back to article New UK trade deals would not compensate for loss of single market membership

The UK could lose out on a 4 per cent boost to gross domestic product (GDP) if it was no longer a member of the EU single market, with particular repercussions for the financial services industry, according to an influential think tank. The 4 per cent figure is based on the UK defaulting to membership of the World Trade …

  1. djstardust

    Really ....

    The IFS are part of the gravy train that has kept the status quo for so long now. Along with government, major banks, chambers of commerce etc. They have all been blatantly pro remain.

    They lost. get over it and stop the scaremongering.

    Britain can and will be "great" again and all this doom and gloom ain't helping one bit.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really ....

      Lately i've noticed a lot of Brexiteers saying "don't talk down the economy".

      As if closing our eyes and finding our happy thoughts will itself increase aggregate demand.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Really ....

        As if closing our eyes and finding our happy thoughts will itself increase aggregate demand.

        Of course it won't, but prancing around saying "look, it's failing, we told you so, hahahaha" will certainly *reduce* it.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "Of course it won't, but prancing around saying "look, it's failing, we told you so, hahahaha" will certainly *reduce* it."

          Not sure why you got downvoted for that. That is exactly how the sheep in the stock markets work. Rumours and hints of rumours regularly cause fluctuations in the stick market. Downbeat "forecasts" are guaranteed to cause downward market fluctuations. And we all know how accurate economic forecasts are.

          An interesting observation on the radio the other day. Economists are like fortune tellers but with less glitz and poorer accuracy :-)

        2. Naughtyhorse

          Re: prancing around saying "look, it's failing

          But it is!

      2. William 3 Bronze badge

        Re: Really ....

        Given that the stock market is purely based on the "perceived" value of companies, wouldn't you agree that negative perception of a country by a bunch of moaning fuckers who can't stand a fair and legitimate democratic outcome is likely to have a material effect on said country.

        Or are you going to pretend otherwise as it doesn't suit your argument.

        1. Jess

          Re: legitimate democratic outcome

          A margin of one in fifty when so many lies were told is legitimate?

          Whether leave meant moving back to the EFTA or quitting the whole thing was never made clear.

          The Norway model was often quoted. So if that is what over 1 in 25 leave voters wanted, then there is no mandate to leave the EEA.

          Dragging Scotland and NI out against their wishes is democratic?

          The only sensible way forward is another referendum for England and Wales giving three choices.

          Remain in the EU

          Move to the EFTA

          Leave the EU and the EEA

          It should be preferential and made clear that should the result be other than remain, then the other parts of the UK will get to decide whether they wish to join us.

          1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

            Re: legitimate democratic outcome

            A margin of one in fifty when so many lies were told is legitimate?

            It's more legitimate than the lies told when we joined the EU, when we weren't even given a vote because the politicians knew the result would be "No".

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: legitimate democratic outcome

              This is often mentioned. You do know there was a previous referendum to leave the EU, right? And people voted to stay in. If it was that bad to have joined it...

              1. Tequila Joe

                Re: legitimate democratic outcome

                In the referendum under Wilson people voted to remain in a Common Market, not the EU.

                Politicians at the time promised there would be no loss of Sovereignty as this was only for Trade.

                If people had been told then that the trading union of the Common Market would become a political European Union over-ruling British Law and policies then the overwhelming vote would have been to leave that Common Market.

                The idea that this country is best run for its inhabitants by another country, or by a political organisation with a vastly different idea of personal freedom, would have been ridiculed.

                1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                  Re: legitimate democratic outcome

                  "If people had been told then that the trading union of the Common Market would become a political European Union over-ruling British Law and policies then the overwhelming vote would have been to leave that Common Market."

                  Up to this point I'm with you. I'd go further. The Maastricht and Lisbon treaties should have been ratified (or not) on the basis of basis of referenda in each of the countries, binding referenda with sensible majority levels set appropriate to the fact that they'd have been overturning the status quo. No change without substantial agreement in each country and none of this "keep voting till you get the answer we want" nonsense. On that basis we might still have had the status quo and if not it would have been something different to what we have now.

                  However we got what we got and we now have to think whether jumping blindly out of it is the most sensible thing to do from an economic perspective. I don't think it is. I think it's going to turn out to have been a very bad decision for most people including those who voted leave and kids like my grandchildren who didn't even get to vote.

                  "a political organisation with a vastly different idea of personal freedom"

                  The EU's idea of personal freedom does indeed seem to be vastly different from that propounded by recent Home Secretaries of both major parties. Vastly better in my view.

              2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: legitimate democratic outcome

                This is often mentioned. You do know there was a previous referendum to leave the EU, right? And people voted to stay in. If it was that bad to have joined it...

                That is not correct. The previous referendum in 1975 concerned remaining in the common market, or EEC. That was useful, if not perfect, and I would be happy for the UK to remain in it if it existed today.

                The EU, created by the treaty of Maastricht in 1992, extended by the treaty of Lisbon in 2007, is a very different beast. It's a political and monetary union, not a purely economic one, and we were given no choice about joining (by John Major) or remaining (by Tony Blair, despite his election promise of a referendum) because both knew from opinion polls that it would have been rejected. That is what Brexit voted to leave.

          2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

            Re: legitimate democratic outcome

            > Move to the EFTA

            Who would have to agree that we join. And current indications are that they are not keen - especially as our GDP far outweighs their combined GDP and so would exert disproportionate influence.

          3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: legitimate democratic outcome

            "The only sensible way forward is another referendum for England and Wales giving three choices.

            ...

            Move to the EFTA"

            That couldn't be a realistic option in a vote. It would have to be Make an application to join EFTA which might not be accepted".

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really ....

          "Given that the stock market is purely based on the "perceived" value of companies, wouldn't you agree that negative perception of a country by a bunch of moaning fuckers who can't stand a fair and legitimate democratic outcome is likely to have a material effect on said country."

          Not at all. That's not how the stock market works. The traders don't give a rats arse about the opinion of most normal people. Indeed, they thrive on knowing a bit more than your average joe. You really think a little opinoning about Brexit will affect the stock market more than actual economic prospects?

        3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "Given that the stock market is purely based on the "perceived" value of companies,"

          Damned right. Does anyone here, let alone the downvoters, actually think Facebook has any real tangible value? Any value even close to its market value?

    2. Tom 64
      Mushroom

      Re: Really ....

      "Britain can and will be "great" again..."

      Would you like to explain how that can happen with an economy in the shitter, prices going up, and no-one in their right mind willing to trade with, and/or invest in the country?

      The sooner people get their heads out of their asses, and realise that brexit is a horrible idea, the better.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Really ....

        "The sooner people get their heads out of their asses, and realise that brexit is a horrible idea, the better."

        You lost. It's happening.

        Get over it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Get over it

          This has become distressingly overused by Brexiters.Some things are so gross one shouldn't 'get over' them. Hitler becomes German Chancellor 'Get over it'. Stalin launches Great Purge 'Get over it'. Japan attacks Pearl Harbor 'Get over it'. Just a few example to indicate how inane this response is.

          1. Phil.T.Tipp

            Re: Get over it

            Godwin's Law invoked. You play no further part in this debate. Get. In. The. Sea.

        2. whatevs...

          Re: Really ....

          "You lost. It's happening.

          Get over it."

          Thing is, you irreverent anonymous fuckwit, is that we have all lost. Yes, even "winners" like you.

          1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            Thing is, you irreverent anonymous fuckwit, is that we have all lost. Yes, even "winners" like youNo, we haven't. We might, though, if people like you continue to beg for failure. I'd rather work to make it a success.

            1. smartypants

              Re: Really ....

              Phil O'Sophical,

              When a car full of my kids is being steered towards a cliff by the Nigel Farages of this world, I'd rather try to wrestle the wheel away from him and force a change direction rather than watch people like you postulate on how we should "make a success" of the mangled wreckage.

              Brexit, as is clear on these threads, is driven by people who have a romantic view of a fictional Britain which can be made "great again" by breaking our relationship with our closest allies. This is utter bollocks, with more than a hint of xenophobia thrown in, all oiled by decades of breakfast bullshit spouted from the tabloids.

              This is not how our children's future should be decided. They are far more outward looking than their elders, and they won't thank you for being driven off a cliff.

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: Really ....

                Phil O'Sophical,

                When a car full of my kids is being steered towards a cliff by the Nigel Farages of this world, I'd rather try to wrestle the wheel away from him and force a change direction rather than watch people like you postulate on how we should "make a success" of the mangled wreckage.

                And I'd agree with you, except that the man at the wheel is Jean-Claude Juncker and he's the one wilfully ignoring all the signs about the cliff because it's his car and he'll be damned if he'll let anyone else tell him how or where to drive it no matter who's inside. In that case I'd probably push my kids out & jump after them, in the hope that we'd have a slightly better chance than remaining in it as we go over the edge.

                Farage is just sitting in his MG with a beer observing "well, I wouldn't drive over the edge, ye daft bugger", he's irrelevant.

                Brexit, as is clear on these threads, is driven by people who have a romantic view of a fictional Britain which can be made "great again" by breaking our relationship with our closest allies. This is utter bollocks, with more than a hint of xenophobia thrown in, all oiled by decades of breakfast bullshit spouted from the tabloids.

                I'm really tired of the remainers characterising anyone they don't understand as racist/xenophobic fools, because that is utter bollocks. I was born before the UK joined the EEC, I've been an expat living outside the UK, in the EEC/EU, for many years, so many that I no longer have a vote in the UK. The individual countries are great places to live, and the common economic ground of the EEC helped build prosperity for all of us, but I've seen how bad the EU is first-hand. I see the rising anger in the people of those countries at the damage the EU is doing to their economic lives. Unlike the EEC, the EU fills no actual need, except the desire by politicians to control everything, to flatter their vanity by "leaving a legacy", and they are driving Europe to a very dangerous place, politically and economically. I fully support Brexit, not from some desire to rewind Britain to an impossible, non-existent past, or because of some imagined hatred of foreigners, but as a way to regain control of our own lives, and hopefuly to encourage an end to EU empire-building before it's too late.

                This is not how our children's future should be decided. They are far more outward looking than their elders, and they won't thank you for being driven off a cliff.

                And I sincerely believe that Brexit is the first step in securing that outward-looking future for them.

            2. Hans 1 Silver badge
              Coffee/keyboard

              Re: Really ....

              >I'd rather work to make it a success.

              Good luck!

          2. El_Fev

            Re: Really ....

            ""You lost. It's happening.

            Get over it."

            Thing is, you irreverent anonymous fuckwit, is that we have all lost. Yes, even "winners" like you."

            My look whose a big internet hardman, You got to love these remainers, of course the chances of your having the plums to say that to someone's face without wetting yourself are zero.

            1. whatevs...

              Re: Really ....

              "...someone's face without wetting yourself are zero." Says another internet hardman. I have said that to peoples faces, and will continue to do do so. It's the rampant fuckwittery of people like you that make me enjoy it all the more.

        3. 64kRAM

          Re: Really ....

          "You lost. Get over it"

          The Brexiteer's only remaining response.

          Or roughly translated:

          "We're all going to be worse off, and it's our fault for believing transparent lies and not understanding what we were voting for. Get over it!"

        4. Roo
          Windows

          Re: Really ....

          "You lost. It's happening."

          Everyone lost, including folks who got the result they wanted. Savings and assets are all worth a lot less, rent will go up to compensate, tax receipts have already gone down so all that "extra" money will be used to fill the widening hole in the balance sheet. The only folks "getting over it" are leaving the country and taking their money with them.

      2. fruitoftheloon
        Happy

        @Tom 64: Re: Really ....

        Tom,

        You are as well entitled to your thoughts as I am to mine.

        I seem to recall that several large organisations that were basically saying 'if you lot vote to leave, our company will too...' which hasn't come to pass has it?

        How many companies do you know of that see the positive side of the exit vote?

        I don't know what the outcomes of the vote will be, I doubt you do with much certainty either eh?

        Also the 'markets' seem to have rebounded from the 100% guaranteed calamity eh?

        As to me 'getting my head out of my derriere' who gave you the right to metaphorically tell a signifcant percentage of fellow commentards that they are wrong and you are right?

        What evidence do you have to support your bold claim, re the ecomony being in the shitter? Sure there are many elements that could be better, but I suspect that many of our French, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, Bulgarian etc cousins wouldn't mind having their economies as 'in the shitter' as ours eh?

        Ooi voting to remain would have suited my direct family and nascent business better than the exit vote.

        If the vote had have been to remain I would have been fine with that, it's called democracy you know, chill out dude, the world will continue turning you know!

        Regards,

        Jay.

        1. 7layer

          Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

          "What evidence do you have to support your bold claim, re the ecomony being in the shitter? "

          Have you visited xe.com for example in the last few weeks?

          Compare the £ to against anything and you will see the HUGE drops.

          Against to my countries currency, it reached the level when the terrorist attack happened in 2005.

          I do remember the exact level, cause we swapped over more than 10K. to start our new life here.

          You think the Bank of England changed the interest rate to be 0.25% was a coincident? The next thing that will start falling like hell is the housing market and that will hurt us badly!

          1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

            Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

            Compare the £ to against anything and you will see the HUGE drops.

            It goes up and down fairly regularly against the dollar. 2:1 in 2009, 1.4:1 in 2009, that was a worse fall than recent weeks, and it came back.

            Against the euro it's at about the same level now as 2013, same is true against the Yen. It's no big deal. Over the past many years I've sometimes made 10% on conversions that I couldn't avoid, sometimes lost 10%.

            The next thing that will start falling like hell is the housing market and that will hurt us badly!

            Why? Absolute house prices are really only a problem for people entering or leaving the market. If you sell a house for 200K and the one you want to buy is 200K the actual price doesn't matter, could be 100K or 300K. UK house prices are very overheated at the moment, a drop would be a good thing for people trying to enter the market.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

              @Phil O'Sophical

              "Absolute house prices are really only a problem for people entering or leaving the market"

              They're also a problem for anyone who still has a mortgage - just because the bottom has fallen out of the value of your single biggest asset doesn't mean that the loan you took out to buy it goes away too. Negative equity is a nasty situation to find yourself in.

              1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

                Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

                "Negative equity is a nasty situation to find yourself in."

                Only if you want or need to move. Other than the sense of injustice that you paid £200K for a house now worth £100K, if you're not planning on selling before it's paid off, it's not a problem. Unless wages also go down in real terms and you can't keep up the repayments.

                1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                  Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

                  "Only if you want or need to move."

                  Which severely harms the mobility of labour which has a substantial national economic cost as well as the impact on the individuals concerned.

          2. fruitoftheloon
            Happy

            @7layer: Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

            7layer,

            I am well aware of that, quite a few economists (can't remember specifics, can't check it now as I am current making wardrobes) have stated that on a trade weighted analysis, sterling has been over valued for a while.

            As a fellow commentard has pointed out, a Y% shift in GBP/name_of_currency DOES NOT necessarily translate into a Y% change in End-user pricing, business and economics is a bit more complex (and occasionally subtle/counter-intuitive than that).

            Methinks the BoE was to 'wave a flag' for positivity and optimism, which in principle I think is a good thing, I think the actual rate change will achieve less than not much however.

            Also do you genuinely believe that as over a few months the pound has dropped by not significant amount that the whole country is completely cattle-trucked and we'll all be digging up random roots from public parks and eating grass by the end of the year?

            What do you think of the various French and German Ministers who have made interesting and pragmatic statements of late, why would they do that I wonder?

            Ooi my former career was Risk Consulting (NOT H&S!!), one of my favourite topics is the law of unintended consequences, we have an 'interesting' few years ahead of us!

            The housing market is already absurdly cream-crackered, principally because homes are seen as an easy way to generate wealth (whilst actually stuffing the lives of many folk that aren't in the market yet), rather than being somewhere to live. Of course actually building more houses would solve that problem eh?

            I think it is bonkers that on the salary I had when working in London 9 years ago (about 65k), I wouldn't be able to get a mortgage now for the modest 3 bedroom council house I grew up in in east london, now THAT'S F'ING CRAZY!!!

            Chill out my friend, life gods on, and I GENUINELY wish you and your family well.

            Kind regards,

            Jay.

          3. Archtech Silver badge

            Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

            It is quite true that the pound has dropped in value against other currencies and gold. That is in itself a very helpful change, which will help our exporters and discourage the buying of excessive imported goods - thereby stimulating domestic industries. It's not so good for people going on holidays abroad, as their money won't go so far - but which effect do you honestly think is more important for the health of the UK?

            The Bank of England's decision to lower Base Rate is generally agreed to have been utterly pointless and harmful if anything. It was actually calculated to cause a further depreciation of sterling, as obviously when interest rates get lower, invstors are apt to pull out their money and put it elsewhere. One wonders whether the Bank of England, like so many others, is still trying to prove that Brexit will be harmful rather than doing its best to help the economy.

        2. Tom 64
          Pint

          Re: @fruitoftheloon: Really ....

          Apologies for the rather vulgar turn of phrase, however this is important stuff.

          Brexit, really was never a good solution to the problems the British establishment were having with the EU, and they knew that. It is the political equivalent of throwing your toys out of the pram and screaming 'I HATE YOU'. It really wont serve the common good, it will only serve those who have the will and means to exploit the resulting chaos, and that isn't me, and isn't you, and it isn't the people who need the most help in society here, or abroad.

          Do you really believe that a fractured and infighting Europe with more hate in it is good for any one? I had some grandparents who seemed to think that was bad last time around.

          So with peace in mind, I hold out an olive pint to you sir, and will drink to a better future, whatever your definition of that is.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @Tom 64: Really ....

          > Also the 'markets' seem to have rebounded from the 100% guaranteed calamity eh?

          Which markets are you talking about?

          On the foreign exchange markets, the pound is still worth around 15% less than it was before the vote.

          As for shares, it's not unreasonable for the FTSE index to have risen by a similar amount - it just means that UK companies are worth the same in real (dollar) terms as before.

      3. Dave 15

        Re: Really ....

        Oh honestly...

        the economy is in a mess BECAUSE of the EU, or rather the use of the EU as a blanket excuse by government to send all our money abroad (Spanish tanks... what the hell is wrong with building BRITISH tanks in a BRITISH factory using BRITISH workers and BRITISH materials... that way we keep BRITISH tax payers money in BRITAIN and even better have an industry that can export and an army that can get new tanks and spares if we ever do need to go to war for real.... after all we have no British ships to go to Spain to get the parts ... remember the Argies... they lost the Falklands because they could neither make nor buy the exocets they needed to sink our task force)

        The same idiots that think it is acceptable to buy foreign weapons are the same idiots that think we have to let our steel industry sink because of the same EU regs that seem to allow the Germans to keep theirs going. Much the same with cars, lorries, ships, coal, software and computers. (Strangely the banks somehow managed to get the help denied everyone else... despite those self same rules).

