http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
comment by Wenger destroying the club the same way Pete destroying the thread (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect they purposely have not costed a no-deal scenario as it’s a complete bluff. It’s not an option. For a number of reasons.
If the UK left the EU without a deal many businesses in the country would immediately cease trading.
There are 33 EU regulatory bodies which govern everything from airlines, agri, pharma, food, finance, commerce etc etc in the UK.
If the UK left without a deal, a whole range of industries would not be able to operate/trade with the EU until, (and just as importantly) unless they received authorisation from EU regulatory bodies.
Which could take years of talks and negotiations. In the interim the UK could not legally export any products, services, goods etc governed by these bodies into the EU. Our largest trading partner.
The entire debate has concentrated on WTO trade tariffs, which in the grand scheme of things are the least of the UK’s concerns.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by Wenger destroying the club the same way Pete destroying the thread (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect they purposely have not costed a no-deal scenario as it’s a complete bluff. It’s not an option. For a number of reasons.
If the UK left the EU without a deal many businesses in the country would immediately cease trading.
There are 33 EU regulatory bodies which govern everything from airlines, agri, pharma, food, finance, commerce etc etc in the UK.
If the UK left without a deal, a whole range of industries would not be able to operate/trade with the EU until, (and just as importantly) unless they received authorisation from EU regulatory bodies.
Which could take years of talks and negotiations. In the interim the UK could not legally export any products, services, goods etc governed by these bodies into the EU. Our largest trading partner.
The entire debate has concentrated on WTO trade tariffs, which in the grand scheme of things are the least of the UK’s concerns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if YOU know it is a bluff and I know it is a bluff so surely the EU also know it is a bluff. So is a Bluff still a bluff is the one sitting opposite to you at the table know you are bluffing?
It’s a bit sad as everyone (and I include the government in this) aware of the situation, knows it’s a sham. It’s brinkmanship.
The UK are essentially threating the EU with their own economic suicide. The problem is that if talks get strained – which I expect they will, there will be many in the UK calling on the government to make good on their promise.
Makes me think of Blazing Saddles: "Nobody move, or the ni**er gets it"
As some of you might know (or would have guessed), I'm not British but I'd have happily endorsed Brexit if there was A plan.
It took how many years (and how much money) just to decide to build an additional runway at Heathrow.
There has been studies and investigations on environmental and economical impacts before the Govt made the decision.
So why has it not been the same for Brexit, which could arguably be the biggest and most important decision of the century? Is it just patriotism? Or ego from the conservative party?
From an outsider point of view, it is just staggering...
Wenger destroying the club....
The HoL’s formed various cross party committees to look at Brexit – prior to June last year.
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
The government however, and to be honest most of the HoC’s, have disregarded the HoL’s advice. Including many peers who have spent most of their political (and professional) careers working within, or close to EU institutions.
Lord Kerr, for example, the Scottish peer and architect of a50 of the Lisbon Treaty – ignored.
Lord Hill, the UK’s longstanding commissioner to the EU (stepped down from the EU Commission in July last year after vote) also ignored. There are countless others.
IMO their expertise and experience could have been exploited by the government for everyone’s benefit.
I expect Theresa May’s letter to the EU to notify the triggering of a50 will say something along the lines of:
“Global Britain....tally ho!”
Watched Ch4 Dispatches on the NHS. Pretty grim viewing. Will be on 4OD for anyone interested.
In a nutshell the NHS is in dire straits, (as we know). But Brexit is making the situation considerably worse.
Hospitals are finding it extremely difficult to retain EU Nationals, and even recruit staff to fill the void. One Dr interviewed said that they are now receiving a handful (4 or 5) applicants for a position. Before the referendum they were receiving over one hundred interviewees.
Overall there is a 20,000 staff shortage, with no short term solution.
The government’s Brexit strategy, Home Office visa policies, and the general feel of unwelcoming for foreigners, (following the referendum) is contributing to the dismal situation.
