet, discounted the bias factor favouring the group publishing those views and then arrived at their own conclusions. The electorate had months to do this and it is really weak of the remain side to push this agenda that they did not have enough information available to make a reasoned judgement.

 

There has also been post-Brexit analysis of why the Remain campaign failed, despite having arguably the stronger position and the backing of the PM and Chancellor, and £9 million pounds of Government propaganda paid for by us. One of the main conclusions was not that Remain had been unsuccessful in putting out enough information about the implications of leaving the EU, but that its campaign had been so negative and seemingly exaggerated.