        To be totally honest Europe is not to blame for the state of the UK, nor indeed for Brexit, it is our very own civil servants, traitors to a politically correct person.

        However we should get out, stay out, use the money saved to bail out industry, we should build up our navy, airforce and army using ONLY British built products and we will once again have real employment in real factories making real goods... not paper shuffling tax collecting accountants and worse still leaching bankers taking wealth off the majority to accumulate it for the rich few

        1. H in The Hague

          Re: Really ....

          "… what the hell is wrong with building BRITISH tanks in a BRITISH factory using BRITISH workers and BRITISH materials... that way we keep BRITISH tax payers money in BRITAIN …"

          1. That would create a monopoly which would increase the cost to the British taxpayer.

          2. If you close your market to imports, other countries will close their market to your exports.

          "… to let our steel industry sink because of the same EU regs that seem to allow the Germans to keep theirs going."

          Ermm, it's not quite my field but I do seem to remember that the EU wanted to reduce steel imports from China, but Cameron vetoed that as he didn't want to upset the Chinese.

          (Incidentally, the steel industry is quite complex. Tata is suffering in the UK, but their plants in NL seem to do quite well and are expanding. Possibly due to higher productivity, not sure.)

          "… it is our very own civil servants, traitors to a politically correct person."

          That is a very grave accusation to make against hundreds of thousands, even millions of people. Care to support it?

          Incidentally, I remember the days before political correctness (i.e. the days of casual racism and discrimination based on class/accent/region - possibly discrimination against you, or me) and I know which I prefer. (Though I appreciate some folk take it too far, or use PC and health and safety as an excuse to hide behind when they're obstructive.)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Really ....

            Really? Using British materials? So you're going to use taxpayers' money to recreate the British coal and iron ore industries, both of which no longer exist, in order to make British steel (oops - more taxpayers money there then). The reopening cost of a single pit is likely to exceed the cost of buying our entire annual coal supply from abroad.

            Tell me, are you expecting private enterprise to valiantly jump in to invest in these traditionally loss-making industries? Or are you proposing nationalisation?

            The problem with every Brexiteer I have ever talked to is that they don't think things through. Talk of "making Britain great again" have no grounding in reality when we have no coal or iron industries, and no steel industry worth speaking of. Our (foreign-owned) large car manufacturing plants either assemble components largely manufactured elsewhere or , if they do actually manufacture here, use imported raw materials to make those cars. If the economic realities of Brexit do indeed drive those companies out of the UK then the assets will be stripped and all that will be left to start British car making will be empty sheds. This applies just as much to Jaguar-Landrover as it does to Nissan et al. The only way to stop this would be large-scale seizure of assets; nationalisation by any other name.

            And compared to aviation tanks are simple; we do not have the expertise to recreate our own military aviation programme in anything under ten years, even if we had unlimited funds. Most of the Britons with the requisite skills now work for European consortia and have no intention of returning to the UK unless their residential rights are revoked as a result of Brexit.

            The only way your "all British" proposal would work would be to launch a massive programme of nationalisation, asset freezing, currency control and huge tax rises. Welcome to the Soviet Socialist Republic of England & Wales... (I'm assuming the Scots and N. Irish will have had enough sense to bail by then!).

            1. Dave 15

              Re: Really ....

              Yes, and why not? You want to continue to pay for millions to sit at home or do you want them contributing and reducing your tax bill? I want my tax bill down. Currently my total tax bill is ridiculous... income tax, social security tax, local tax, more local tax, an even more local tax, VAT, fuel duty, insurance tax, road fund licence, bbc licence, beer duty, wine duty, cigarette duty, police tax.... the list goes on and on and on. The reason for all of this tax is to fund the two prongs of policy... getting everyone else to make what our government wants to buy and paying the unemployed here enough to stop them starving.

              Really it is totally unbelievable that anyone wants to support this.

              And they are NOT loss making industries, they were originally set up by private enterprise, other countries seem able to dig coal out of the ground and make steel at a profit! True reopening pits is costly BUT in the long term employment and fuel supplies are achieved, the net cost compared to paying the unemployed and buying foreign is not as bad as the headline number. Add into this the strategic value of not being dependent on the middle east and Russia and I think it is a bargain. After all, Russia walked into Crimea and no one in europe could say squat... if they turned off the gas we would be in serious trouble, and when we buy oil and gas from the middle east we support the regimes that are actively paying for the terrorism we are also supposed to be fighting.

              And yes, the current car industry does use a lot of imports, we need to wean off this and any drop in the value of the pound makes it all the more obvious we need to wean ourselves off it.

              As to aviation, are you saying the British who created the Spitfire, Harrier and many other world beating planes are now somehow rather more stupid than the Americans? As I say TSR2 created by the British in the 50s was as good a plane as the eurofighter is today.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Yes, and why not?

                There are so many fallacies, non-sequiters and false premises in this statement that I don't know where to start. So I'm not going to bother! Live in your dream world; I hope it's nice there...

            2. zaax

              Re: Really ....

              ARM holdings.

            3. Hans 1 Silver badge

              Re: Really ....

              >unless their residential rights are revoked as a result of Brexit.

              What horse crap ... they will switch to onther EU-member's nationality and stay ... easy ... that is what I will do for sure ... none of that rip-off Britain crap for me ...

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: Really ....

                >unless their residential rights are revoked as a result of Brexit.

                It is really surprising how many people seem to think that it wasn't possible to live in another European country until the EU came along and graciously made it possible. It was not only possible, it wasn't even very difficult.

                In other news, the world is not flat.

          2. Vinyl-Junkie

            Re: but their plants in NL seem to do quite well .....

            Actually due in no small part to having a continuous well-funded, well maintained rail network between them and their raw materials. Things get a lot more expensive when you have to offload your coal and iron to a ship, then reload it at the other end.

          3. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            OH please... you really think that taking money from the UK tax payer and giving it to the Spanish is cheaper????

            Consider the WIDER situation.

            When the Spanish build the tanks we will find ourselves paying unemployment to the men who would build the tanks in the UK, the men who would generate the power, the men who would create the steel, the men who would build the machinery, maintain the factory building, make the paint.... etc etc etc etc etc

            Then to top that off when someone else wants a tank they won't come to the (now non existent) British tank factory they will go to the Spanish one.... after all if the British won't buy a British tank why the hell would the Sudanese or anyone else..... why????

            This is just the same with ALL other British products... why buy a Range Rover when the British police prefer BMW X7s? Why employ a British software engineer when the British government prefers to pay the French to employ an Indian (at a cost in excess of what the British engineer gets paid)

            Just because the Daily Mail says Thatcher was a genius for destroying British industry does not mean she was!

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

            2. H in The Hague

              Re: Really ....

              "Consider the WIDER situation. When the Spanish build the tanks we will find ourselves paying unemployment to the men who would build the tanks in the UK, ..."

              No, those men, and women, would be applying their talents in other industries making products the UK can export profitably (Cheddar cheese, Jaguar cars, Rycote microphone mounts, Tata Colorcoat prefinished steel, Rolls Royce jet engines, etc.). Some of them would be working, in the UK or overseas, as engineers, architects, artists and teachers. Others would be working in tourism, etc.

              In my perception, long-term support of uncompetitive industries always hurts the taxpayer and, ultimately, the people in those industries. The UK has the potential to export many products and services, but some are more attractive to import. (And many will be imported and exported at the same time, in different flavours.)

              Though I'm also unhappy about the way financial services, etc. have been overemphasised in recent decades. Unfortunately many in the UK don't seem to be interested in studying to become an engineer or technician/craftsperson. Hopefully that will change again.

              1. Dave 15

                Re: Really ....

                NO they will NOT be employed elsewhere.... the numbers speak for themselves even the massaged unemployment shows more than a million people sitting at home twiddling their thumbs.

                We need to find employment for these people. I can still remember the conservative posters complaining that Labour is not working when unemployment was still below a million, now we seem to think it wonderful when it is less than 2 million.

                We need jobs for these people and there really is only so much wonderful cheese and Rolls Royce jet engines that can be made and sold. We need a range of industries including building vans, lorries, tanks, planes and software.

                1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

                  Re: Really ....

                  "NO they will NOT be employed elsewhere.... the numbers speak for themselves even the massaged unemployment shows more than a million people sitting at home twiddling their thumbs."

                  It's worth noting that in those employment figures was a number demonstrating that the number of people in work has increased. Except in the West Midlands and London. Yeah, the unemplyment numbers are fantasy because they don't count people on training courses as unemployed and the numbers "in work" don't tell us about full- and part-timers, but it's not as cut and dried as some here are making out.

            3. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Really ....

              Having not lived in the UK for nearly a decade I was confused by this talk of Spanish built tanks. First I had heard of it. I thought the only tank in the British armed forces was the Challenger II, which I don't believe is scheduled for replacement anytime soon.

              After some googling I can only assume you are talking about the Ajax infanttry fighting vehicle, which isn't a tank by modern definitiions. It is a family of vehicles built by American mega arms corp General Dynamics which includes a recce model, an engineer model and a personnel carrier.

              These are based on a vehicle originally designed for the Austrian and Spanish armies, but heavily modified with British content for the British Army. The bulk of the Ajax vehicles are apparently going to be built in Merthyr Tydfil in Wales.

              Unless there is some other Tank being produced for the British army that I can't find any information about, then I can only conclude that it is actually an American vehicle, built with British turrets and electronics, with some initial assembly in the General Dynamics factory in Spain, but with most of the work actually to be done in Wales.

          4. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            1. It wouldn't create a monopoly.... The Germans only buy German and have multiple suppliers of pretty much everything... German police cars, Merc, Audi, VW, BMW, not a monopoly. The British could do the same... there is NO reason this is a monopoly

            2. Tit for tat yes, but it seems that when we discuss the EU everyone says they will close to us but somehow that is ok and they don't expect us to reply in kind. However what I actually suggested is NOT closing the market but merely ensuring BRITISH government spends money in a way that is best set for the BRITISH economy... i.e. it keeps money here. This is what the entire rest of the world does... including France, Germany, Italy and the USA

            3. The problem for the steel industry in the UK is the cost of energy. Other countries provide ways of reducing energy cost for large users like the steel industry, we don't (we say that would be state aid and don't, others have worked out a way of avoiding the accusation... something our civil servants are not skilled at doing).

            4. Easy to support the accusation, just look at the behaviour, check what behaviour is there to support the UK and what is there to damage it. On balance the rules created and the way they are implemented is ALWAYS against Britain. Even things like smoking... while we had to put no smoking stickers in the cabs of steam engines the Germans had 'smoker club' stickers FREE from the local council to allow people to keep smoking in your pub!

            I object hugely to abuse based on genetics... race or sex or any other. However I will point out that if a school child calls another the n word this HAS to be reported to the police as a racist abuse incident. Call another a ginger nut or similar and no action is required. Perhaps those whose distant relatives came from Africa are in need of more protection than those whose distant relatives came from Denmark ... but the fact that this behaviour is enshrined in our laws is quite beyond belief. For me rules should be implemented in a fair and just way for ALL.

            1. Hans 1 Silver badge
              Facepalm

              Re: Really ....

              >The Germans only buy German

              Ohhh, so those Ford patrol cars are just, I dunno, some joker who painted Polizei on his car and gets away with wearing German Polizei uniforms, then, right ? WTF, man, you need help! I stopped reading there ..

              Listen, you can turn it the way you want, Mr Farage got everything wrong, as I had warned, you are not even out, yet, and in deep shit ... so, you are wrong, every economist on this planet agrees with me on the Brexit ... denial on your part won't change that. It would be greatly appreciated if the Brexiters could STFU, you have been fooled, accept it ... and live with the consequences!

            2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

              Re: Really ....

              "it keeps money here. This is what the entire rest of the world does... including France, Germany, Italy and the USA"

              It's almost as if the UK is a failed experiment in globalisation started under the leadership of Blair, who in his early career stated he planned to be the first president of a fully united Europe. While "we" went down the route of always buy from the cheapest supplier globally and lost most of our industry, no one else followed.

          5. Archtech Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            Your arguments are interesting, but do not convince. Surely if a country really needs defensive weapons, it should be prepared to pay whatever is necessary to obtain the best? And isn't it probably wise to retain the ability to make your own weapons? What if the country (or countries) that choose to attack you are also those from whom you have chosen to obtain your weapons?

            I would also like to see your explanation of why the USA, France, Germany, Russia, China and Israel have all chosen to manufacture their own tanks.

        2. Les Matthew
          FAIL

          Re: Really ....

          "should build up our navy, airforce and army using ONLY British built products"

          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12128889/Royal-Navys-warships-face-major-engine-refit-amid-reliability-concerns.html

          Built by BAE.

        3. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "However we should get out, stay out, use the money saved to bail out industry, we should build up our navy, airforce and army using ONLY British built products and we will once again have real employment in real factories making real goods... "

          What money?

          You don't think making weapons for our own use will generate any money, do you?

        4. Bigkahuna456

          Re: Really ....

          Sure we can have a steel industry if we reduce the minimum wage to about 3.00 PH because that is the equvalent wage rate paid in China for steel.

        5. phil 27
          FAIL

          Re: Really ....

          Because that tank design your refering to was already existing and rejigged lightly for the role. A existing spanish tank. With spanish design. And spanish production lines to make nato issue tanks.

          There's nothing wrong with british tanks being built in britain, except they'd be a magnitude more expensive than repurposing whats there already with a minor refit. Has brexit Britain has a chequebook fat enough right now to achieve that currently?

      4. Smooth Newt
        WTF?

        Re: Really ....

        "Britain can and will be "great" again..."

        You can't live on stupid slogans based on historical fantasy. You do actually need a decent economy.

        So when exactly was Britain "great" - do you have any particular date in mind?

        1. Phil.T.Tipp
          Facepalm

          Re: Really ....

          How one can be so historically ignorant is quite beyond me. I suspect the period of 'greatness' with which you are wilfully avoiding is the height of Empire at the end of the C19th and beginning of the C20th, railways and telegraphs across the world? Or perhaps it was the global influence in the C17th and C18th as that Empire spread, mapping the world as it went, sending ships to all the corners of the known and unknown world, trading and civilising as it went? It's certainly been a long and painful nosedive into penury and misery, since the end of the last great European Unpleasantness, Britain has been a penniless pauper since 1945 - all fur coat and nae knickers. Membership of neither the Common Market nor the EU have bettered life for ordinary folk in this country, not one iota. About time something changed. Oh wait, it already has!

          1. El_Fev

            Re: Really ....

            Christ citizen smith lives and breathes! How many times to you lash yourself , to get that self loathing up and running in the morning?

        2. Archtech Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "So when exactly was Britain "great" - do you have any particular date in mind?"

          Wow! I knew that history was neglected in British schools recently, but that is such an amazing question for anyone living on Planet Earth to ask.

          As a historian, I would say that Britain's "greatness" has varied through the centuries. Several of the Plantagenet kings, for example, in the 12th to the 14th centuries, ruled over one of the largest empires in Europe - or, for that matter, the world. Then in the 18th century Britain's Navy became preeminent with the defeat of its main rivals, the French, Dutch and Spanish. This led to the establishment of the British Empire, on which "the sun never set", the largest empire the world has ever known in terms of area and population. See, for example, http://www.britishempire.co.uk/

          Britain has also led the world in science and technology, with more Nobel Prize winners than any other nation except the (far larger) USA. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11926364/Nobel-Prize-winners-Which-country-has-the-most-Nobel-laureates.html

          1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            " Then in the 18th century Britain's Navy became preeminent with the defeat of its main rivals, the French, Dutch and Spanish. This led to the establishment of the British Empire, on which "the sun never set", the largest empire the world has ever known in terms of area and population. See, for example, http://www.britishempire.co.uk/"

            We all know about this. Doesn't make it all that great though. Unless your idea of greatness is greed and opressing/killing other people?

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            'This led to the establishment of the British Empire, on which "the sun never set", the largest empire the world has ever known in terms of area and population.'

            And on which it had pretty well finished setting before we joined the Common Market. Clocks don't run backwards. This isn't going to magically project us back about half a century or more before we joined.

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Really ....

        with an economy in the shitter,

        I don't know where you have your head, but perhaps you should extract it and take a look at the facts. The UK economy is in far, far better health than most of the eurozone countries. Brexit may be a challenge, but not half the challenge that coping with the disaster that is the EU economy if we stay in would be.

        1. Naughtyhorse

          Re: Extracted!

          Apples and oranges

          Apples and oranges

          while rejoycing at how bady 'most' EU economies are doing, don't let the idea that these are, by-and-large, who we are trading with!

          doh

          dunderhead shortsighted thinking prevails.

        2. Archtech Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-economy-idUKKCN10T0SG

          1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            Better do some shopping now, before the pound falls even more...

            Brexit hasn't happened yet, FYI.

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            Re Reuters article.

            With interest rates as they are there's no point in hanging onto money that will be worth less in the future.

      6. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Really ....

        "The sooner people get their heads out of their asses, and realise that brexit is a horrible idea, the better."

        Experience is a dear teacher but there are those who will learn at no other.

    3. wolfetone Silver badge

      Re: Really ....

      "The IFS are part of the gravy train that has kept the status quo for so long now. Along with government, major banks, chambers of commerce etc. They have all been blatantly pro remain.

      They lost. get over it and stop the scaremongering.

      Britain can and will be "great" again and all this doom and gloom ain't helping one bit."

      Alright Nigel Farage pipe down.

      Since we voted to leave the EU, what good has come of it? None of the idiots who wanted to leave are now around to actually see through what they wanted. Sterling is tanking against the Euro and the Dollar. Countless businesses etc have either halted their expansion plans or removed their interests from the UK since then. What's the result of this? Where is this promised land we've been told we would get? Has the NHS improved or be improved with the £350 million a week that we'd suddenly have free OHHHHHH Hold on that's not actually true was it? No, the NHS won't get £350 million a week because of us leaving the EU but it will get TTIP! Joy!

      "But unemployment has fallen" - it'll always fall for as long as those horrible, exploitive zero hour contracts are in force regardless of the EU.

      "But we've got trade contracts with 26 countries" WE ALREADY HAD THOSE TRADE CONTRACTS WITH THE EU!