The government has also cut the student nursing bursary of circa 4k per nurse, which is dissuading people from entering the profession. You'd think given the situation the government would be doing all they could to get nurses and Dr's into hospitals
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/brexit-crisis-on-the-wards-channel-4-dispatches
I am industry based (biotech) but we collaborate quite a lot with academics and the feeling is the same. They saw a big drop in application for post doc positions.
Going back to the NHS, I never understood why they never tried to copy the German or French system.
Neither are perfect but far more efficient and less costly than the NHS.
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 3 hours, 40 minutes ago
Makes me think of Blazing Saddles: "Nobody move, or the ni**er gets it"
-----😵😵😵😵😵😵-----------------------------------------------------------------
There's too much money to be made from the NHS, and that's in its current form - there's little interest in reform while certain strong lobbying sectors can feather their nests with such ease. For much of my life successive governments have sold off different public services for short term financial fixes - If no-one can genuinely make a difference, I think before my life is done I'll see the whole thing fall on its 'arris. Proper blood in the streets stuff.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 25 minutes ago
Watched Ch4 Dispatches on the NHS. Pretty grim viewing. Will be on 4OD for anyone interested.
In a nutshell the NHS is in dire straits, (as we know). But Brexit is making the situation considerably worse.
Hospitals are finding it extremely difficult to retain EU Nationals, and even recruit staff to fill the void. One Dr interviewed said that they are now receiving a handful (4 or 5) applicants for a position. Before the referendum they were receiving over one hundred interviewees.
Overall there is a 20,000 staff shortage, with no short term solution.
The government’s Brexit strategy, Home Office visa policies, and the general feel of unwelcoming for foreigners, (following the referendum) is contributing to the dismal situation.
The government has also cut the student nursing bursary of circa 4k per nurse, which is dissuading people from entering the profession. You'd think given the situation the government would be doing all they could to get nurses and Dr's into hospitals
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/brexit-crisis-on-the-wards-channel-4-dispatches
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ch4 Dispatches did a programme on us lot, in the Independence Movement back in the early Nineties, but linked the UIM to an inner circle of loyalist hit men in mid-Ulster🙌🙌
Think it was called the Committee, or inner circle?
Total hatchet job....early fake news from Walter Mitty sources in Portadown, that could have got folk shot.
Check it out....there was a book too, published in the USA, for legal reasons.
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 3 hours, 33 minutes ago
As some of you might know (or would have guessed), I'm not British but I'd have happily endorsed Brexit if there was A plan.
It took how many years (and how much money) just to decide to build an additional runway at Heathrow.
There has been studies and investigations on environmental and economical impacts before the Govt made the decision.
So why has it not been the same for Brexit, which could arguably be the biggest and most important decision of the century? Is it just patriotism? Or ego from the conservative party?
From an outsider point of view, it is just staggering...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can we do that vote again!
Can we do that vote again....Sing.
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regretfully the majority of their findings were post referendum:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/
It's fair to say, many of the economic issues were known pre June 2016 but because the Remain campaign overhyped some concerns, the overall (and real) issues were dismissed, or deemed to be scaremongering, or labelled "project fear"
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 4 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by Wenger destroying the club the same way Pete destroying the thread (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect they purposely have not costed a no-deal scenario as it’s a complete bluff. It’s not an option. For a number of reasons.
If the UK left the EU without a deal many businesses in the country would immediately cease trading.
There are 33 EU regulatory bodies which govern everything from airlines, agri, pharma, food, finance, commerce etc etc in the UK.
If the UK left without a deal, a whole range of industries would not be able to operate/trade with the EU until, (and just as importantly) unless they received authorisation from EU regulatory bodies.
Which could take years of talks and negotiations. In the interim the UK could not legally export any products, services, goods etc governed by these bodies into the EU. Our largest trading partner.
The entire debate has concentrated on WTO trade tariffs, which in the grand scheme of things are the least of the UK’s concerns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if YOU know it is a bluff and I know it is a bluff so surely the EU also know it is a bluff. So is a Bluff still a bluff is the one sitting opposite to you at the table know you are bluffing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The HOL's have called the government out on this:
"It is quite clear that “no deal” is in effect a deal to trade with the EU under WTO rules. The Prime Minister has said that it is her ambition to seek tariff-free trade with the EU and frictionless customs arrangements. It is clear that WTO rules would not permit this. Therefore, the “no deal” option should be discounted entirely."
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regretfully the majority of their findings were post referendum:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/
It's fair to say, many of the economic issues were known pre June 2016 but because the Remain campaign overhyped some concerns, the overall (and real) issues were dismissed, or deemed to be scaremongering, or labelled "project fear"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is going back to what I was saying in my comment earlier.
I genuinely didn't have any preconceived opinion or idea prior to the vote. I just wanted to know the facts. What was the pros & cons but couldn't find any reliable report or paper on it.
So, somehow I decided to go with the devil I know.
Also, the facts that the people who were supposed to be "in the know" (Cameron, Osborne, etc...) were in the remaining camp didn't really send the right signal.
For anyone who has twitter, Faisal Islam has a trail from today parliament. Worth a read...
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regretfully the majority of their findings were post referendum:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/
It's fair to say, many of the economic issues were known pre June 2016 but because the Remain campaign overhyped some concerns, the overall (and real) issues were dismissed, or deemed to be scaremongering, or labelled "project fear"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is going back to what I was saying in my comment earlier.
I genuinely didn't have any preconceived opinion or idea prior to the vote. I just wanted to know the facts. What was the pros & cons but couldn't find any reliable report or paper on it.
So, somehow I decided to go with the devil I know.
Also, the facts that the people who were supposed to be "in the know" (Cameron, Osborne, etc...) were in the remaining camp didn't really send the right signal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think that was an issue for many. There simply was so much mis-information, and nonsense being circulated, that it was impossible to make an informed decision.
People actually voted in fear of millions of Turks entering the UK, or in protest that a leave vote would somehow lead to WW3.
Follow Faisal myself so will have a look on the way home from work
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
For anyone who has twitter, Faisal Islam has a trail from today parliament. Worth a read...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unbelievable.
Davies answers ranged from complete ignorance, don't know, haven't looked at yet, and incoherent jibberish. It was almost as if he couldn't care less!
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 16 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
For anyone who has twitter, Faisal Islam has a trail from today parliament. Worth a read...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unbelievable.
Davies answers ranged from complete ignorance, don't know, haven't looked at yet, and incoherent jibberish. It was almost as if he couldn't care less!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure if he didn't care or if in fact he knew the answers to some of those questions but was told to keep them for himself.
Either way, it is not looking like a bright future, is it?
Not that I has some kind of hope or anything but this has just made things worse to me.
Question time..
David Davies has his hands tied by his masters in Westminster.
Watched QT last night as well. Was a frustrating watch.
Rather than a panel of politicians, given the complexities surrounding Brexit, it would have been much better if QT had one or two 'experts' on.
Who at least could have offered non-partisan opinions. Some of the sugar coating that is still being expressed is nauseous.
Sign in if you want to comment
Brexit AHHHHHH
Page 157 of 166
158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162
posted on 15/3/17
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
posted on 15/3/17
comment by Wenger destroying the club the same way Pete destroying the thread (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect they purposely have not costed a no-deal scenario as it’s a complete bluff. It’s not an option. For a number of reasons.
If the UK left the EU without a deal many businesses in the country would immediately cease trading.
There are 33 EU regulatory bodies which govern everything from airlines, agri, pharma, food, finance, commerce etc etc in the UK.
If the UK left without a deal, a whole range of industries would not be able to operate/trade with the EU until, (and just as importantly) unless they received authorisation from EU regulatory bodies.
Which could take years of talks and negotiations. In the interim the UK could not legally export any products, services, goods etc governed by these bodies into the EU. Our largest trading partner.