      But, I have every faith in the politicians we voted for to do the right thing. And that will be to ignore the little Englanders such as yourself and put the future and rights of the whole country first and not follow through with it. I'm not sure if you know this, or believe it - because obviously I'll be part of some gravy train illumati type deal - but that referrendum isn't legally binding. Still has to go through parliament, still has to go through the Lords, still has a long long long long way to go before it becomes reality.

      Idiot.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Really ....

        To trade with anyone in the EU, you have to agree the deal with the EU

        We cannot renegociate a deal with just Germany for their cars

        And to agree the deal, all the EU members need to agree, so if we want a special deal on Germany for their cars, the French can veto it as it is not in their car manufacturers favour.

        also explains why it has taken Canada 7 years so far and still counting to try to get a trade deal with the EU...

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "We cannot renegociate a deal with just Germany for their cars"

          Germany will still be able to sell the UK cars (if we have the money). The terms on which they're sold here will depend on those set by the UK government.

          The problem is negotiating the terms on which to sell our cars in the EU. Those terms will be set by the EU of which we won't be a member. What was that about control?

          And it's been made quite clear that the existing terms won't be applied unless we agree to free movement of people. Wasn't free movement one of those things Brexiteers wanted to see the end of?

          1. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            So you think that a British government will turn around and say yes you Germans can sell your cars here... and its really fine that we can't sell ours to you?

            I know I said that most civil servants are traitors but do you really think any UK government could get away with selling that sort of statement even to a stupid and gullible British public?

            No... I don't think so. If we can't sell our stuff to europe then we will tit for tat and stop them, this means they will lose out (at current rates they send a lot more here than we do there). This is not in the interests of europe and so cut through the blather and look at the facts... we WILL sell there as much as we do now, there will NOT be an issue. The Germans will not allow it, and frankly I doubt the French will even try and get in the way (they sell cars, cheese and wine here as well, and as with the Germans buy a good deal less from us than they sell). Europe will not fail and can not afford to fail to sort out a trade deal.

        2. Dave 15

          Re: Really ....

          What ROT!

          Do you REALLY believe the Germans are going to stand idly by and watch their car industry lose out on billions in trade with the UK????

          Get REAL

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            "Do you REALLY believe the Germans are going to stand idly by and watch their car industry lose out on billions in trade with the UK????

            Get REAL"

            What would stop them? Do you have it in your head that the EU would set export tariffs? Of course they won't. A UK govt may or may not set import tariffs. But what we should be worrying about is the EU setting import tariffs against us. And we would have no say on that because we wouldn't be members.

          2. Jess

            Re: Germans are going to stand idly by....

            What choice do they have? Our currency has already dropped, meaning their cars will cost more, if we are outside the single market, it is our government that will set import tariffs.

            Of course the choice they do have is to make it easy for currently UK based businesses such as multinationals' European HQs to move to Germany and remain within the EU. (Relocation allowances, special deals for UK nationals who wish to retain their positions, etc.)

          3. Hans 1 Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            >Do you REALLY believe the Germans are going to stand idly by and watch their car industry lose out on billions in trade with the UK????

            Seriously, what competition do they have in the UK, then ?

            Mouhahahahaha! You will pay more... and with the Pound tanking, yet even more ... hilarious!

        3. Stuart Grout

          Re: Really ....

          "To trade with anyone in the EU, you have to agree the deal with the EU"

          You might want to tell that to the USA, China, Russia and in fact most of the significant economies of the world who happily trade with countries in the EU without a specific deal.

          The UK may end up sharing the same trading relationship to the EU as most of the world has or it may negotiate an individual deal such as Canada is trying.

          Anonymous Remoaner nonsense was unconvincing before the British public was allowed a voice and is now sounding truly pathetic.

          Worse case we will share the same economic relationship to the EU as the USA, China, Japan and most of the rest of the world.

        4. Archtech Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "To trade with anyone in the EU, you have to agree the deal with the EU".

          That turns out not to be the case. Anyone, anywhere in the world, is perfectly free to trade with any entity in the EU at will. There may be some tariffs and fees to pay, and some regulations to follow, but that's all.

          One of the weirdest aspects of this whole EU business is the delusion so many people seem to suffer from: that somehow trade and industry are dependent on governments. Quite the opposite, in fact: governments could not exist without the money they extract from trade and industry. It is understandable that politicians and civil servants try their level best to make themselves appear indispensable; but they are not. Mostly, they are nothing but a parasitic burden.

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            "There may be some tariffs and fees to pay, and some regulations to follow, but that's all."

            Yes. they're the difference between being in and not being in. They'll be set by the EU. Right now we're in the EU so we contribute to making the decisions about those that the rest of the world have to follow to trade here. When we leave we will have to such influence. The conditions on which we will trade with the EU will be made by the EU in their best interests, not in ours. We will have no control. And wasn't regaining control one of the issues?

        5. David Beck

          Re: Really ....

          So true, but conversely, if you want to replace MB and BMW as the premium brand as has happened in the US, you make a trade agreement with one country, Japan, and Lexus becomes the premium brand as it has there. It's only magic when you don't know how it's done.

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            "you make a trade agreement with one country, Japan"

            We currently have dealings with Japan in the car business. They build cars here because we're in the EM. How long do you think that's going to continue? Future investment will be in countries still inside the EU in the future unless, of course, we still have access to the single market. But remaining in the single market, it's been made quite clear, will include continuing freedom of movement. Any other conditions will be decided by the EU without our input because we won't be there.

            So we don't get rid of all those Johnny Foreigners from the EU. We don't regain control, we lose more of it. What else was the leave vote for? Oh yes, sticking two fingers up at the bureaucrats; well they'll be sticking two fingers up at us with impunity.

      2. Dave 15

        Re: Really ....

        Honestly, how do you expect politicians to put ANY of the money saved into anything until we have left and have that money available????

        The politicians are in power to DO WHAT THE PEOPLE TELL THEM... that is DEMOCRACY any other behaviour is a modified dictatorship.

        As to the 'best interests' of the country or the 'right thing' (in your opinion) can you PROVE which is best... in or out? There are arguments, powerful ones, on both sides. What is more, from my view point it is FAR more likely that we can do better outside than we ever have inside.

        Mind, we could do with fixing a few things in general...

        a) Use the nationlized banks to invest in British companies (rather than selling them back to the rich for a cut down price having used the tax payer to avoid any losses for those with billions and billions already)

        b) Sort out tax and benefit, single flat tax on all income in the UK ... business or personal, no tax breaks no 'profit' discussions, just pure income... you spend 30 quid in topshop and they pay the same % tax as you paid when you earnt the 30 quid. Single flat benefit... you are in this country legally you get x per week... regardless of where you live or how many heads you have. Simple, easy to implement, quick to implement.

        c) NO British tax payer spending abroad... none what so ever on anything

        d) British aid in British goods and services

        That might cause you some grief but this would sort the UK out

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really ....

          > The politicians are in power to DO WHAT THE PEOPLE TELL THEM...

          Which universe do you live in? The vast majority of politicians (yes, there are exceptions) are in it for the power involved. And they don't do what the people tell them - they do what their party tells them (again, with a few exceptions).

          >NO British tax payer spending abroad...

          So - no paying of pensions to British Citizens abroad? No sending the armed forces to assist with emergencies abroad? No participation in NATO? No meeting our responsibilities in the various treaties we have signed?

          What a sad, pathetic little person you are.

        2. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "NO British tax payer spending abroad... none what so ever on anything"

          Funny!

          More hardcore idiot-commie than any actual politically active commie!

          Beat even Chavez I believe?

          Chavez, incidentally, did a great job of showing how communism "works".

      3. Archtech Silver badge

        Re: Really ....

        "None of the idiots who wanted to leave are now around to actually see through what they wanted".

        Translation: although a significant majority of UK voters chose, in the largest turn-out of any UK vote ever, to Leave the EU... unfortunately it turns out that most of our political leaders and representatives wanted to Remain. Although we had just had a General Election the year before.

        Hmmmmm. That seems to demonstrate conclusively that our electoral system reliably produces leaders and governments that not only do not reflect the popular will; they actively ignore it and often do the very opposite of what the people want.

        Just as, in the USA (the home of perfect democracy) repeated polls show that the Congress as a whole has a satisfaction rating of about 13% among US voters... just one year after elections which saw most members of Congress re-elected!

        Lastly, I don't think it's very respectful to refer to a majority of the British electorate as "idiots". On the contrary, I think it may be rather foolish to ignore the 1,000 years and more of British sovereignty during most of which this country proved itself not only independently viable, but one of the world's most successful nations.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really ....

      Just yow wander why brexiters didn't already invoked the exit clause and stated to deal from a so strong position. It looks May instead is waiting for a Le Pen strong result in France, and a weakened Merkel in Germany. Just, I can't see someone like Le Pen be kind with Britain.... she's on the line of a Napoleon and would like a Europe where France is dominating and Britain is a non influent island across La Manche. And in Germany may not go better...

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: Really ....

        Le Pen would love Brexit to go well for Britain, so she could follow afterwards.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really ....

          Yes, and what you should believe Le Pen would do afterwards? Try to establish a strong France position *against* all its neighbors, especially Germany and Britain. What city is most appealing in Europe beside London, for company HQs, and finance? Of course, Paris. She would lower taxes, and make it far more appealing than the idiotic 75% tax by Hollande. And France has and industry to protect.

          Remember France is the country where foreign goods were destroyed at the borders. All nationalism work that way, don't believe someone like Le Pen would be nice to Britain and let it make much business in France and wherever France influence will be stronger.

          Beware of such allies, it could be just a Ribbentrop-Molotov pact. And Germany sent Lenin to Moscow to help crush Russia in WWI, just it paid it very dearly with a long communist occupation of a large part of Germany after WWII... really, beware of your "allies"...

      2. Dave 15

        Re: Really ....

        May is NOT a Brexiter, she is trying to ignore the referendum in good old 'its not what I wanted' style and hopes that the rest of us will forget that she hasn't done what the people told her.

        1. Richard 81

          Re: Really ....

          If she thinks that's what's best for the country, then that's her job. We live in a parliamentary democracy, so unless a legally binding referendum is held (which this wasn't), the only say the people have in how the country is run is in electing the MPs we want to represent us. In doing so, we defer to them decisions that need to be made on our behalf.

          This referendum was nothing more than a poll to see what people thought should happen. Without setting an appropriate majority threshold, based on turnout, the whole exercise was pointless. Parliament is quite right to ignore it, if they think it's in our interest.

          ...also I'm sick and bloody tired of being told "you lost, get over it". This isn't a fucking football match!

          1. wolfetone Silver badge
            Facepalm

            Re: Really ....

            "...also I'm sick and bloody tired of being told "you lost, get over it". This isn't a fucking football match!"

            ..... ahhhh shit that's where I went wrong. I thought it was a question about if I wanted to go to the Euro's or not.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Really ....

              .... ahhhh shit that's where I went wrong. I thought it was a question about if I wanted to go to the Euro's or not.

              I seem to remember there was a fairly abrupt Brexit there too. Apart from Wales...

          2. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            It is NOT her job actually.

            The job of ALL MPs is to represent their constituents. As was shown the majority of the constituents they represent chose to leave (or didn't give a monkeys either way... those who don't care are ignored in elections so why not here). Thus if the MPs are doing their job then they represent the view we should leave and therefore we should.

            It is not their job to think for themselves, it is their job to do what they are told.

            1. whatevs...

              Re: Really ....

              "The job of ALL MPs is to represent their constituents"

              Actually, no. MP's are not delegates. We elect them to parliament to make decisions for us based on what their political views are. They categorically do not have to do what we tell them to.

            2. Naughtyhorse

              Re: Really ....

              just got it

              davedavedave

              fucking ignoramus

              it is not their job fuckwit. their job is to represent the interests of their constituents, and a big part of that is recognising when their constituents are a gaggle of fucking turkeys all eagerly voting for christmas.

              In this curcumstance a good MP converts to Judaism (downvote now and you are one of us filthy anti-semites!)

            3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: Really ....

              "The job of ALL MPs is to represent their constituents."

              Given that constituents are apt to want different things representing their constituents' wants would be rather difficult.

              In fact we vote to find the individuals to whom we delegate the task of making decisions. It's up to the MPs to work out for themselves what to decide would best serve their constituents' interests and the country's interests, even to decide what to do if those interests don't coincide.

              Although we may cynically think that the MPs decisions will ultimately be those which promote their own interests this isn't necessarily so. After the 2010 election the LibDems took the view that the best interests of the country required that there should be a stable government and went into coalition. Given that a lot of their voters were voting for them to be a party of protest, not of government this cost them dearly last year but as a parliamentary party they did what they considered to be the right thing for the country.

        2. whatevs...

          Re: Really ....

          May is also well aware that she doesn't have to do "wot the people told her..." The results of the referendum aren't legally binding...

        3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "May is NOT a Brexiter"

          She did campaign on the leave side early on but then sort of faded into the background. Not sure if she really wanted to leave or was just hedging her bets.

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            "Not sure if she really wanted to leave or was just hedging her bets."

            Given that she didn't seem keen on anything from Europe that impinged on her Home Office brief I'd say that her barely visible Remain stance was hedging bets against the expected Remain win.

            However, kudos to her for putting prominent Leavers in charge of trying to make it happen. If it goes pear-shaped they'll only have themselves to point the finger at. I do think she ought to have handed a few more of them similar jobs.

        4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "what the people told her"

          The people told her very little. It was an advisory referendum. In order to have an effect on the status quo a referendum should have a very much bigger majority than was achieved. One sufficient, for example, to be sure it won't change when voters are confronted with reality a couple of years down the line.

    5. H in The Hague

      Re: Really ....

      " Britain can and will be "great" again …"

      What exactly do you mean by that? "Great" as during the empire? Are you proposing to go back to subjugating other countries by force and looting them? Don't think that's going to be entirely successful. "Great" as during the periods of industrial strife in the 70s and 80s? (Did I get the dates right? Memory a bit hazy.)

      Please tell me when, and why, the UK was "greater" than it is now! Who benefitted from this greater, greener and pleasanter land?

      I'm really rather cheesed off with Brexiters' talk of "… will be great again" and "taking back control" which I feel amounts talking down the country and the people living and working in it.

      The UK, in the EU, is a perfectly successful country, on the whole liked by other countries and people, and generally in control of its own affairs. (Just like other successful countries in the EU). But that position is now at risk due to what I perceive to be misinformation, downright lies, an electorate which possibly did not fully consider the issues at stake, and sheer jingoism. And I am really upset about that.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Really ....

        'Please tell me when, and why, the UK was "greater" than it is now!'

        Prior to 1956. That's more or less when we gave up.

        You're right, of course. We'd have to invade Egypt again to regain control of the Suez canal and all sorts of other stuff. Is it so difficult for people to believe that clocks only run one way?

        1. Phil.T.Tipp

          Re: Really ....

          Bingo, sir.

        2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "Prior to 1956. That's more or less when we gave up."

          The UK was almost economically bankrupt before WWII. Afterwards, as the result of lend-lease, we really were in the shiiter, especially when the Yanks killed lend-lease dead just days after VJ day. It was only the Marshal Plan which saved us (and the rest of europe) from reverting to the stone age or further wars.

      2. Dave 15

        Re: Really ....

        Cobblers

        Britain in the EU was an insignificant boy bullied in the playground. We interpreted the rules against ourselves while everyone else bent them to better themselves....

        I challenge you to find a single non German police car, council lorry or army truck in Germany

        And just to prove a point go and find a single German police car, council lorry or army truck in France... you won't, the French have only French ones.

        Similar in Italy

        Come to the UK and try and find a single British built one! We have a massive car industry, we had a massive lorry, armaments and van industry... once.

        Note how the French happily maintain a now illegal ban on British beef.... and still would burn our Lamb on the dockside if we bothered to send it. Of course the fact they have more BSE doesn't stop them sending their beef abroad does it?

        I live in europe, its great, but I can assure you that it is just NOT POSSIBLE to find British food, drink, near impossible to find any other British products here... to say we benefit at all is a joke.

        1. Strahd Ivarius

          Re: Really ....

          In France you will find police cars from Ford and other non-French brands...

          But I concur, I have a lot of trouble finding British wine in Paris ;-)

          1. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            I admit to not spending a lot of time in Paris, but in south west France where I have spent a lot of time they are ALL Renault or Citroen.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Really ....

              Downvote, in my local commune teeterign on the border of limousin, the commune has a jcb backhoe, german and italian tractors, and coliposte uses merc sprinters. Of course the gendarmes use fords amongst the renaults etc.

              Mostly if a org is using french vehicles, its because renault or citroen offer massive discounts to keep the business and to keep their vehicles as a preferred choice, just like vauxhalls could do in the UK. If they weren't american owned (GE owns GM which owns vauxhall/opel/holden etc) that is.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Really ....

            But I concur, I have a lot of trouble finding British wine in Paris ;-)

            Good, you really don't want to drink British wine, wherever you might find it. It's factory-made rotgut.

            English wine, on the other hand, is a very different matter. The French are probably too embarrassed to stock it after it beat Champagne into third place at a blind tasting:

            http://www.englishwineproducers.co.uk/news/latest/england-comes-out-on-top-in-sparkling-blind-tasting/

            and not for the first time.

            It's also 40 years since the famous Californian victory in Paris.

        2. This post has been deleted by its author

        3. pauleverett

          Re: Really ....

          The reason you don't find any products, made in England, on shelves, in other EU countries, is because England, does not actually make many products, that anyone else, but the Brits, wants to buy. It is not because there is some plot, to keep out the brits. it is simply that there is no demand, at all, for english produce. Britain is an import nation, importing foreign foods and goods, because foreigners,make stuff, that we want to use, and eat. Maybe that is something your average brexiter should take into consideration.

      3. Dave 15

        Re: Really ....

        Britain was great enough to save the world twice in the 20th century ... at massive cost to itself (financially as well as in people etc. ... the ONLY country to benefit out of the two massive wars being the Americans who milked europe and Russia for every penny they could before stepping in right at the end to make sure they got all the post war benefits as well).

        Britain was an industrial powerhouse right through the 19th century totally dominating the world with the mass produced output from places like Birmingham, Sheffield, Manchester.

        The industrial strife of the 1960's and 1970's was frankly due to the bosses not wanting to pay their workers for the work being done. When faced with bosses taking 40-100% pay rises and giving the workers nothing the people in the 60's and 70's stood up and fought, the people today just shrug and carry on.... the problem is still happening but people are now too scared and spineless to do anything when they are dumped on from a great height (hardly a 'Great' thing at all).