The entire debate has concentrated on WTO trade tariffs, which in the grand scheme of things are the least of the UK’s concerns.
posted on 15/3/17
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by Wenger destroying the club the same way Pete destroying the thread (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect they purposely have not costed a no-deal scenario as it’s a complete bluff. It’s not an option. For a number of reasons.
If the UK left the EU without a deal many businesses in the country would immediately cease trading.
There are 33 EU regulatory bodies which govern everything from airlines, agri, pharma, food, finance, commerce etc etc in the UK.
If the UK left without a deal, a whole range of industries would not be able to operate/trade with the EU until, (and just as importantly) unless they received authorisation from EU regulatory bodies.
Which could take years of talks and negotiations. In the interim the UK could not legally export any products, services, goods etc governed by these bodies into the EU. Our largest trading partner.
The entire debate has concentrated on WTO trade tariffs, which in the grand scheme of things are the least of the UK’s concerns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if YOU know it is a bluff and I know it is a bluff so surely the EU also know it is a bluff. So is a Bluff still a bluff is the one sitting opposite to you at the table know you are bluffing?
posted on 15/3/17
It’s a bit sad as everyone (and I include the government in this) aware of the situation, knows it’s a sham. It’s brinkmanship.
The UK are essentially threating the EU with their own economic suicide. The problem is that if talks get strained – which I expect they will, there will be many in the UK calling on the government to make good on their promise.
posted on 15/3/17
Makes me think of Blazing Saddles: "Nobody move, or the ni**er gets it"
posted on 15/3/17
As some of you might know (or would have guessed), I'm not British but I'd have happily endorsed Brexit if there was A plan.
It took how many years (and how much money) just to decide to build an additional runway at Heathrow.
There has been studies and investigations on environmental and economical impacts before the Govt made the decision.
So why has it not been the same for Brexit, which could arguably be the biggest and most important decision of the century? Is it just patriotism? Or ego from the conservative party?
From an outsider point of view, it is just staggering...
posted on 15/3/17
well said U10012
posted on 15/3/17
Wenger destroying the club....
The HoL’s formed various cross party committees to look at Brexit – prior to June last year.
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
The government however, and to be honest most of the HoC’s, have disregarded the HoL’s advice. Including many peers who have spent most of their political (and professional) careers working within, or close to EU institutions.
Lord Kerr, for example, the Scottish peer and architect of a50 of the Lisbon Treaty – ignored.
Lord Hill, the UK’s longstanding commissioner to the EU (stepped down from the EU Commission in July last year after vote) also ignored. There are countless others.
IMO their expertise and experience could have been exploited by the government for everyone’s benefit.
I expect Theresa May’s letter to the EU to notify the triggering of a50 will say something along the lines of:
“Global Britain....tally ho!”
posted on 15/3/17
Watched Ch4 Dispatches on the NHS. Pretty grim viewing. Will be on 4OD for anyone interested.
In a nutshell the NHS is in dire straits, (as we know). But Brexit is making the situation considerably worse.
Hospitals are finding it extremely difficult to retain EU Nationals, and even recruit staff to fill the void. One Dr interviewed said that they are now receiving a handful (4 or 5) applicants for a position. Before the referendum they were receiving over one hundred interviewees.
Overall there is a 20,000 staff shortage, with no short term solution.
The government’s Brexit strategy, Home Office visa policies, and the general feel of unwelcoming for foreigners, (following the referendum) is contributing to the dismal situation.
The government has also cut the student nursing bursary of circa 4k per nurse, which is dissuading people from entering the profession. You'd think given the situation the government would be doing all they could to get nurses and Dr's into hospitals
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/brexit-crisis-on-the-wards-channel-4-dispatches
posted on 15/3/17
I am industry based (biotech) but we collaborate quite a lot with academics and the feeling is the same. They saw a big drop in application for post doc positions.
Going back to the NHS, I never understood why they never tried to copy the German or French system.
Neither are perfect but far more efficient and less costly than the NHS.
posted on 15/3/17
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
posted on 15/3/17
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 3 hours, 40 minutes ago
Makes me think of Blazing Saddles: "Nobody move, or the ni**er gets it"
-----😵😵😵😵😵😵-----------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 15/3/17
There's too much money to be made from the NHS, and that's in its current form - there's little interest in reform while certain strong lobbying sectors can feather their nests with such ease. For much of my life successive governments have sold off different public services for short term financial fixes - If no-one can genuinely make a difference, I think before my life is done I'll see the whole thing fall on its 'arris. Proper blood in the streets stuff.
posted on 15/3/17
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 25 minutes ago
Watched Ch4 Dispatches on the NHS. Pretty grim viewing. Will be on 4OD for anyone interested.
In a nutshell the NHS is in dire straits, (as we know). But Brexit is making the situation considerably worse.
Hospitals are finding it extremely difficult to retain EU Nationals, and even recruit staff to fill the void. One Dr interviewed said that they are now receiving a handful (4 or 5) applicants for a position. Before the referendum they were receiving over one hundred interviewees.
Overall there is a 20,000 staff shortage, with no short term solution.
The government’s Brexit strategy, Home Office visa policies, and the general feel of unwelcoming for foreigners, (following the referendum) is contributing to the dismal situation.
The government has also cut the student nursing bursary of circa 4k per nurse, which is dissuading people from entering the profession. You'd think given the situation the government would be doing all they could to get nurses and Dr's into hospitals
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/brexit-crisis-on-the-wards-channel-4-dispatches
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ch4 Dispatches did a programme on us lot, in the Independence Movement back in the early Nineties, but linked the UIM to an inner circle of loyalist hit men in mid-Ulster🙌🙌
Think it was called the Committee, or inner circle?
Total hatchet job....early fake news from Walter Mitty sources in Portadown, that could have got folk shot.
Check it out....there was a book too, published in the USA, for legal reasons.
posted on 15/3/17
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 3 hours, 33 minutes ago
As some of you might know (or would have guessed), I'm not British but I'd have happily endorsed Brexit if there was A plan.
It took how many years (and how much money) just to decide to build an additional runway at Heathrow.
There has been studies and investigations on environmental and economical impacts before the Govt made the decision.
So why has it not been the same for Brexit, which could arguably be the biggest and most important decision of the century? Is it just patriotism? Or ego from the conservative party?
From an outsider point of view, it is just staggering...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can we do that vote again!
Can we do that vote again....Sing.
posted on 15/3/17
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regretfully the majority of their findings were post referendum:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/
It's fair to say, many of the economic issues were known pre June 2016 but because the Remain campaign overhyped some concerns, the overall (and real) issues were dismissed, or deemed to be scaremongering, or labelled "project fear"
posted on 15/3/17
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 4 hours, 37 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by Wenger destroying the club the same way Pete destroying the thread (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/a44440b6-2864-4e28-9150-518e1ddfa5bc
--------------
The link above is a video of David Davies in front of the Brexit committee (about 10 minutes).
Major point of it? Well he was asked if the governement has undertaken any economic assessment of the case of a no deal with the EU.
I'll let you guess the answer.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect they purposely have not costed a no-deal scenario as it’s a complete bluff. It’s not an option. For a number of reasons.
If the UK left the EU without a deal many businesses in the country would immediately cease trading.
There are 33 EU regulatory bodies which govern everything from airlines, agri, pharma, food, finance, commerce etc etc in the UK.
If the UK left without a deal, a whole range of industries would not be able to operate/trade with the EU until, (and just as importantly) unless they received authorisation from EU regulatory bodies.
Which could take years of talks and negotiations. In the interim the UK could not legally export any products, services, goods etc governed by these bodies into the EU. Our largest trading partner.