        The decline compared to other countries during that time was partly imposed by the USA who threatened us to cause the withdrawal from Suez, the giving up of what was left of the bankrupt empire and even scuttling the Royal Navy and destroying the aircraft industry... forcing us to buy inferior American warplanes in place of completing TSR2 (which would even today compare favourably with eurofighter). The other problem faced during the 60s and 70s was that the rest of the world had American financial help (Germany, Japan, Italy) OR just a lack of debt (France etc.) while we were paying off a massive debt, this meant while the rest of the world invested in automated machinery we couldn't. And no, I don't forget the unions fighting against updates, but where other countries had money to expand replacing lost jobs with new ones and retraining, in the UK if your job bolting on wheels was automated you had no where else to go.

        All in all some people need to look at what really happened and not go along with what the government wants to tell you.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really ....

          > Britain was great enough to save the world twice in the 20th century

          Along with our allies (the Soviets, eventually the US, all the Commonwealth countries). And, if the Channel hadn't been there, we would still be German.

          You really are not very bright are you?

        2. The Travelling Dangleberries

          Re: Really ....

          @Dave 15

          "Britain was an industrial powerhouse right through the 19th century totally dominating the world with the mass produced output from places like Birmingham, Sheffield, Manchester."

          Sounds like you have never read "Love on the Dole", or "The Road to Wigan Pier" or any factual contemporary historical reports of living and working conditions for workers in such "industrial powerhouses". People who scraped by every week on a pittance living in towns with environmental conditions that were worse than the worst you will find in China today.

          Britain's industrial revolution was run on the gross exploitation of workers, employed with contracts that could leave you out of a job at the end of each day, with little or no attention paid to the health, safety and well being of the employed. With no regard to the devastating environmental impact of a coal based heavy industrial economy. Wealth created on the backs of child labour and the exploitation of families.

          That Brexiteers think that this is something to return to in the 21st century to make Britain "great" again only goes to show how tenuous their grasp on reality really is.

          Mind you, it looks like the UK is already on the way back to that "great" period in our history. Zero hour contract anyone?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Really ....

            living in towns with environmental conditions that were worse than the worst you will find in China today.

            Care to provide proof of that ludicrous statement? Industrial revolution conditions were poor by modern standards, but not remotely as bad as parts of China/India/Africa today.

            1. smartypants

              Re: Really ....

              "but not remotely as bad as parts of China/India/Africa today"

              FFS this is absurd. It takes moments for you to find out just how bad life was in the 19th C.. Let me help you:

              "Henry Mayhew was an investigative journalist who wrote a series of articles for the Morning Chronicle about the way the poor of London lived and worked.

              In an article published on 24th September 1849 he described a London Street with a tidal ditch running through it, into which drains and sewers emptied. The ditch contained the only water the people in the street had to drink, and it was ‘the colour of strong green tea’, in fact it was ‘more like watery mud than muddy water’. This is the report he gave:

              ‘As we gazed in horror at it, we saw drains and sewers emptying their filthy contents into it; we saw a whole tier of doorless privies in the open road, common to men and women built over it; we heard bucket after bucket of filth splash into it’ (2).

              Mayhew’s articles were later published in a book called London Labour and the London Poor and in the introduction he wrote:

              ‘…the condition of a class of people whose misery, ignorance, and vice, amidst all the immense wealth and great knowledge of “the first city in the world”, is, to say the very least, a national disgrace to us’ (3)."

              http://www.hiddenlives.org.uk/articles/poverty.html

              ---

              If the only way you measure success is in the achievements of the rich or the number of countries 'owned', then yes, Britain was "great". But life for ordinary people in Britain has never been better than today, and if you think differently, you really have been duped by the two arse cheeks of nationalism and xenophobia.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Really ....

                described a London Street with a tidal ditch running through it, into which drains and sewers emptied. The ditch contained the only water the people in the street had to drink, and it was ‘the colour of strong green tea’, in fact it was ‘more like watery mud than muddy water’.

                So, just like parts of Africa and India today, then.

                It's not right that people have to live like that, of course, but it was not worse in 18c Britain.

                1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

                  Re: Really ....

                  "So, just like parts of Africa and India today, then."

                  I don't think people in the third world today live in squalor quite as horrible as that depicted below about London in the early industrial age.

                2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                  Re: Really ....

                  "it was not worse in 18c Britain."

                  No, the large-scale urbanisation that Mayhew described hadn't got going in the C18th, at least not to the same extent.

      4. welshi

        Re: Really ....

        Sorry you are upset GB -not bad at sport I hear? some issues

        The Empire is our legacy bad or good through the Commonwealth those countries and more still speak to us and meet to discuss issues.One issue on their books is a Free Trade Zone between Commonwealth counties -57 countries that are a third of the worlds population that I presume GB would have access to?If we had access to this would you as the EU not feel it was in your best interests to do a favourable deal with such a country or not?

        The UK become disenfranchised with Politicians over the expenses scandal but this is nothing to Trumpton on the US where third generation Politicians were the norm and where being elected was all about greasing your sponsors interests rather than the electorate you were elected for -This is why Trumpton emerged and Brexit was all about them and us who spend their life calling everyone dumb and dumber rather than looking at why they actually did it in the first place.

        Lastly the EU operates on the basis of expansion -as a new country joins it is offered infrastructure improvements which they gladly take -see Portugal etc .This creates debt to centralised banks which is what the whole EU needs to feed off.Cut off the expansion ......thats why they are not happy..

        1. if(i == alive) { live_free = true; government = NULL; }

          Re: Really ....

          Here is an example of the reason that I voted for Brexit:

          The EU are mandating a spy in the car technology called eCall. Initially it will just contact the police if there has been an accident where the airbags have been set off, but sooner or later it will provide all sorts of information that will allow for the abstraction of cash from drivers.

          If we had remained in the EU then we would have no choice but to accept this technology. As it is there is a possibility that eCall might be implemented by the British government regardless as to whether we are in the EU or not, but this is the biggie; this is the reason why I voted to leave the EU: At the next general election we will have the opportunity to vote for a government that promises to scrap eCall. If we had remained, no government would even be permitted to make that promise, let alone act on it.

          This example can be applied to any and all rules, laws and regulations and is the absolute major reason to get out of the stinking rotten EU as fast as possible and to hell with the FTA.

          1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            "At the next general election we will have the opportunity to vote for a government that promises to scrap eCall."

            You are funny, you!

            1. There won't be a party that promises this, because for the average person it won't be an issue. If you sell yourself to Farsebook and Twatter, why would you care about invasion of privacy?

            2. Any government with ANY sense will sneak this in mid-term with no say whatsoever from the voter.

            I use an older car so won't be affected. I'll get another older car next time (I.e new now), and after that it will be a self driving electrical one anyway.

    6. anothercynic Silver badge

      Re: Really ....

      Quote: 'Britain can and will be "great" again'

      What, it's not now? What planet do you live on? Oh. Right. An alternate reality where we are a downtrodden folk, oppressed by the evil overlords from the continent and we must fight the oppression to become great again.

      *eyeroll*

      1. AMBxx Silver badge
        Boffin

        Re: Really ....

        Unemployment down

        Employment up

        Productivity up (that's the big surprise)

        FTSE 100 up

        FTSE 250 up

        Consumer spending up

        The only thing that's gone wrong is all the predictions made by remainers.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really ....

          Racist attacks up

          1. Peter2 Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            "Does anyone anywhere have a source for such policy and research from those who championed the Leave vote? This is a genuine request for information not a troll."

            eureferendum.com

            They have a number of monographs covering various things in very simple form as well as the Flexible Exit plan (aka FLEXIT) which El Reg covered some while back.

            1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: Really ....

              "They have a number of monographs covering various things in very simple form as well as the Flexible Exit plan (aka FLEXIT) which El Reg covered some while back."

              Several of the Leavers have now been given the task of coming up with actual plans in the real world where forms aren't even simple, let alone very simple. Let's see how they cope.

            2. keithpeter
              Windows

              Re: Really ....

              "They have a number of monographs covering various things in very simple form as well as the Flexible Exit plan (aka FLEXIT) which El Reg covered some while back."

              @Peter2

              Thanks for this.

              The monographs appear to be paraphrasing the legal frameworks that the negotiations will be held within.

              The 'Flexcit' document seems to combine strangely precise historical figures together with bald assertions couched in the passive voice.

              But it is a *substantial* document (400 pages). I suspect that the political vision put forward in the document will not find acceptance by either of the major parties and will, therefore, not form a basis for negotiation. The 6 phase model will give me a sort of 'bingo card' to check events as they unfold though, so thanks again.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Britai great again

            Well, if we haven't the armed forces to biff people abroad we have to do it at home, don't we?

          3. William 3 Bronze badge

            Re: Really ....

            So are terrorists attacks by Islamic Fundamentalists. Is that the fault of Brexit also?

            Is that why they're driving trucks into people?

            Because Brexit.

            Away with your Guardian Bullshit.

          4. Phil.T.Tipp

            Re: Really ....

            Only those made by crazed muzzies. Get a grip.

          5. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Really ....

            News reporting of Racist attacks up.

            There, fixed that for you

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really ....

          So as a trading nation the exchange rate of the Pound vs USD, Euro, Yen etc is not important?

          Everything we import will get at least 10% more expensive in the coming months. Already happening with some goods from Japan. Sure, what we sell overseas gets more attractive but a how much of that trade relied upon something being imported in the first place.

          With exchange rates against the Euro fast approaching 1:1 we are well and truly up shit creek without a paddle.

          With businesses putting expansion and hiring on hold we are stuffed

          Some businesses have already announced shifting of production to Europe because of the uncertanyu of exchange rates.

          Sheesh, couch potato economists.

          1. AMBxx Silver badge

            shifting of production to Europe

            That's been happening for years. Much cheaper labout available in eastern Europe.

            I've worked in multiple currencies for the last 20 years. An exchange rate shift doesn't automatically make imported goods more expensive by the same percentage. You end up with supplier rebates or price adjustments from the overseas supplier so that they can keep market share.

            For imports that are subsequently exported, we add value in some way (that's how profit is made), so the increased cost of raw materials has no impact on export price from the 3rd country's perspective.

            Hiring on hold? Check the employment statistics.

            On the plus side, every time your life goes badly in the next few years, you'll be able to blame people like me rather than taking personal responsibility.

          2. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            Yes the pound against other currencies is important..... the lower the better, our products are then relatively cheaper. Once we start making power and digging up the raw materials here rather than importing them then the products get even cheaper.

            Of course if we buy the electricity from France and the steel from Germany it doesn't help as much as if we dig coal up in Wales, burn it and smelt our own steel in the UK.

            1. Naughtyhorse

              Re: digging up the raw materials here

              So destroying the coal, steel, rain and pretty much all maunfacturing in the 80's tunrs out to be a bit of a mistake

          3. William 3 Bronze badge

            Re: Really ....

            "Sheesh, couch potato economists."

            Riiight, so we should listen to some fucking joker on a tech website because he's right and everyone else is wrong.

        3. The Islander

          Re: Really ....

          @ AMBxx ... "Employment up"

          At a Bank of England Gov'nor press conference on 4th August (as reported in Guardian) "Following the Brexit vote, unemployment is expected to be higher than the Bank assumed in May. The unemployment rate is expected to have risen modestly in July (from 4.9% in the three months to May) and to continue rising to 5.4% next year and 5.6% in 2018.

          At the press conference, the Bank governor said unemployment was likely to rise by 250,000 so it is right to take action now."

          Statistics anyone?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Really ....

            The prediction didn't match what's actually happened, that's true. At least not yet.

            According to reed recruiting new graduate and apprenticeship posts are down about 25% on what there were before the referendum. It looks like employers are still hiring, but only for posts which don't require long term investment - i.e. can be dumped again with relatively little loss. And when you think about it, why not? Until article 50 is triggered employers know that they have at least two years to reverse any hiring decisions they make now, so the final impact of brexit on the employment market isn't going to be apparent for a while to come. In the meantime we get fewer decent jobs out there, and more temping/zero hours positions - yay for brexit!

          2. Dave 15

            Re: Really ....

            Of course we will never really know. We haven't left. The BofE took avoiding action (correctly). The employment figures are so massaged and fudged they make zero sense anyway and haven't for many years. (Unemployment is down is regularly heard when the number not in work is rising - from the ONS statistics... somehow a massive and increasing % of the work force is either happily at home or somehow incapacitated from work).

        4. smartypants

          Re: Really ....

          Ambxx:

          You do know that brexit hasn't happened yet, don't you?

          We are still in the EU.

          The article is talking about the consequences of brexit on trade... The trade which carries on today because we are a member of the EU.

          I do try not to consider the brexit supporters to be a bit thick, but it's hard sometimes.

        5. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          @ AMBxx

          What stats are you quoting here? I suspect it's Q2, ending only just after the vote, so you're looking at what happened almost entirely before the vote, not the consequences.

        6. Warm Braw Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          FTSE 100 up, FTSE 250 up

          Given that there has as yet been no change in our relationship with the EU (we haven't even formally declared an intention to leave) and that at present noone has the slightest idea what our future relationship with the EU will be, it's hard to argue for any cause and effect either way.

          Except in one area. The FTSE 100 are mostly global corporations traded in London. The fall in the value of the pound made the FTSE 100 cheap to buyers in other countries, so they bought. The FTSE has risen, very roughly, 10% about the same, roughly, as the pound has fallen so its international value hasn't really changed very much.

          It's likely that the FTSE 250 has been influenced by better trading prospects for its more UK-based companies, resulting from weaker sterling.

          Having sterling tank may well be a good thing for the UK economy but I'm not sure it's what the Brexiteers actually meant by "making Britain great again".

        7. whatevs...

          Re: Really ....

          "Unemployment down

          Employment up

          Productivity up (that's the big surprise)..."

          Construction industry in recession.

          Hang on to your hats folks, this is the calm before the shit-storm...

        8. 64kRAM

          Re: Really ....

          @AMBxx

          "The only thing that's gone wrong is all the predictions made by remainers."

          Please can I remind you that **we haven't left the EU yet**.

          Nothing has changed, other than us proposing our intention to leave.

          1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

            Re: Really ....

            > Nothing has changed, other than us proposing our intention to leave.

            Quite a bit has changed - lots of scientific collaborations have ejected their UK scientists (particularly if it's a multi-year agreement) due to "political uncertanties".

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Really ....

              "Quite a bit has changed - lots of scientific collaborations have ejected their UK scientists (particularly if it's a multi-year agreement) due to "political uncertanties"."

              Luckily, Brexiters don't need no experts...

        9. Roo
          Windows

          Re: Really ....

          "FTSE 100 up

          FTSE 250 up"

          My guess is that folks are moving money into shares because the pound is taking a beating on the currency markets, the prospect of negative interest rates will tend to do that.

        10. Edward Ashford
          Meh

          Re: Really ....

          The key word occurs early in the article... "could". These are the same people who led us into EMU and missed the credit crunch.

        11. Archtech Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "Unemployment down

          Employment up

          Productivity up (that's the big surprise)

          FTSE 100 up

          FTSE 250 up

          Consumer spending up

          The only thing that's gone wrong is all the predictions made by remainers".

          I wonder why so many people voted that post down. After all, it consists exclusively of undeniable, undisputed facts.

          It seems that quite a lot of us are capable of disapproving of reality. That's not a useful attitude in the long run.

          1. smartypants

            Re: Really ....

            Archtech,

            The reason that post got so many downvotes is simply because it refers to predictions by the remain camp that are about Brexit, which hasn't happened yet.

            Is this really so hard for you to understand? Or do you genuinely believe that we are now living in the post-brexit world, and it is now safe to conclude there had been nothing to worry about? In which case, I'm afraid you just help reaffirm what the statistics claim about the brexit camp.

            Even if we ultimately avoid brexit, the damage that is being done in loss of confidence will take months and years to feed through properly. Business requires the winning of contracts for their pipeline which generate future income and employment, and it's the moment when these holes in the pipeline manifest themselves that the effects will be felt. The more instability, the more damage. It really is that simple.

            Sure, at the end of it all, businesses will align to a new reality, but it is pure wishful thinking to believe that it will be dramatically better than now.

    7. keithpeter
      Windows

      Re: Really ....

      "The IFS are part of the gravy train that has kept the status quo for so long now. "

      @djstardust

      Do you have a specific criticism of the content of the report or methodology used in the report?

      We have had the referendum. We are not fighting a campaign any more. We need to actually make things work now, and to do that, we need accurate evidence-based policy and research.

      Does anyone anywhere have a source for such policy and research from those who championed the Leave vote? This is a genuine request for information not a troll.

      1. maffski

        Re: Really ....

        'Do you have a specific criticism of the content of the report or methodology used in the report?'

        Here's one - they appear to factor in a cost for compliance with customs inspections/paperwork etc. (and the related 'trade friction') if we are outside of the FTA. But they make no effort to factor in the cost reductions from not having to comply with EU legislation for products not destined for the EU.

        Or the fact they mention unilateral free trade in passing, but then when looking at the 'WTO' scenario they make the assumption that all countries will operate the harshest import duties and restrictions allowable against the UK, and further that the UK will also take the harshest position possible against all imports, this despite the fact that the UK has traditionally wanted less import restrictions into the EU compared to other members.

        But mainly, the problem is that the report is pointless; there's just far too much which is unknown; so the only real point of the report is to be reported. And to get the words 'The Institute for Fiscal Studies' into places like the Wall street Journal.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "But they make no effort to factor in the cost reductions from not having to comply with EU legislation for products not destined for the EU."

          Products destined for countries not in the EU will have to comply with existing requirements of those countries so there would be no change there. The exception is for products to be sold here. Do you think that to save money we should reduce the existing EU-wide standards on, say, electrical safety of goods sold here?

    8. phuzz Silver badge

      Re: Really ....

      This country is called "Great Britain" in order to differentiate it from "petite Bretagne", or Brittany as we call it.

      As long as Britain is larger than Brittany, we'll always be Great Britain.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Really ....

        "As long as Britain is larger than Brittany, we'll always be Great Britain."

        What's the matter with you? Do you think facts enter into it?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Who we

        As Tonto memorably responded 'Who we?' Many Scots, for instance, would think differently.

      3. Jess

        Re: This country is called "Great Britain"

        er no.

        Great Britain refers to the union of Scotland and Britain (England and Wales). i.e the whole Island.