The entire debate has concentrated on WTO trade tariffs, which in the grand scheme of things are the least of the UK’s concerns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if YOU know it is a bluff and I know it is a bluff so surely the EU also know it is a bluff. So is a Bluff still a bluff is the one sitting opposite to you at the table know you are bluffing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The HOL's have called the government out on this:
"It is quite clear that “no deal” is in effect a deal to trade with the EU under WTO rules. The Prime Minister has said that it is her ambition to seek tariff-free trade with the EU and frictionless customs arrangements. It is clear that WTO rules would not permit this. Therefore, the “no deal” option should be discounted entirely."
posted on 15/3/17
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regretfully the majority of their findings were post referendum:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/
It's fair to say, many of the economic issues were known pre June 2016 but because the Remain campaign overhyped some concerns, the overall (and real) issues were dismissed, or deemed to be scaremongering, or labelled "project fear"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is going back to what I was saying in my comment earlier.
I genuinely didn't have any preconceived opinion or idea prior to the vote. I just wanted to know the facts. What was the pros & cons but couldn't find any reliable report or paper on it.
So, somehow I decided to go with the devil I know.
Also, the facts that the people who were supposed to be "in the know" (Cameron, Osborne, etc...) were in the remaining camp didn't really send the right signal.
posted on 15/3/17
For anyone who has twitter, Faisal Islam has a trail from today parliament. Worth a read...
posted on 15/3/17
Is there breadcrumbs?
posted on 15/3/17
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 11 minutes ago
They have spent the last year or so investigating all aspects, consequences, and potential outcomes, and have produced countless reports. Interviewing numerous industry and business leaders as well as WTO representatives. They’ve completed a massive body of work.
---------------------
Were those reports finalised or made available after the referendum? Because I can still remember how the various debates were very "flat" because no one had any advices or facts on the impact of Brexit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regretfully the majority of their findings were post referendum:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/eu-referendum/
It's fair to say, many of the economic issues were known pre June 2016 but because the Remain campaign overhyped some concerns, the overall (and real) issues were dismissed, or deemed to be scaremongering, or labelled "project fear"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is going back to what I was saying in my comment earlier.
I genuinely didn't have any preconceived opinion or idea prior to the vote. I just wanted to know the facts. What was the pros & cons but couldn't find any reliable report or paper on it.
So, somehow I decided to go with the devil I know.
Also, the facts that the people who were supposed to be "in the know" (Cameron, Osborne, etc...) were in the remaining camp didn't really send the right signal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think that was an issue for many. There simply was so much mis-information, and nonsense being circulated, that it was impossible to make an informed decision.
People actually voted in fear of millions of Turks entering the UK, or in protest that a leave vote would somehow lead to WW3.
Follow Faisal myself so will have a look on the way home from work
posted on 15/3/17
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
For anyone who has twitter, Faisal Islam has a trail from today parliament. Worth a read...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unbelievable.
Davies answers ranged from complete ignorance, don't know, haven't looked at yet, and incoherent jibberish. It was almost as if he couldn't care less!
posted on 16/3/17
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 16 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by IAWT... not anymore. (U10012)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
For anyone who has twitter, Faisal Islam has a trail from today parliament. Worth a read...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unbelievable.
Davies answers ranged from complete ignorance, don't know, haven't looked at yet, and incoherent jibberish. It was almost as if he couldn't care less!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure if he didn't care or if in fact he knew the answers to some of those questions but was told to keep them for himself.
Either way, it is not looking like a bright future, is it?
Not that I has some kind of hope or anything but this has just made things worse to me.
posted on 27/3/17
Question time..
David Davies has his hands tied by his masters in Westminster.
posted on 28/3/17
Watched QT last night as well. Was a frustrating watch.
Rather than a panel of politicians, given the complexities surrounding Brexit, it would have been much better if QT had one or two 'experts' on.
Who at least could have offered non-partisan opinions. Some of the sugar coating that is still being expressed is nauseous.
Page 157 of 166
158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162