        The likely outcome of Brexit is this union being broken, meaning 'Britain' will return to meaning England and Wales rather than being an abbreviation for Great Britain.

        So the BR in Brexit would be literally Britain.

        Brexit would take the Great out of Great Britain and end the United Kingdom.

        However it would seem likely to me that were it to be a reversal of our 1970s move from the EFTA to the EEC, then Scotland and NI might accept it and the UK might continue.

      4. mad physicist Fiona

        Re: Really ....

        This country is called "Great Britain" in order to differentiate it from "petite Bretagne", or Brittany as we call it.

        As long as Britain is larger than Brittany, we'll always be Great Britain.

        Last time I check the country was called the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in full). Britain is an island. The "great" prefix denotes it as the largest in the archipelago - Gran Canaria is another example. Nothing at all to do with Brittany...

        1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          > Britain was great enough to save the world twice in the 20th century

          Actually, no. As the previous poster said, historically it was Greater Britain as opposed to Less Britain (Brittany).

          It may well have come to mean as you say, but the original derivation was as a comparison to Brittany.

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          'The "great" prefix denotes it as the largest in the archipelago - Gran Canaria is another example.'

          You do realise, don't you, that Gran Canaria is not the largest island of its archipelago? Your modern geography is no better than your historical geography.

        3. Ripper38
          Thumb Up

          Re: Really ....The "great" prefix denotes...

          @ mad physicist Fiona. Spot on analogy, bravo!

      5. Archtech Silver badge

        Re: Really ....

        "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing..."

        It is perfectly true that Great Britain was originally so called to distinguish it from "Petite Bretagne". That was in the Middle Ages. But as soon as the French kicked the British occupiers out of their country, the distinction ceased to have any relevance. (Under Henry II of England, who ruled over Normandy, Maine, Anjou, Aquitaine and other parts of modern France as well as England, it was quite useful).

        Since perhaps the time of Shakespeare, at the very latest, "Great Britain" has been a term of appreciation for the expansion and prosperity of this nation. It also acknowledges that Wales and Scotland, as well as England, are integral parts of modern Britain.

    9. TheOtherHobbes

      Re: Really ....

      >They lost. get over it

      No, you lost. Because you're just so easy to con with a bit of flag waving, some obvious lies, and a few slogans that sound good but don't mean anything

      You were lied to, and now you're going to be ripped off. You fell for the political equivalent of the crooks who "sell" new driveways to pensioners, then disappear with the money and never do any work.

      Pure emotion. No planning. No strategy. No facts.

      No contact with reality.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Really ....

        This always gets brought up.

        How on earth can anyone plan for something, when the other party will not discuss any options, until we trigger article 50?

        Were there lies and mis-truths banded about? Sure - by both parties. The entire referendum was handled extremely poorly. You blame the general public, but when were there anything other than scare tactics used to bully the populace into a decision by the remain camp?

        The public voted, and the result was leave. Sure, things might be tough in the future financially. That's not what the leave vote was about. It was to stick two fingers up at the elected bureaucracy that thinks it can ignore the little people, both in Europe and the UK. Our current lot may be no better, but come 2020 we can always vote in a new crowd. The same cannot be said for the EU...

        1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "That's not what the leave vote was about. It was to stick two fingers up at the elected bureaucracy that thinks it can ignore the little people, both in Europe and the UK."

          Perhaps you mean that that is what the Sun, or other quality publications like the Daily Fail, told you it was about?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Really ....

            >anonymous boring coward

            >Perhaps you mean that that is what the Sun, or other quality publications like the Daily Fail, told you it

            >was about?

            Are you seriously suggesting the UK government always acts in the general public best interest?

            1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

              Re: Really ....

              Of course not.

              What does that have to do with anything?

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Really ....

          "It was to stick two fingers up at the elected bureaucracy that thinks it can ignore the little people, both in Europe and the UK. "

          The words nose and face come to mind.

    10. Andrew Moore

      Re: Really ....

      "and all this doom and gloom..."

      It's called reality.

    11. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really ....

      "Britain can and will be "great" again"

      Without looking it up, I'm pretty sure the "Great" refers to included territories, rather than being particulary good.

      So how is GB planning to keep hold of its various parts with a constantly weakened influence in the world?

      Looks like Scotland and NI isn't that keen on the union any more?

      Argentina wants the Falklands. Spain wants Gibraltar.

      Trident to the rescue, with a a few F35s for good measure?

      Looks like Brexiters have made choices based on some bizarre ideas about GB's importance and influence in the wider world.

    12. andrewj

      Re: Really ....

      Britain has never stopped being great, despite the attempts of dimbulbs like yourself.

  2. Thought About IT

    TTIP to the rescue?

    Liam Fox was hugely enthusiastic about removing restrictions on trade with the US, before he was sacked from his last cabinet role, so I expect he'll welcome TTIP with open arms and rush it through with all its nasty clauses intact. Neoliberals never like to let a crisis go without using it to ratchet up their control, as Naomi Klein observed in The Shock Doctrine.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: TTIP to the rescue?

      I thought I read somewhere that both Trump and Clinton were against the TPP and the TTIP

      Oh well, we can go on being shafted as normal then. Come on Farage, where is this boom in trade you promised and not just because the pound has tanked. Apparently you get less than 1 Euro for your pound now as a tourist.

      What happened to the truth befing the fact that the sum is greater than the parts?

      Why will other countries even bother to even start negociations over a trade deal with us? What's in it for them that they can't already get with the EU?

      consider me unconvinced.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: TTIP to the rescue?

        At present, there is no reason why the pound should be so low against the euro. And it wouldn't be except for profiteering by those who make their money from buying and selling currency.

        Well, that and a Bank of England that seems incapable of acting in the economy's and the country's best interest.

        People talk about "Brexit" like it has already happened, it hasn't yet (and maybe it will never). Article 50 hasn't been invoked and we are still a member of the EU. Meanwhile, trade still goes on, people still need our goods and services.

        All that has happened, is that a bunch of people who seem to enjoy doom and gloom headlines take the worst case scenario from any predictions and make it seem that it will happen or has already happened.

        I voted remain and I believe we are better off in the EU (even if it is broken), but I also believe all this doom and gloom, horsemen of the apocalypse rubbish is harming the economy more than Brexit ever will.

        1. sbolae
          Childcatcher

          Re: TTIP to the rescue?

          "Well, that and a Bank of England that seems incapable of acting in the economy's and the country's best interest."

          Why would the Bank of England act in the country's best interest? The BoE will act in the best interest of it's share holders and guaranteed that is not the tax payer.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: TTIP to the rescue?

            @sbolae

            The Bank of England is owned by the Treasury and has no share holders.

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: TTIP to the rescue?

            "The BoE will act in the best interest of it's share holders and guaranteed that is not the tax payer."

            From Wikipedia: "The Bank was privately owned by stockholders from its foundation in 1694 until nationalised in 1946."

    2. Dr Stephen Jones

      Re: TTIP to the rescue?

      "Neoliberals" ... "Shock doctrine" ...blah.

      I'd rather assess TTIP independently for myself, rather than take the world of a ranting soap-dodger.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: TTIP to the rescue?

        Yeah well you can't independently assess TTIP. It's top secret because you wouldn't like what's in it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: TTIP to the rescue?

          TTP isn't secret. TTIP won't be secret once it's published - then it's up to us to ratify it, or reject it. (TTP is dead in the water).

          I dare say there will be things in it I like, and things I won't like - but for now can you put away the loony tinfoil hat?

          1. sbolae

            Re: TTIP to the rescue?

            "I dare say there will be things in it I like, and things I won't like - but for now can you put away the loony tinfoil hat?"

            How do you know if there is thinks you like and dislike in the TTIP agreement? You have never read it because you are not allowed access to it.

            I hate to quote from Wiki but:

            "The reports on the ongoing negotiations and the contents of the negotiated TTIP proposals are classified from the public, and can be accessed only by authorised persons. Multiple leaks of proposed TTIP contents into the public caused controversy." Caused controversy? I wonder why?

            If you are an MEP you are allowed to read the agreement under supervision but are not allowed to make copies and you are allowed to make notes so long as it's not word for word. Conspiracy? what conspiracy?

            It's not the tin foil hat loonies but wool over your eyes that should concern you.

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: TTIP to the rescue?

            "once it's published - then it's up to us to ratify it,"

            It won't be published until the stitch-up's complete.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Well,

    file that one under 'no shit sherlock'

  4. Dr Stephen Jones

    The big picture

    So...

    Our trade balance with the Rest of the World is positive and rising.

    Our trade balance with the EU is negative and falling.

    Therefore, regardless of Brexit, we the UK should have been focussing on global not EU trade any way. On balance, we got out in time. Trade is the biggest Brexit bonus. A recent David Davis article has lots more useful stuff in it.

    http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2016/02/david-davis-britain-would-be-better-off-out-of-the-eu-and-heres-why.html

    1. lglethal Silver badge

      Re: The big picture

      Did you miss the figures in the article? EU Exports are worth 44% of exports. China and India (the two expected big growth markets) are worth 4.6%.

      Even if you double trade to China and India (unlikely). All it takes is a 10% reduction in EU trade (which is very likely) and you have reduced net exports.

      And you really wanted to say the outlook looks good? OK then...

      1. Dr Stephen Jones

        Re: The big picture

        Yes, I would say the outlook has tons of potential and upside. It's really up to the UK's exporters trade negotiators to make the most of it. For once it's up to us to make the most of the UK's advantages in contract law and the English language, rather than whinging about Brussels or whatever.

        Our trade with the Rest of the World was rising anyway - that's where the new markets and strong demand is coming from. The EU is falling because a) it's in a slump and b) Germany has it sewn up. As I wrote, our emphasis has been and should be on the RoW regardless of Brexit.

        "And you really wanted to say the outlook looks good? OK then..."

        The needle seems to be stuck on Project Fear. Are you doing this so I can say "I told you so". It sounds very childish.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: The big picture

          "It's really up to the UK's exporters trade negotiators..." Except we haven't got any; at the governmental level the only British trade negotiators are working for the EU (as EU employees) and they may well continue to do so rather than apply for jobs with HM Government. Those are the people we need to negotiate trading deals with other governments. Individual companies' negotiators are used to working within an agreed trade framework, and would be totally useless at negotiating those frameworks, they are salesmen, not trained political negotiators.

          As for advantages in contract law and the English language, as we are the supplicants in this process it is much more likely that any trade negotiations will have to be carried out in the language of the country with which we wish to trade and that those contracts will be bound by the laws of that country, not this one.

          1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
            WTF?

            Re: The big picture

            "It's really up to the UK's exporters trade negotiators..." Except we haven't got any;

            We had no railway engineers when the railways were invented either, but we trained them when we needed them. We had no computer specialists until we needed them at Bletchly park. We had no jet pilots until we invented the jet engine, and so on.

            Why take such a negative view of everything? If everything was run by people like you we'd still be sitting in caves banging rocks together and calling it 'music'.

            When an opportunity comes along, expected/wanted or not, there always seem to be two types of people, those who jump at the chance to turn them into something positive, and those who prefer to lie on the couch moaning about how it was better in the old days when they didn't have to work so hard. The latter are part of the problem, not the solution.

            1. H in The Hague

              Re: The big picture

              "We had no railway engineers when the railways were invented either, but we trained them when we needed them."

              Good point. Tiny problem: those railway engineers learning on the job only had to compete with horses. Trainee UK trade negotiators will have to deal with v experienced folk on the other side. And, when negotiating with the EU, China and US, those negotiations are likely to be lopsided - not to the UK's advantage.

              Call me a pessimist but somehow I doubt the new trade negotiators (who, incidentally, would be "unelected, faceless bureaucrats") are going to bring the UK trade deals significantly better than those we have through the EU right now. Furthermore, those negotiations are going to take up energy and money which, in my view, would be better spent on education & training, the NHS or tax cuts.

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: The big picture

                Trainee UK trade negotiators will have to deal with v experienced folk on the other side.

                Other countries have already offered us experienced negotiators to get the ball rolling, and train others. Some of the existing "EU" negotiators are British, and may well be enticed back to negotiate on behalf of the UK, especially if they're the type who like a challenge (the EU can keep the ones who just want a soft job).

                Call me a pessimist

                You're a pessimist. You assume that there's no point in trying because we can't succeed. That's a guaranteed recipe for failure.

                but somehow I doubt the new trade negotiators (who, incidentally, would be "unelected, faceless bureaucrats") are going to bring the UK trade deals significantly better than those we have through the EU right now.

                They don't have to, they just need to bring ones as good as we have now. They will, where's there's money to be made, people will find competent folks to do it. Provided the pessimists keep out of our way...

              2. Dave 15

                Re: The big picture

                Your point would be well made if the current crop of eu negotiators were working for British interests and our guys are really so stupid they can't see a bad deal and walk away.

                The US will want to trade and to set up a deal right now because they net export to us, same with China, if they offer us shit and we walk past then they will be back. Same with the EU.

                Once we get our collective heads up and realise we are important and capable then the boot will be on the other foot. We will need to negotiate fair deals for the future and reject unfair ones now, not that difficult.

                Anyone with a reasonably brain could do this, it doesn't take an engineer or scientist.

                1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                  Re: The big picture

                  "Anyone with a reasonably brain could do this, it doesn't take an engineer or scientist."

                  Have you read what the scientists are saying about the impact on British science?

          2. Dave 15

            Re: The big picture

            er no, trade is a two way street. Why do people like you automatically assume that Britain... one of the largest economies... has to go begging?

            Stand up correctly, square up your shoulders and stop thinking we are some poor little street urchin begging for crumbs.

        2. Roo
          Windows

          Re: The big picture

          "As I wrote, our emphasis has been and should be on the RoW regardless of Brexit."

          Fair point, I think most people can also agree that it would have been better for the trade figures to be skewed towards the RoW before lighting the fire under the pan. :)

      2. Dave 15

        Re: The big picture

        Won't comment on your figures but trade with the EU is still in the EUs favour... so I cant really see a reason for them to destroy that trade... retaliation by us would cost them.

    2. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: The big picture

      "The EU currently accounts for 44% of UK exports as a whole, and 39% of UK services exports. In contrast, China and India together account for just 4.6% of UK exports as a whole and only 2.6% of service exports, according to the report."

      I did look at this and wonder how a bad thing was turned into a good thing. The Eurozone is tanking and expecting further problems from the last recession yet we rely on them so much? And as pointed out the growth economies account for so little. In or out of the EU surely it would be a good thing to look at diversifying our exports and it is much easier when you can have trade agreements.

      "The UK "may have to make some very difficult choices" between the benefits to the financial services sector, in particular of maintaining "passporting" rights and the costs of regulatory compliance, the IFS said. However, without single market membership, there was a considerable risk that these firms would have to transfer substantial amounts of business to EU subsidiaries."

      Again this ignores the increased burden the EU is desperate to impose as was mused on the bitcoin plans of the EU. The transactions will just leave the EU and funny enough we have a world leading financial sector here. Being outside the EU may be a benefit, it depends on what we choose to do (that whole taking back control thing).

      ""almost all of the EU's post-crisis financial regulatory measures, including passporting rights, are currently excluded" from the EEA agreement."

      Does that include our money not being used to trap Greece and potentially others in an economic death spiral? Trying to prop up the Euro?

      Every time a bad piece of news or another doom prediction comes out it is all brexit! brexit! brexit! When a good piece of news comes out we havnt left yet, its an expert so brexiters shouldnt believe em and it is despite brexit. I am starting to wonder if it is a masochistic pleasure or something.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The big picture

      He scares me

      Does not seem to think there is a border between IRE and NI

      Thinks he can get a deal with Germany on their own....

      worrying

  5. Bigg Phill

    "But outside the EU, single market membership also comes at the cost of accepting future regulations designed in the EU without UK input"

    Yes but it would most likely only apply to those companies who trade with the EU, which is a perfectly reasonable situation - if you want to set up your stall in our market,you follow our rules.

    At present every business in the UK has to comply with EU regulations whether they trade with other member states or not.

    Also, the reverse would apply. Want to sell holidays in the UK? Follow our rules and register with ATOL

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Also, the reverse would apply

      Uhmmm, no. If you join the free trade area, the deal is bidirectional.

      1. Bigg Phill

        Re: Also, the reverse would apply

        "If you join the free trade area"

        Norway has said it will veto us joining the EFTA

        1. Dr Stephen Jones

          Re: Also, the reverse would apply

          "Norway has said it will veto us joining the EFTA"

          More desperate Project Fear FUD. Norway has the potential to block the UK's application, but it also has lots of reasons not to do so:

          http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/norway-has-little-to-lose-from-having-the-uk-in-efta/

          EFTA was originally a club for the non-EEC states - the UK helped found EFTA and was a leading member along with all the Nordics.

          1. Paul Shirley

            Re: Also, the reverse would apply

            The reason Norway gave was not wanting to add a massively larger economy to a club of small nations. Whatever reasons you think any EFTA member would have for wanting the UK, not letting them in now means no need to 'take back control' some time in the future if/when the UK starts bullying the others.

        2. Peter2 Silver badge

          Re: Also, the reverse would apply

          "Norway has said it will veto us joining the EFTA".

          Citation needed.

          I think the actual quote from Norway's PM was:-

          "The most important thing we can do is to safeguard national, Norwegian interests. An EFTA agreement will give us a good relationship with the UK. We can also get [a good relationship with the UK] through other agreements as well. And do we want Britain to be involved in dictating what the EFTA negotiates with third countries? Will our key national interests being benefited by that? That is the discussion we need to have,” Solberg said, pointing out that the dynamics of the EFTA negotiations with other countries will change."

          This is considerably more nuanced than "Norway has said it will veto us joining the EFTA".

        3. Teiwaz Silver badge
          Joke

          Re: Also, the reverse would apply

          Norway has said it will veto us joining the EFTA

          Bastards!! Boycot smorgasbords and Norwegian restaurants now!!

        4. Bigg Phill

          Re: Also, the reverse would apply

          "Norway has said it will veto us joining the EFTA"

          Quite a lot of replies to this. What I was basically saying (with as few characters as possible) is it's looking like we're not going for the EFTA option.

          One reason is the understandable concerns all the existing members would have about us dominating the group, most notably Norway.

          However another reason is our own Chancellor of the Exchequer has ruled out single market membership (and therefore the EFTA).

        5. Dave 15

          Re: Also, the reverse would apply

          If they do then bad Norwegian companies like Ikea, Norwegian oil and gas imports and Norwegians from visiting here... tit for tat. Frankly no skin off my nose if they fail to remember who fought for their freedom to veto us.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Also, the reverse would apply

            IKEA is Swedish, you numpty.

            1. Dave 15

              Re: Also, the reverse would apply

              oops, you are right... principle applies though...

              Actually, ban Ikea anyway... their furniture is ugly. :)

              Then blame the Norwegians... anything for a laugh

            2. The Travelling Dangleberries

              Re: Also, the reverse would apply

              @AC

              "IKEA is Swedish, you numpty."

              Actually it's generally regarded as a Dutch company. Although given its complex multinational corporate structure you'd be forgiven for thinking it was based somewhere else such as Luxemborg or Lichtenstein.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Also, the reverse would apply

                IKEA is Swedish by virtue of having been started by a Swede, Ingvar Kamprad, in Sweden. It's 100% branded as Swedish. Still controlled by Ingvar Kamprad, via a tax contruct that happen to be in the Netherlands.

                From wikipedia:

                "IKEA is owned and operated by a complicated array of not-for-profit and for-profit corporations. The corporate structure is divided into two main parts: operations and franchising. Most of IKEA's operations, including the management of the majority of its stores, the design and manufacture of its furniture, and purchasing and supply functions are overseen by INGKA Holding, a private, for-profit Dutch company. Of the IKEA stores in 43 countries, 303 are run by the INGKA Holding. The remaining 47 stores are run by franchisees outside of the INGKA Holding, with the exception of IKEA Delft which is not franchised.[70]

                INGKA Holding is not an independent company, but is wholly owned by the Stichting INGKA Foundation, which Kamprad established in 1982 in the Netherlands as a tax-exempt, not-for-profit foundation. The INGKA Foundation is controlled by a five-member executive committee that is chaired by Kamprad and includes his wife and attorney."

    2. H in The Hague

      "At present every business in the UK has to comply with EU regulations whether they trade with other member states or not."

      Now, I'm only really familiar with technical product safety and performance regs, so the following is restricted to this area.

      If the UK comes up with its own regs, are they going to be stricter (= more expensive) than the EU ones? Or less strict (= less safe/efficient)? And who is going to write those regs, and at what cost? Unelected people from the industry? Unelected, faceless bureaucrats in Whitehall?

      So, what's the benefit to the British manufacturer/consumer/economy?

      And most manufacturers are likely to export, so would have to comply with both UK and EU regs - which means more regulation/headaches, not less.

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        @ H in The Hague

        "So, what's the benefit to the British manufacturer/consumer/economy?"

        Very good question. It depends on the regs but if they are good but not damaging then it will be easier to develop products here. I think the automatic cars moved here for a similar reason of less restrictive than the US but I might be wrong. Anyone wanting to export would have to conform to the regs of the target country but since the EU is only a part of this world the EU rules wont impose on other exports or domestic items.

        Depending on what we do as a country it could be a benefit or not. And we get to elect the gov to write and maintain the rules.

        1. JohnMurray

          Re: @ H in The Hague

          Regulations governing standards/quality are applied not only to finished products, but every component within it. You cannot export a car without compliance in total. Not only that, but when you ship the finished goods, they will be held for inspection. Try running a just-in-time operation with that arrival lag. Presumably the re-vamped UK regulations will be exactly the same as EU existing regulations, or is it to be a ditto re goods arriving inspections. Now I hear we are going to try to creep back into the EEA via the EFTA rear entrance at a massive financial disadvantage, and the ffff-four freedoms will still be there. Weird. Vote leave to remain.

          1. Paul Shirley

            Re: "just in time"

            There was an interview with German car companies and ones in the car part supply chain around vote time. The problems even small disruptions in delivery cause in a JIT industry were detailed, along with the point that no mass production car factory can build cars without working JIT supply lines. They also seemed resigned to losing exports to the UK, including component supply.

            The brexiteers favourite 'they'll be hurt more than us' overlooks that supply chain dependency. Unless they can magically negotiate much better terms for component supplies over assembled cars, those UK car factories are going to be severely disrupted as EU export losses/problems hit their production. Fixable but not necessarily before the foreign owners of those factories have moved somewhere more efficient.

            That particular big stick brexiteers think they can frighten Gernam car industry with doesn't look all that frightening.

            1. Dave 15

              Re: "just in time"

              Yes fixable if anyone was so stupid as to try and break it. But the Germans are NOT going to break it or even allow it to be broken.

      2. Bigg Phill

        Rather than strictness, think relevance.

    3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      WTF?

      "Yes but it would most likely only apply to those companies who trade with the EU,"

      Wrong.

      Business don't joint trading markets, countries do.

      Did you not realize this when you presumably voted?

      1. Bigg Phill

        Re: "Yes but it would most likely only apply to those companies who trade with the EU,"

        "Business don't joint trading markets, countries do."

        China and Iceland have an FTA. Do Chinese trading laws & standards apply to all Icelandic businesses and vice versa?

        You presumably know the answer to all of this because you wouldn't want to write a patronising comment without knowing absolutely every first...

    4. Dave 15

      Outside the EU we can trade with anyone. If the EU bundle together some rules that deliberately set out to block us then we can and will do the same.

      If we are really honest the EU come up with rules all the time which are designed to go against the UK and we have to go along with them because we are inside...

      Our car companies HAVE to have an 'EU acceptable' mix of car production... doesn't really work too well for sports car and luxury car brands

      There is an increasing push on regulations for spare parts which would kill our flourishing spare parts industry

      There is even bank regulation which we might not fight off for much longer

      Before we see the damage done to our old coal fired power stations (now all closed) by EU regulation which basically forces us to be dependent on French nuclear power, Chinese and French future investment (at guaranteed rip off prices) or Russian gas...

      Really, you happy with all of this??? Think it is so bad to be away from it and able to decide to frack and burn our own shale gas, or dig coal out and burn that (yes we still have open cast...)

  6. Tom7

    We've heard enough from experts

    These are the same economists who said the vote would cause a ~9,600 increase in unemployment in July, right? Oh wait, unemployment fell by 8,400.

    These are the same economists who said the vote would cause a slump in retail spending in July, right? Oh, wait, retail sales rose by 1.4% in July (bonus challenge: spot brexit in this graph).

    These are the same economists who said the vote would send the FTSE100 through the floor, right? Wait, what, the FTSE100's up? Oh, no, don't look at that, it's not a good indicator. Look at the FTSE250 instead. What, that's up too? Shit, better issue a new doom-and-gloom report on trade.

    I'm getting pretty sick of this BS. What's the point in issuing a report that essentially says, "Hey, look, if we make all the worst-case assumptions, things look pretty bad!"? So far all bar one of the expert economic predictions have proved exactly wrong (the exception is the value of the pound - as an exporter, I'm not complaining). The only person who's been consistently right turns out to be Michael Gove: The "experts" know bugger-all.

    1. Tom7

      Re: We've heard enough from experts

      And to all the down-voters: That's the internet equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "Lalalalalalalalalalala. Don't want to hear the good news!"

    2. RIBrsiq
      Boffin

      @Tom7

      >> "Wait, what, the FTSE100's up?", etc.

      Now, I'm not a financial expert -- though maybe that gives my opinion, such as it is, more weight in your eyes, come to think of it -- but it seems to me that if GBP goes down against the rest of the world's major currencies then the total valuation of UK stock as measured in GBP will go up even if their absolute value as measured in "real money" goes down, assuming the drop in stock value is not as steep as the drop in currency value; which it stands to reason would be the case. At least in the short term.

      But I like your attitude! I mean, what do experts know about their field of expertise anyway? Amirite...?

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        >> "Wait, what, the FTSE100's up?", etc.

        The FTSE 250 is doing well too.

        There are enough stats out there that both sides can find statistics to confirm their own point of view.

      2. Tom7

        Re: "Amirite...?"

        You tell me. Did they predict the FTSE100 would go up, or down? And is it now lower? Or higher?

        When it became clear that the FTSE100 was very quickly going up, did they predict the FTSE250 would go up, or down? And is it now lower? Or higher?

        Did they predict that unemployment would rise, or fall? And did it rise? Or fall?

        Did they predict that retail sales would go up, or down? And did they go up? Or down?

      3. The Travelling Dangleberries
        Joke

        Re: @Tom7

        "But I like your attitude! I mean, what do experts know about their field of expertise anyway? Amirite...?"

        This skepticism about experts could actually turn into a great money saver for Brexitland and present opportunities for economic growth. Think about it, soon the country will only need 48% of the current number of dentists. After all, what do dentists know about teeth?

        We can reduce the NHS budget to 48% of current levels as the 52% of Leavers will no longer be willing to trust doctors and other medical staff. After all, what do they know about health?

        People can stop buying expensive European cars as well. Sure, Chinese built ones have a reputation for being somewhat less safe in crash situation but hey, what right have the experts in the EURO NCAP teams to stop people buying perfectly good cars?

        At the same time there will be massive growth in the markets for DIY tooth repair kits and health diagnostic toolkits, books titled "Remove your own appendix in half an hour" and "Road side trauma surgery for beginners" and other important things like DIY airbag kits for cars.

        Yes the future is looking so bright I need two pairs of sunglasses.

        PS I am no expert about economic matters, so I must be right, right?

        1. Tom7

          Re: @Tom7

          So point to some pre-vote predictions about the economy that turned out to be right. Come on, they're experts. There must be some, right?

          You don't quite seem to understand. You don't assess whether someone's prediction was right by checking whether they've got letters after their name. You check whether their prediction was right by comparing what they predicted to what's actually happened. This isn't hard, unless you've got your head shoved so far up your arse that all you can do is give a muffled whine, "But they're experts!"

          1. JohnMurray

            Re: @Tom7

            I'll wait for 5 years or so....we're in the EU for a minimum of 2 years from the date that art50 is invoked. So looks like we're in the EU until 2020...until the both leavers and remainers don't know what will happen.

            1. Paul Shirley

              Re: @Tom7

              "we're in the EU for a minimum of 2 years"

              Not strictly true. We're guaranteed at least 2 years of negotiation time but there's nothing saying we can't complete and leave faster. Unlikely but not forbidden. Likewise the 3 brexiteers could, in some parallel universe, not piss off the EU so badly they refuse an extension on those 2 years.

              We have Boris in just the right place to ensure a hard 2 year limit applies, now to find some way to stop the delaying and watch the clowns panic.

        2. Dave 15

          Re: @Tom7

          Lets not get into doctors.. one of them has sentanced my sister to death because he wanted to lecture her about the smoking she used to do instead of sending her for the scan that might have given them enough time to fix the cancer.

          Experts???

          If that was the ONLY time they had let my family down it would be fair enough, but they also killed both of my inlaws by failing to diagnose either of them, they left my gran to die in agony in a nursing home rather than admit her.....

          Even for me they managed to leave my elbow infected for 2 years after fixing the break..... and then decided to take the metal out and then realised as they pulled the pins out that the infection had prevented the bones knitting and had to replace it all.....

          next time choose your ideas more carefully

    3. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: We've heard enough from experts

      I do think that unless a well-crafted Brexit plan executed by competent people is put into action soon then the news might not be so good.

      Unfortunately the well-crafted Brexit plan was someone else's fault and we're still looking for competent people.

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: We've heard enough from experts

        "I do think that unless a well-crafted Brexit plan executed by competent people is put into action soon then the news might not be so good."

        In a nutshell.

  7. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    Looks like "Red Ken" Livinstone had it right so far.

    "It'll take years and you won't get what you want."

    It is taking years and so far the voters have not got the immigrant hords (at least that's what Daily Heil and the Daily Depress liked to call them) stopped as promised.

    I think I can paraphrase the report as "To regain what the UK loses in trade to the EU will a)Take a stupid increase in business with the rest of the world or b)Pay entry fees and accept EU regulations, almost certainly including the free movement of EU citizens, exactly what a lot of people who voted for exit did not want.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Looks like "Red Ken" Livinstone had it right so far.

      Well...

      Voters who wanted to block all immigration are not going to get what they want, obviously. They want some more control than we have now.

      The EU and successive UK governments have made hiring skilled non-EU workers (Aussies, Kiwis, South Africans, Russians) a lot more difficult.

      It does not seem unreasonable that we inhibit non-skilled immigration and make skilled immigration easier. That's what most people would be happy with. Ranting about the "Daily Heil" does not make you look reasonable or rational.

      1. H in The Hague

        Re: Looks like "Red Ken" Livinstone had it right so far.

        "The EU and successive UK governments have made hiring skilled non-EU workers (Aussies, Kiwis, South Africans, Russians) a lot more difficult."

        I don't think the EU imposes restrictions on bringing in workers from outside the EU. But I might be wrong - outside my field. Which EU regulation are you referring to?

        Anyway, I thought that currently around 50% of immigration into the UK is from non-EU countries.

        1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          Unhappy

          Anyway, I thought that currently around 50% of immigration into the UK is from non-EU countries.

          It is.

          But managing that would have actually involved confronting real issues of race and labor and might have involved (gasp) loss of Tory support.

          CMD decided to take the popular option.

      2. John Smith 19 Gold badge

        "Ranting about the "Daily Heil" does not make you look reasonable or rational."

        Why be reasonable or rational when you're "TAKING BACK CONTROL" as the brexit camp blathered on at every opportunity, Mr AC.

        And then when they'd dropped the UK in the s**t scuttled off like scared schoolboys to hide in the wardrobe.

        After all as DB Gove put "we've had enough experts," haven't we?

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: "Ranting about the "Daily Heil" does not make you look reasonable or rational."

          "scuttled off like scared schoolboys to hide in the wardrobe."

          They haven't been allowed to, at least not those on the govt. side. They've been put in charge of making real plans. That seems like an appropriate punishment. Although immediately after the referendum result BoJo's approach to Brexit did seem akin to St Augustine of Hippo's approach to chastity.

      3. JohnMurray

        Re: Looks like "Red Ken" Livinstone had it right so far.

        Good old UK.

        Still parasitic on other nations.

        1. Dave 15

          Re: Looks like "Red Ken" Livinstone had it right so far.

          "Still parasitic on other nations."

          so who do you look up to?

          Germany.... billions in aid from America after it wrecked europe twice?

          America whose economy is very largely based on the money it stripped from the British, French and Germans in the first and then second world wars?

          Spain who stripped the entirety of south America of its gold?

          Italy that invaded most of europe (including most of England and Wales) and took many locals as slaves (oooh yes, the slave trade... some would say only the British ever did that the parasites they are eh???)

          Do I need to go on?

          If you don't like the UK then you can always see how our balance sheet totals up against those of other nations and maybe choose one of them instead.

          1. smartypants

            @Dave15 "Do I need to go on"

            No.

    2. Dave 15

      Re: Looks like "Red Ken" Livinstone had it right so far.

      Two things

      We wont lose trade to the EU, as mentioned countless times the EU loses out if it is stupid and it is not stupid. OK the EU is a large part of our trade but the rest of the world is larger than our trade with the EU. So if we lose 10% of EU trade we only need 9% increase and not a 'stupid' increase with the entire rest of the globe (larger than the EU!)

  8. Zippy's Sausage Factory

    Er...

    People do know that we're only WTO members by virtue of our EU membership, right? Once we leave, we're no longer members.

    Basically, we'd have to negotiate to join the WTO in order to get people to play by WTO rules. And all it takes is one veto to make sure it doesn't happen. I'm sure the corporations are drooling over the concessions that they can get from the UK in exchange for no veto: selloff of the NHS to US health care companies, all GMO agriculture, relaxation of gun laws...

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Er...

      It's by virtue of GATT, the UK entered GATT in 1948 and GATT members got an upgrade to WTO status in 1995. The EU is also a member of the WTO but that doesn't take away each individual member state's membership. link

      1. rd232

        Re: Er...

        The UK's WTO membership is under the umbrella of the EU, and coming out from under it to be an independent WTO member isn't as easy as it sounds, because a lot of things are agreed with other WTO members at EU level and those will need renegotiating. For perspective: there are issues arising from the 2004 expansion of the EU which still haven't been resolved... 12 years later.

        http://www.ictsd.org/opinion/nothing-simple-about-uk-regaining-wto-status-post-brexit

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Er...

          "a lot of things are agreed with other WTO members at EU level and those will need renegotiating."

          That's OK, we've got BoJo to look after that.

    2. alain williams Silver badge

      Re: Er...

      People do know that we're only WTO members by virtue of our EU membership, right? Once we leave, we're no longer members.

      That is completely disingenuous. Look at this map of WTO members, basically everyone is a member except for bits of the middle East and North East Africa. So how long do you think it will be before the UK joins in its own name ?

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

    Remember the we are currently running a pretty significant trade deficit with the EU. This means that they have a lot more to losse if they decide to play hard ball. Not only that but some of the member countries (e.g. Germany) have obviously thought the numbers through and appear to be becoming aware that playing silly-buggers is definitely a losse-loose scenario for all parties.

    1. RIBrsiq
      Joke

      Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

      What's a "losse"? How do you "loose" one? And is such action likely to negatively impact any parties it's done at...?

    2. thegroucho
      Trollface

      Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

      Explain that to the French politicians who will cut their nose to spite their face.

      1. Dave 15
        Pirate

        Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

        :) True they would. But the Germans are too sensible to let the French ruin everything.

        Of course for most French cutting off their noses will hardly make their faces any worse :)

        1. JohnMurray

          Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

          The people who buy/lease BMW and Mercedes cars/vans are not going to be bothered about a minor tariff .... they'll just drop a few percent off the list price and increase the parts price...

        2. smartypants

          Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

          @Dave 15:

          "Of course for most French cutting off their noses will hardly make their faces any worse :)"

          A cheeky joke? But no. It isn't really is it? "The French" you refer to isn't a real thing. It's a fictional entity imagined by tabloid headline writers over decades. It's bollocks.

          The french (germans etc...) - they're all just people. They too have their nationalists and xenophobes. The less of it there is, the better for ALL of us. Pig-ignorant tribalism. It leads to mutual distrust and eventually war. Every tin-pot dictator, every manipulative wannabe leader stirs the pot of shit called tribalism and nationalism to get good people to bend to their ways.

          And every brexiter I've seen on this thread is happily helping out. The subtext of "Make Britain Great" is "Foreigners are ruining our country".

          Keep that stick away from me!

    3. Hans 1 Silver badge
      Coffee/keyboard

      Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

      @alanorthhants

      >Remember the we are currently running a pretty significant trade deficit with the EU. This means that they have a lot more to losse if they decide to play hard ball. Not only that but some of the member countries (e.g. Germany) have obviously thought the numbers through and appear to be becoming aware that playing silly-buggers is definitely a losse-loose scenario for all parties.

      Make up your mind, is it loose, as in "on the loose", or losse, whatever that means ... you want help? None of them .. it is "lose" ... Now, do not insult the dyslexic by claiming you are of them, that was the worst spelling you got wrong ...

      Now I have fixed your spelling, on to the subject ... what is Germany's greatest fear, according to you, a Brexit, which has already been decided, or other members deciding to do the same ?

      I think the latter, hence, you can cling onto Germany or France all you want, they do not care ... they have more important things to prevent ... and, the UK needs the EU more than we need UK ... we were 500 million and just lost, what, 8% ? not that great a loss, let's carry on ...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Trade deficits also need to be taken into account

        @ Hans 1

        "Make up your mind, is it loose, as in "on the loose", or losse, whatever that means ... you want help? None of them .. it is "lose" ... Now, do not insult the dyslexic by claiming you are of them, that was the worst spelling you got wrong"

        His name is alannorthhants not alanorthhants

  10. alain williams Silver badge

    The world is a different place

    from what it was when we voted to enter the Common Market some 40 years ago. In that time there has been a huge increase in globalisation; inter-country trade with all parts of the world has gone through the roof.

    So: do we need to be part of a low/zero tariff trading block as much as we did then ? The whole world is moving to low tariffs.

    Take 4 minutes to learn a bit about Trade and Tariff History, see how international trade has gone through the roof in recent years, not all of those countries are members of the EU.

    So: why should we suddenly do worse than other non EU countries ?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The world is a different place

      I've given you an upvote, as you've made a very good point. In the past the trade tariffs were higher, and joining a free trade bloc was more attractive as a result.

      The counter is that brexit isn't about whether we do better or worse than other countries outside the EU, but whether we will do better outside the EU than we would have done by staying in. That's a far harder question to answer, expecially as all the referendum campaign gave us was scaremongering on the one side and anti-intellectual bullshit on the other.

  11. 7layer

    Citizenship

    There is nothing to worry about, cause Nigel Farage got his own deal with Germany already. He has applied for a citizenship, so we will be all right. :)

  12. jason 7 Silver badge

    Brexit...

    ...won't happen.

    The powers that be will sum up if they stand to lose and tear up the vote and Article 50.

    MPs etc. still get paid.

    They can take the hit, voters WILL forget about it in time. Labour are in total chaos so the Tories will just take the hit with impunity at the next election. Why else is the date for instigating Article 50 slipping further and further back.

    Once the fuss has died down it will get thrown out.

    1. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

      Re: Brexit...

      Labour are in total chaos so the Tories will just take the hit with impunity at the next election.

      Except, if we do not Brexit, there is a large enough faction within the Tory party to plunge it into chaos.

      This whole mess came about through Cameron trying to defend against members of his own party and the risk of members and supporters defecting to UKIP.

      I would love for the vote to be forgotten about but there are plenty of people who will ensure it won't be.

      We have jumped out the plane and now have to figure out where we will get parachutes from.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Brexit...

        "Except, if we do not Brexit, there is a large enough faction within the Tory party to plunge it into chaos."

        At present several leading Brexiteers have been given the job of putting the practical plans together (I think a few of the noisier specimens who haven't had jobs yet need to be given them).

        At some time they'll have to be asked to put forward their solutions with a reasoned assessment of how well they'll work. At that point the invocation of Article 50 can be put to a vote in Parliament (which, AFAICS, is the constitutionally correct way of doing that but there's a court case pending on that).

        It will, therefore, be up to that very faction of the Tory party to show that they can make it work. And by "show" I don't mean stand on the sidelines shouting, they've got to deliver a workable solution themselves.

        That puts the whole thing in their hands. If they can't come up with a workable set of deals etc. they can't then point the finger at anybody else; it will be game over.

        Personally I don't think they'll succeed but if they do I'll be content with it going forward. But what would be very wrong would be to proceed on the sole basis of an advisory referendum without an overwhelming majority and no concrete plans that give adequate assurance of working.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Brexit...

      Actually I don't think the voters would forget about this one. MP would still get paid, but only until the end of that parliament. If the tories played fast and loose with this they will suffer at the ballot box next time around. Not that it will be the labour party that would benefit - disaffected brexit tory voters are probably more likely to jump to UKIP.

      However, you may be right abour brexit not happening. Theresa May has gathered a cadre of brexit cheerleaders (Johnson, Fox and Davis) and given them the key ministry posts for making brexit work. If they fail in this spectactularly she will happily throw them overboard and declare that following through on the referendum verdict isn't in the country's best interests - this is the only way she'll be able to get away with dropping it. It will be very interesting to see whether we get to this crunch point (i.e. trugger article 50 or declare brexit a failure) before the next general election - if not, the tories could be in for a bit of a kicking from the parts of the country which wanted to stay in the EU.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Brexit...

        "If they fail in this spectactularly she will happily throw them overboard and declare that following through on the referendum verdict isn't in the country's best interests"

        She can do better than that. She can put it to an open vote in Parliament. It would be for the whole of the House to decide on, not a party matter at all.

        I believe that in a meeting with MEPs she talked about "lines in the sand" or some such mention of criteria. I think she ought to have done that more or less right away it certainly needs to be done PDQ.

      2. Teiwaz Silver badge

        Re: Brexit...

        "If the tories played fast and loose with this they will suffer at the ballot box next time around. Not that it will be the labour party that would benefit - disaffected brexit tory voters are probably more likely to jump to UKIP."

        - Probably splitting the 'conservative' vote even further, and the other parties aren't exactly pro-leave...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Brexit...

          "Probably splitting the 'conservative' vote even further, and the other parties aren't exactly pro-leave"

          Absolutely. I didn't make a prediction about what the final result of a general election like that woud be because it really is anyone's guess. Probably a complete mess of tory vote split with UKIP, labour underachieving, and a few of the smaller parties picking up support from those disgusted with the blues and reds. It's unlikely anyone would have an overall majority, and it's far from certain that a viable coalition could surface from the parliamentary soup either. I don't think it's realistic to expect a pro-remain government to emerge from that and declare the referendum result will not be enacted. Labour have got a few years to sort themselves out but sadly at the moment they appear to be choosing to devolve into some sort of trotskyite experiment rather than conducting themselves as a government in waiting.

          In any case, this sort of poll mayhem may not happen. If the conservatives pull their finger out and put something on the table before 2020 it'll all be over (bar the shouting) before we get a chance for a do-over in a general election. If not, then expect some tory blood to be spilt the next time we go to the polls, and chaos to ensue thenceforth.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Brexit...

          - Probably splitting the 'conservative' vote even further, and the other parties aren't exactly pro-leave...

          Yes, no party with a majority, and none willing to form a coalition with Farage & co.

          We could end up with a minority government where the SNP have the deciding vote. Oh Joy...

      3. JohnMurray

        Re: Brexit...

        A lot of voters have forgotten who the previous conservative leader was.....in a year many will have forgotten what the referendum was about. By the time of the next election, many voters will have a hard time remembering their name...

      4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Brexit...

        "If the tories played fast and loose with this they will suffer at the ballot box next time around."

        Well, it's now up to the Tory pro-Brexiteers to come up with some workable plans. If they fail to do so then they'll have to tell their own supporters that they gave it their best shot & it wouldn't work. Such a statement, coming from the Leavers themselves, would take an awful lot of heat out of the situation. May would be able to say that Leave had had their chance. In those circumstances it would be a brave political party who could campaign on a Leave ticket.

        Irrespective of that I won't be voting for them as long as May is in charge - she brings too much baggage from her time as Home Sec.

  13. jb99

    Wrong

    Every other "prediction" by the losers who wanted to stay in has proven wrong.

    This one will be too.

    1. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: Wrong

      Every other "prediction" by the losers who wanted to stay in has proven wrong.

      Everything in the last month and a half has just been uncertainty, we've not actually left the EU yet, so it's too soon by far to call wrong on much of anything, remain doom or leave dreams.

      Overall it's wiser to expect the worst and hope for the best than vice versa, which is why the leavers concerned me.

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Wrong

      "has proven wrong."

      You seem to have a bit of a problem with tenses here. Brexit hasn't happened. Proof of right or wrong will only be available in retrospect afterwards, by which time it will be too late.

  14. William 3 Bronze badge

    Good grief.

    Who'd have believed being a dyed in the wool hard left marxist was a pre-requisite for being in the IT sector.

    Never in all my time have I met a bunch of intolerant bigots than those on the Left, made worse with their sanctimonious self righteousness about how "tolerant" they are, and how they love diversity.

    Yet faced with a result they dislike in a fair and free democractic election, all you hear from them are insults, negativity, moaning, finger pointer, and general all round tantrums they didn't get their own way, and that anyone who dared to have a different opinion than them are all racist, nazis, xenophobes, little Englanders, blah blah, fucking blah.

    Bunch of hypocritical wankers.

    You know who you are.

    Now fuckoff and hold yourself to the same standards you demand from others. The country decided to leave the POLITICAL body that was the EU.

    Either accept this, get on with your life, do the best for the country, or the shut the fuck up being intolerant about it.

    Understand.

    1. H in The Hague

      Re: Good grief.

      "Who'd have believed being a dyed in the wool hard left marxist …"

      Given that many Remainers, including myself, are committed to free trade and the elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers, I rather doubt that they are of the hard left, let alone Marxists. Free markets are usually associated with the centre and moderate left and right of the political spectrum. (FWIW I'm probably of the moderate right and strongly committed to free enterprise.) But thanks for the laugh.

      I know little about Marxism but I seem to remember that it involves a command economy. The only commentard advocating that here appears to be Dave 15, who is a Brexiter (and sounds much like Arthur Scargill).

      "… do the best for the country, .."

      I rather think that is exactly what drives a lot of Remainers. And trying to do what's best for their children, give them the opportunity to study, live and work in the rest of Europe - the advantages many of us have benefitted from. And have a country which is in a strong position, in Europe and in the world.

      Incidentally, I'm probably hopelessly old-fashioned, but I rather thought that British political discourse was based on reasonable discussion, considered arguments and respect for one's opponent. Not shouting at them like you're in a pub brawl after six pints.

      1. JohnMurray

        Re: Good grief.

        "Incidentally, I'm probably hopelessly old-fashioned, but I rather thought that British political discourse was based on reasonable discussion, considered arguments and respect for one's opponent. Not shouting at them like you're in a pub brawl after six pints"

        But..but...

        We've got bigger bombs than them...

        1. Paul Shirley

          Re: Good grief.

          "reasonable discussion" etc.

          I used to think lying to voters in the run up to a vote was unacceptable and career ending.

          Apparently I was wrong.

    2. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: Good grief.

      dyed in the wool hard left marxist

      - I'd have thought 'workers control of the means of production' would be more fitting a Brexit position, given the slogan 'Take back Control'.

      Clearly only someone leaning heavily toward the far right would imagine his nemesis would be so far on the 'opposite end of the political spectrum'.

    3. Paul Shirley

      Re: Good grief.

      I'm definitely going to do what's best for my country. Your country I've given up on.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Good grief.

      "faced with a result they dislike in a fair and free democractic election, all you hear from them are insults, negativity, moaning, finger pointer, and general all round tantrums they didn't get their own way"

      Yup, that's democracy right there. There was a democratic result, we didn't like it, and we've still got the right to bitch about it and say that it was the wrong choice. There's nothing hypocritical about that at all - it's called freedom of political expression, and it's actually rather important in a democracy.

      Or did you think that getting 52% of the vote meant that the principle was now sacrosanct, and everyone had to agree with it?

    5. Tom -1

      Re: Good grief.

      I find it rather difficult to understand what William 3 is trying to say. He appears to be objecting to hypocritical wankers, which is remarkable since that would clearly mean he is objecting to himeslf. anyone who believes that aprox 37% of eligible voters constitute a democratic majority for a massive change in direction isclearly an idiot (like those who set this referendum up without a minimum threshold like that used for the 1979 scottish referendum), but since he pretends to believe that everyone who thinks there should be sensible minimum threshold for such referenda is clearly died in the wool hard left marxist he is clearly a hypocritical wanker since there is abundant evidence that that is not true (Margaret Thatcher, for example, supported having a minimum threshold included in the legislation for the 1979 referendum, and although william 3 is clearly an idiot he surely can't be quite enough of a fuckwit to believe that she was a hard left marxist).

      Well, I suppose I ought to happy that william 3, a person so poisonous, uncivilised, and idiotic as to be rare even in these columns, has proven himself to be a hypocritical wanker and evidently hates himself.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: Good grief.

        anyone who believes that aprox 37% of eligible voters constitute a democratic majority for a massive change in direction isclearly an idiot

        So that would be everyone who accepted the results of the last several general elections, then?

        (like those who set this referendum up without a minimum threshold like that used for the 1979 scottish referendum),

        Would have been nice if we'd had such a choice and threshold for joining the EU in the first place, though.

    6. H in The Hague

      Re: Good grief.

      "Who'd have believed being a dyed in the wool hard left marxist was a pre-requisite for being in the IT sector."

      So, you associate a vote for Remain with being on the hard left? Odd then that the Beast of Bolsover (for non-UK readers: Dennis Skinner, Labour MP for Bolsover, extremely left-wing) backed Brexit with the following argument:

      "My opposition from the very beginning has been on the lines that fighting capitalism state-by-state is hard enough. It’s even harder when you’re fighting it on the basis of eight states, 10 states and now 28."

      Interview in the Morning Star (communist newspaper), 10 June 2016

      https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-e4af-Beast-of-Bolsover-Im-voting-out#.V7Y1xqIgmWd

      (Not my favourite newspaper :)

      So, Skinner sees Brexit as an opportunity to bring about the end of capitalism in the UK. Well William 3, you do have an interesting bed-fellow there. Wish I could be party to your pillow talk.

      (I'm a Remainer and in favour of capitalism, albeit with some of the hard edges taken off.)

    7. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Good grief.

      shut the fuck up being intolerant about it.

      Yes, well...

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This what made Britain "great"..

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/18/uncovering-truth-british-empire-caroline-elkins-mau-mau

    And if it takes a fraction of that to do it again then I for one hope we become the most insignificant, poor nation on the planet, because we don't deserve any better.

    This is not the apologising for slavery mostly carried out over 200 years ago, or our treatment of the native Americans (ditto) but something totally and utterly shameful that happened within my parents' lifetime, covered up within the last few years by exactly the type of people who spout off about "making Britain great again"...

    1. Dave 15

      Re: This what made Britain "great"..

      Oh more of this sort of cobblers.

      Should the USA shrink into a hole in the ground for invading several other countries and killing hundreds of thousands in bombing raids?

      Should Germany hide its head in its hands and scuttle off into the hinterland of nowhere?

      China (they claim that Ghengis was Chinese and look at how many he killed)

      If you go through it I doubt there is a single country on the whole planet who hasn't at sometime killed, mained, tortured or oppressed someone from another country.

      Now to the truth on slavery. A very large proportion of the African slaves sent to America were SOLD to the slave traders by other African tribes. The British navy put a massive effort into preventing the slave trade when parliament (finally) decided that it wasn't good. The slave trade had been going on for many hundreds of years before the British were at all involved with African slaves sold in the middle east. The British were certainly not the only, and probably not the largest traders in slaves. One thing, we traded them which in a lot of respects was better than Ghengis who rounded them up and used them and other prisoners as target practice, as training for his men and finally as human shields to absorb the bolts and arrows of his enemies.

      People like you really make me sick to the bones. If you are that ashamed of being British change your nationality and move abroad. Perhaps it would however be better to read a fuller version of history and realise the good we have also done, and look at the balance sheets of other countries as well.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This what made Britain "great"..

        What good did the British empire ever do? We "civilised" people who were actually perfectly civilised in their own way. This "civilisation" usually consisted of forcing them to convert to Christianity or be killed, then put to work either as slaves or nothing better than forced labour. Then we stripped their countries of every valuable natural resource we could get our hands on whilst paying them next to nothing. When they rebelled we put them down without justice and without mercy.

        When we were finally forced to grant them independence we did our best to strip away every asset we had there and cover up what we had done.

        I am proud, not ashamed to be British. However I am not proud of some aspects of our past and what I am ashamed of is that there are still people like you around who think that our behaviour was reasonable and justified. We need to face up to what we have done, apologise and compensate, and ensure that it never happens again. That means eliminating racism and other prejudice from our society.

        It is the "fuller version" of history that we are reading now; the one where generations of cover-ups are being exposed and we are finding the truth of what really happened when "Britain was great".

        1. Tequila Joe

          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

          One of the many victims of revisionist history, I see.

          Britain brought the Pax Britannia firstly to enable trade, and secondly to advance Britain's policies.

          One of those policies was to destroy the African slave trade, specifically targeting the Atlantic slave trade using the South Aftrica Squadron.

          Britain wasn't able to do so much about the Eastern slave trade, I'm sure you'll be glad to know given your SJW angst.

          Now perhaps you feel sorry Britain hit the Africans' economy and civilisation that way, yet probably much less sorry for economic interests further West given your unequal 'equality education', but the measure of Britain's civilisational and justice standing in past time and other countries can be measured by:

          1 - the number of countries maintaining historic links with Britain via the Commonwealth,

          2 - the number of countries deciding to keep the legal system Britain brought,

          3 - the number of people with those historic language, legal and social links that came to Britain.

          All rather astounding if Britain is, and was, the black-hearted grasping villain you imply.

          ... unless you're trying to say that all those countries and people are very thick?

          1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

            Re: This what made Britain "great"..

            "Britain brought the Pax Britannia firstly to enable trade, and secondly to advance Britain's policies."

            Yeah, right. All very altruistic.

            Here is just one example of this altruism:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

            1. Tequila Joe

              Re: This what made Britain "great"..

              Ooh scathing!

              That must be why all those Chinese didn't want to stay in British-run Hong Kong, or didn't want to come to Britain. /sarc

              1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

                Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                That probably had something to do with the raise of communism and the one-party state, rather than being totally in love with Britan as a remote controlling colonial power, don't you think?

                1. Tequila Joe

                  Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                  So now you're suggesting British rule was better than the alternative.

                  So why shouldn't Britain rule itself?

                  1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

                    Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                    Well, 1990s British rule was better than "the alternative" when the only alternative was communist China. But the HK people didn't have a choice, did they? I'm sure they would have choosen total independence if that had been on the table.

                    How on earth that can be compared to an EU membership I simply do not understand. That just points to a total failure to understand what EU is about. Just by virtue of having the option to leave the EU I would have thought it would be obvious that the EU is nothing like a colonial power, or a communist state.

                    1. Tequila Joe

                      Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                      No, we had membership of a Common Market.

                      EU-loving politicians have increasingly handed over the making of laws & policy to the EU.

                      That's EU control, not EU membership.

                      The UK finally had a referendum, after many broken promises, and it turns out that despite years of importing EU votes, diverting UK tax money to buy support for the EU, and despite the supposedly unbiased EU-smooching BBC - the majority of voting British want to exit the EU to retake control of British interests.

                      Now, anyone who wants to live in the EU can do so.

                      So if you still prefer the EU to Britain stop moaning and go live there.

                      But do not stay here and support EU interests over Britain's interests.

                      "Just by virtue of having the option to leave the EU I would have thought it would be obvious that the EU is nothing like a colonial power, or a communist state."

                      The EU has a history of having voting re-done to get the desired outcome. The UK isn't out yet, and all the pro-EU tax-guzzlers are looking for any reason to over-turn a referendum result as despite the EU having all the advantages they moan 'It wasn't fair because the British fought back'.

                      1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

                        Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                        Yawn. There's just a smorgosbord of silliness there. But let's pick just one thing for now:

                        "The UK isn't out yet, and all the pro-EU tax-guzzlers are looking for any reason to over-turn a referendum result as despite the EU having all the advantages they moan 'It wasn't fair because the British fought back'."

                        According to you the 48% Remainers aren't British then?

                        The main EU protagonists are Brits. That's not due to tax-guzzling.

                        Most non-Brits don't really care that much either way.

                        1. Tequila Joe

                          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                          "The main EU protagonists are Brits. That's not due to tax-guzzling.".

                          Yeah right, all the poor British like John Major and the BBC. /sarc

                          1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

                            Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                            "Yeah right, all the poor British like John Major and the BBC"

                            Yeah, they make up 48%, don't they..

                            1. Tequila Joe

                              Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                              Equating "main EU protagonists" with the 48% Remain vote rather demonstrates the paucity of your thinking.

                              1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

                                Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                                Voting to Remain is equivalent to arguing to remain. But, sure, if you like knit picking about choice of words... It's still 48%, and it's still 48% Brits. There are no awful Europeans in those 48%. Not even bona fide Brits living on the mainland are in those 48%.

                                1. Tequila Joe

                                  Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                                  Do you even know what the word 'protagonist' means?

                                  Equating the 48% Remain vote with "main EU protagonists" is nonsensical.

                                  So ... do you work for the BBC or the Gurniad?

                      2. H in The Hague

                        Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                        "So if you still prefer the EU to Britain stop moaning and go live there."

                        It's only the current freedom of movement that makes that easy. And that freedom of movement might not be available to Brits in future. If immigration to the UK is cut (one of the main Brexit objectives) then Brits' options for moving to other EU countries (for family reasons, to work, to retire, to study, or just because they feel like it) will be equally curtailed.

                        "But do not stay here and support EU interests over Britain's interests."

                        Most Remainers feel that the UK's interests are served by being in the EU - economically, politically and socially. The reason many of us are so upset, especially for the younger generation, is that Brexit is potentially going to seriously harm the UK's interests. Not just economically, in a way that's the least important aspect (at least for me). But politically, by driving a wedge between England and Scotland and Northern Ireland. By casting the country adrift by cutting ties with allies. By pretending to be bloody special.

                        1. Tequila Joe

                          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                          "It's only the current freedom of movement that makes that easy."

                          Incredible.

                          Are all Remainers dumb enough to believe that people needed the EU to be able to move to another country?

                          The rest of your post is equally naive concerning EU politics.

                          If the EU is so marvellous economically and socially, please explain

                          - why the youth unemployment rates are so high in Greece, Spain and Italy,

                          - why the people in Greece are suffering so much under 'wise & benevolent' EU so-called technocracy,

                          - and if Germany needs to bring in so many young workers why those workers are not coming from Greece and Spain etc if EU 'freedom of movement' works the way you seem to think.

                          There are people posting comments here, having moved to live in EU countries. Why not actually read their posts and then do a bit of research for yourself?

                          I'll just add that the British referendum was not the first expressing serious reservations about EU lack of political accountability, but the EU has ignored previous referenda or made the country vote again e.g. what have you heard on the BBC about the recent Dutch referendum? So we Brexiters made it count this time.

                          The forthcoming referenda, Hungary and Italy, might teach you something about the EU but you'll have to dig on the web to find out what's happening. That's assuming the EU doesn't stop them, of course.

                      3. H in The Hague

                        Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                        "So if you still prefer the EU to Britain stop moaning and go live there."

                        Have thought about that a bit more. Sounds like you're suggesting a large minority (48%) can be ignored by a small majority (52%). That sounds rather undemocratic, indeed unbritish to me - the true face of Brexit?

                        "The EU has a history of having voting re-done to get the desired outcome."

                        Not the only ones. I seem to remember that before the referendum Farage said that if Leave lost by a small margin the referendum would have to be rerun in a few years. Incidentally, what is his involvement in Brexit these days? Winning the referendum was the easy bit. The real hard work, creating a political and trading relationship with the EU which the UK benefits from is yet to start.

                        1. Tequila Joe

                          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                          Well you do sound very EU - ' the referendum result should be reversed because ... well just look at all the losing votes that voted for the EU..! '

                          The EU (and its shills) really doesn't get Democracy, does it?

                          And that 48% was the result of throwing all the talking-heads, Obama, TLAs, political 'elite', corporate big-wigs etc behind the biased BBC's 'Project EU' and Cameron-&-Osborne's 'Project Fear' .

                          The hysteria in Project Fearmongering is plain to see now - instead of 'back of the queue' we have many countries eager to trade with a Brexit UK. The UK needs to get on and make the most of such international trade.

                          The EU is becoming the mix of 'corporatism & unlistening political ideology & only one acceptable view' (I'm sure there's a word for that mix) that cannot stand the undisciplined creative bustle of a pluralistic democracy that Britain does very well at - hence the EU's cynical twisting of Democracy I suppose.

                        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

                          "Farage ... Incidentally, what is his involvement in Brexit these days?"

                          To be fair, he doesn't need one. Getting and winning a referendum was his objective, wasn't it? Sorting out afterwards? SEP.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Anyone who uses the acronym SJW...

            ..is, in my experience, a bigot trying to hide behind acceptable political camouflage. There is no such thing as an SJW; there are those who believe the world would be a better place if we actually used the vast resources available to us for the betterment of ALL humankind, and those who believe it should only be used for the betterment of white folk, which those who use the phrase always are.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

          "What good did the British empire ever do?"

          Well, there's the roads... http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This what made Britain "great"..

          What good did the British empire ever do? We "civilised" people who were actually perfectly civilised in their own way. ...

          When we were finally forced to grant them independence we did our best to strip away every asset we had there and cover up what we had done.

          You highlight the excesses of the British Empire, with reason, yet seem unable (or unwilling) to recognise that building a European empire, for what they consider to be the benefit of EU citizens (whether they like it or not) is exactly what EU politicians are doing. It also reflects the damage they will do to anyone who dares to leave.

          The true irony is that your response to those in the UK who want to leave mirrors that of the British government to India, and other colonies, when they proposed leaving the Empire: total incomprehension of why anyone would reject such a wonderful, civilising and powerful group. I'm sure that those British politicians that laughed at the idea of an independent India would be horrified to see today's IT world.

          Indians didn't want independence because they though India was better, or because they wanted to return to some imagined glory of the epoch of the Tipu Sultan et al, but simply because they wanted the right to choose their own path.

          Sadly we have no Gandhi.

          1. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

            Re: This what made Britain "great"..

            "You highlight the excesses of the British Empire, with reason, yet seem unable (or unwilling) to recognise that building a European empire, for what they consider to be the benefit of EU citizens (whether they like it or not) is exactly what EU politicians are doing."

            Yes it's just horrific how those EU bureaucrats have been coming over here, slaying and enslaving people. Imposing their religion on us too. Shipping out our assets (can't think of any right now, but I'm sure there must be many, many things).

            This level of oppression of the British must stop NOW!

  16. technoise
    Linux

    There you have it – it’s all about GDP and the City – and it has been for a long time.

    The 52% who voted out have worked out that what is good for big business and the City of London, is not necessarily good for the people as a whole. What is good about higher GDP if it also means more expensive housing, and a smaller share of the land to live on?

    The trouble with GDP is that it just measures the values of all transactions in the economy and tots them up. In other words it measures churn in the economy. It does not say whether those transactions have been creating wealth that results in foreign exchange or exports, or even if the GDP is really creating meaningful wealth at all. It could result from churn in the housing market, Ponzi schemes, increased levels of high frequency trading or taking in each other’s laundry in the service sector, and even a growing balance of trade deficit.

    The only people who benefit unequivocally and every time GDP goes up, is the financial sector as they get better returns from more share trading and financial transactions generally.

  17. Jason Hindle

    Well at least we're back in control, and have freedom from opaque laws

    Apparently, we had neither of those, and Europe was to blame. And we have the Conservatives. They're the sensible party of stability. Looking at the NHS, for example, we know we can trust the Conservatives and their solid, sensible approach to management. We can trust the Conservatives. They're the sensible party that doesn't piss money on vanity projects. Everything's good. Finally, the good people of Britian found someone to blame. The future is bright.

  18. Sirius Lee

    These are the same people who sided with Cameron to predict disaster if the UK votes to leave. However the UK seems to disagree and risk again making monkeys out of 'expert' economists. These are the same economists who declared it would be a disaster to leave the ERM, that the UK would flounder in 2008.

    In July unemployment was down (after Brexit), retail sales were 1.5% higher in July over June and 5.5% higher year on year. Yesterday Moody's revised their UK rating from negative back to stable - but not much was heard about this, eh? Why is that?

    Of course these are only early figures. But economists and journalists were happy enough to report negative confidence reports in the days after June 23rd because it suited the bubble's narrative. Confidence is such a fickle thing and is not the real economy. It's the emotional response of a few individuals. It's becoming increasingly clear these were the opinions of people vested in the status quo.

    1. Jess

      Re: In July unemployment was down (after Brexit)

      Brexit hasn't happened yet. It is at least 2 1/2 years away, if it happens at all.

      There are only 2 viable options for the position outside the EU.

      Remain within the EEA (presumably by rejoining the EFTA). I believe that were we to pursue an off the shelf agreement then it would be relatively easy to achieve, as long as we don't try to gain exemptions from too many of the responsibilities of EEA membership. From a business perspective this would maintain the status quo, and everything would return to normal just as soon as it starts looking to be decided. The rest of the EEA would not be stupid enough to prevent this. However if we start asking for a special deal it won't happen. (The Swiss have been trying for years and are still effectively regular EEA members.) The EU would be insane to allow it, because it would undermine the whole thing.

      The other option is WTO memberships, I believe the result of this will lots of EU headquarters and EU centric manufacturing relocating to remain within the free market. It would also mean lots of EU firms upping their orders from UK firms so they have a big inventory for when it becomes troublesome to purchase from the UK. These two factors will cause a pre-Brexit boom. Lots of contractors will be needed to help relocate. (Once it is over there will be a nasty shock for the UK.)

      An interesting point is the delays to article 50 will put the next election very close to the actual leaving date. Which would mean the temporary positive effects would still be there, benefiting the current administration's chances.

      Apparently the civil service is evaluating both these options (but not the breakup of the UK, interestingly).

      However given the promises about the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland that have been made, I really can't see that an WTO arrangement is possible.

      If we are not part of the free market, then at the very least it must be a customs border. Otherwise it is a wide open backdoor in and out of the free market. The EEA could not allow this.

      If we want to 'control our borders' ie EU citizens (since we control everyone else), then a passport border would be needed. Otherwise any EU citizen could come legitimately to the RoI, and then into the UK.

      So it would appear that this promise, a non-EEA arrangement and an intact UK are mutually incompatible. (You can have any two).

      I think we will remain in the EEA. (And to be fair if only one in every 25 leave voters voted based on the Norway model, then the majority of the UK wish to remain in the EEA).

      If that happens none of the doom and gloom will come to pass, and I think that business is hoping the same and deferring decisions to pull out. (But they are also deferring investments too.)

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "In July unemployment was down (after Brexit)"

      I think this tells us all we need to know about the quality of your thinking.

  19. Fading Silver badge
    FAIL

    Got to love this assessment....

    So if we assume the worst case scenario and the UK reverts to WTO rules without any financial pass-porting then the UK will suffer a 4% loss to GDP.

    Wow really? And what would be the loss to GDP under a Godzilla scenario? This is about as credible as the Stern report - assessments that only look at the negative are not assessments but propaganda.

    1. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: Got to love this assessment....

      You can assume that if the UK leaves and reverts to WTO arrangements the GDP hit will be much worse than 4%

      Ford have already announced they're closing their remaining UK plants and moving them to the mainland. GM won't be far behind.

      Nissan haven't announced any cutbacks in Sunderland YET, but they're also not announcing any new models will be built here. Toyota are already ramping up their factories in eastern europe.

      Given that outside the service industries, vehicle manufacture is the single largest foreign currency earner in the UK that should be cause for concern. When you factor in the number of companies making parts in the UK which are dependent on UK or EU component sales and would have to move if faced with tarriff barriers the scenario looks even worse. Several have already begun that process by deciding to expand their european operations (in one case building a new european factory) instead of proceeding with plans to expand UK plants.

      Manufacturers need several years of lead time and cannot deal with financnial uncertainties in the market. Even if the UK stayed in the EU entirely the damage has already been done as far as triggering plans to move away from a single point of failure.

      Many banking operations have decided the same thing. Amex has told its EU staff in brighton to be prepared to move to Paris - in this case non premium accounts are already supported out of India and the UK has been used for multilanguage premium account support. You can guarantee that any risk to "passporting" will result in a mass exodus from the city - which will be a massive GDP hit.

      1. Tequila Joe

        Re: Got to love this assessment....

        Quote (my emphasis): "Ford have already announced they're closing their remaining UK plants ..."

        Ford have been closing their UK plants for the last 4 or 5 years - it's amazing Ford reacted to the Brexit result so many years before it happened. /sarc

        Trying to blame Brexit for problems that have already been going on (in your example Ford) is rather stupid - these problems have been happening under the EU, haven't they? And as the EU thinks its ideology must advance whatever the cost (see Greece, Visigrad etc) then the economic and social costs will increase.

        The unlistening ideological unbending EU left the UK only two choices:

        1 - comply with further EU 'progress' but pretend nothing will change so call it 'Remain'

        OR

        2 - Brexit.

        Thankfully the British chose Brexit.

        .

  20. Realisticlee

    OUT-LAW should stick to law & forsake economics

    Organisations (IFS! OUT-LAW!) should stick to their knitting and not poke their noses outside the parapets of their own know how. Bank passporting has to do with *retail* markets, which comprise a whole 1% or so of UK banking activity in Europe, if even that much. Wholesale banking, the stuff in the UK that we call "The City", is the other 99% and can happen anywhere. Indeed, wholesale banking in euro (dollars, GBP, Renminbi, etc) happens in NYC, Hong Kong, Singapore, Sydney etc and there's absolutely nothing the EU can do about that. Nor would they want to as it provides critical liquidity to financial markets. To deny London the ability to do trades/deals/stuff with euro means Brussels would have to deny HK, NYC etc and this is simply not possible. When people or organisations want to do business, they do it where they wish (with proper rule of law, contract regs, etc) not where they're told to. The IFS and OUT-LAW should be competent enough to have known this but obviously not. Perhaps they should stick to their knitting and leave economics to the experts.

  21. Alan Brown Silver badge

    "outside the EU, single market membership also comes at the cost of accepting future regulations designed in the EU without UK input "

    Which may actually be a good thing (for the EU) as most of the most troublesome regulations were insisted on by the UK over the objections of everyone else.

    Uk.gov has a long history of ramming nasty stuff(*) though Brussels despite opposition from the rest of the EU states, then implementing it in the UK and blaming "them barnpots in Brussells" for it.

    (*) bad for the country, bad for the poor and/or clearly aimed at keeping various rich mates happy.

  22. if(i == alive) { live_free = true; government = NULL; }

    Shocked how many techs are remainiacs

    I was under the impression that to be a tech (be you a programer or a sysadmin) you had to have a logical mind; be fairly intelligent; and have a strong ability to problem solve. This preconception does not reconcile well with voting to remain in the European Union.

    Remaining in the EU is like trying to rewrite a program when you do not have access to the source code; it simply does not make sense.

  23. Jeff Lewis

    Oddball definitions of "democracy"

    First off, the referendum was *advisory* not *binding*. In the UK, because of parliamentary supremacy, all referenda unless explicitly decreed to be binding are advisory. Cameron himself called it advisory several times right up to the week before the vote. Changing it after the fact to binding - when there is literally no legal mechanism for that is anti-democratic simply because the choices people made might have been different.

    Worse, the referendum was exceptionally undemocratic itself. 1.4M British citizens living in the EU were excluded from voting arbitrarily because they were living in the EU - which was legal and allowed - in fact, one of the four cornerstones of the EU which we agreed to when we joined. This amounts to gerrymandering the vote.

    More, British citizens living abroad could not vote either, even though they lose their EU citizenship rights. This is also rigging the election.

    But most bizarrely - Commonwealth citizens - who are NOT British citizens *could* vote if they were living in the UK at the time.

    Next, the UK is a representative democracy. People vote for representatives who represent ALL of the people in their not just the ones who win. More importantly, they have to do what's best for their constituents and for the country - even if that goes against what their constituents want. The government just blindly doing what the majority wants hasn't been part of real world democracy since the Magna Carta.

    So, let's sum up.

    First, the government has the legal right to ignore the referendum.

    Next, to actually invoke Article 50, Parliament has to vote on *rescinding* the 1974 act that got us into the EU in the first place. Most MPs are Remainers and if they vote on their conscience - they will vote against this basically scuttling the process before it starts. May knows this and this is why she's desperate not to let it go to vote in Parliament. Unfortunately she has no choice in this one.

    Next, even if it gets this far - they would have to vote on the new treaty since treaties must be ratified by Parliament. See the previous point.

    Next, even if it's invoked, it can be 'taken back' at any time up to the establishment of a new treaty with the EU, or two years has passed.

    So no - it's 'not over, you lost' it's barely started.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019