back to article Another Brexit cliff edge: UK.gov warned over data flows to EU

The UK is risking a security and trade "cliff edge" if it doesn't secure an arrangement that allows data transfer with the European Union to continue after Brexit, a report has said. In its report Brexit: The EU data protection package, published today, the House of Lords EU Home Affairs Sub-Committee said that there was "no …

  1. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Facepalm

    The committee is also concerned that the UK will lose its influence over the setting of those laws, and has urged the government to take steps to ensure it can still exert its influence.

    Given that it seems the UK negotiating team rocked up without any notes yesterday (see photo half-way down), I really doubt that's going to happen.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      If you're no longer a member of the club, or even if you signal the intention that you are quitting the club, it's hard to see how you can exert any influence on the rules set by the club.

      The whole thing is just a huge dog's breakfast of stupidity with no clear objectives, no plan, no implementation strategy and fundamentally no analysis of the costs/benefits, advantages/disadvantages. Somehow, we're meant to swallow the fiction that May/Johnson/Gove/Grayling/Davis/Fox are actually competent...

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Especially if the minister responsible only attends the meetings on a part time basis.

      1. Nick Kew Silver badge

        @Charlie Clark

        "Especially if the minister responsible only attends the meetings on a part time basis."

        Sensible. Sir Humphrey will have to do the work anyway, and he doesn't want some idiot politician looking over his shoulder.

        1. Yes Me Silver badge

          Re: @Charlie Clark

          Sir Humphrey is in despair, but strongly suspects the whole nonsense will go away soon, along with Theresa May and her "friends".

    3. codejunky Silver badge

      @ Dan 55

      "Given that it seems the UK negotiating team rocked up without any notes yesterday (see photo half-way down), I really doubt that's going to happen."

      You do know that our position is to leave the EU? How many pieces of paper do you need that writing on to know that? The ball is now in the EU's court. They want access to this and that, ok its a trade negotiation and thats not a bad thing. But our position is to leave.

      If the EU decide to be petty and make outrageous demands then our side just need to laugh and walk out. That doesnt need any paper either. If the EU want a serious discussion then cool, our negotiators will likely need some paper when there is something worth writing down or figuring out. But right now it is up to the EU how they want to interact with us outside the EU.

      1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: @ codejunky

        "But right now it is up to the EU how they want to interact with us outside the EU."

        So, let the rest of the EU write the withdrawl and future relationship agreement? The UK does not need to send any negotiators? The UK just has to sign whatever they come up with?

        Glad to see you have more faith in the EU than the UK government.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: @ codejunky

          @ Flocke Kroes

          "So, let the rest of the EU write the withdrawl and future relationship agreement?"

          Erm you do know what is going on dont you? We have said we are leaving. The UK for example said a reciprocal agreement for the others citizens and the EU took their time trying to figure out if they wanted that. We are pretty clear, but it is the EU who need to figure themselves out.

          "The UK does not need to send any negotiators? The UK just has to sign whatever they come up with?"

          The UK doesnt need to do anything until the EU has figured out their position. Hell they cant even start the negotiations right (and they want to do our trade deals!). Demand 60bn and we poke holes in their maths for tractors to roll through. So the EU says oops, erm, duhhhhhhhhhhhh, £100bn which is padded with crap we are not liable for so they can negotiate down to £60bn. It isnt our incompetence we need to worry about yet.

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge

            Re: @ codejunky

            What a strange back-to-front world it is where you are. The EU are publishing everything, it's all there on their website.

            In particular the EU's position on EU/British citizens living in UK/EU was published some two weeks before the UK's position.

            When the UK did publish their position, it was found not to be reciprocal (did not keep all rights that people who have used their EU treaty rights have, all rights were lost after two years if the EU citizen left the UK, no mention at all of cross-border workers).

            If the UK is leaving but doesn't know how to solve the Irish border problem (and now probably never will be able to because the government is hamstrung by the DUP), doesn't know what kind of access to single market and customs union it wants, and is proposing residency rules for EU citizens that can break up their families, it's upon the UK to come up with some solutions. One year after the referendum vote with no answers to any of these questions is shocking incompetence.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: @ codejunky

              @ Dan 55

              "In particular the EU's position on EU/British citizens living in UK/EU was published some two weeks before the UK's position."

              And why there were so many calls for the UK to unilaterally grant the rights because the EU wouldnt play ball. Erm.

              "When the UK did publish their position, it was found not to be reciprocal "

              Not the current arrangement yup. I expect you mean this- https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/07/12/guy-verhofstadt-continues-to-whistle-over-eu-citizens-rights-post-brexit/#5573d3092bfb

              "If the UK is leaving but doesn't know how to solve the Irish border problem"

              Do we consider it our problem? If so to what extent do we care and we only need care as far as our end of the border. Just as the other side is for the EU to ponder.

              "doesn't know what kind of access to single market and customs union it wants"

              Erm yeah, hard brexit (how is this difficult?). If the EU is willing to do a trade deal cool, if not so what.

              "and is proposing residency rules for EU citizens that can break up their families"

              Wow the smell of bull

              "it's upon the UK to come up with some solutions"

              Eh? I thought the remoaning position was that the EU was all powerful and we were irrelevant. Now you say we have all the power and should be telling the EU how to do things? The point of leaving is that they aint telling us and we aint telling them how to do things. We are leaving, leaving, leaving (repeat until it sinks in), leaving. It is up to the EU what they want to negotiate, then we can talk. We just wanna leave and that involves..... us leaving.

              "One year after the referendum vote with no answers to any of these questions is shocking incompetence."

              We might not agree who's incompetence but I will agree with that line.

              1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                Re: @ codejunky

                Good old Tim W quoting BoJo the Clown to back him up. You could have picked any other article but that one.

                There will always be a need for 3rd party arbitration between two countries, this existed before the UK's membership of the EC/EU and saying now that Brexit means the UK is a law unto itself and doesn't recognise 3rd party arbitration is absurd and unworkable and throws our relationships with other countries into doubt.

                "and is proposing residency rules for EU citizens that can break up their families"

                Wow the smell of bull

                No. Family reunion rights were dropped by Maybot in 2012 and full rights will only be granted after 5 years residency.

                There are families in the UK which have some British citizens and some EU citizens. Under the proposal, EU citizens must earn more than a certain an income level and if they leave for two years (e.g. university in another EU country) they have to start to build up rights again.

                If some EU citizens were to try to obtain citizenship, they may lose their other nationality (e.g. Dutch).

                More or less same problem is faced by British citizens in the EU. For those that cannot use family reunion rights, they may have to take up citizenship. Some countries want you to renounce your foreign citizenship if you take up theirs, meaning they lose right to residency in the UK.

                We just wanna leave and that involves..... us leaving.

                Polls seem to be throwing that whole "we just wanna leave" thing into doubt, but anyway.

                If we do cry and take our ball home without negotiating then we will end up economically fucked. Imports and exports require cooperation. Flights require cooperation. Data protection requires cooperation. If we make no attempt to negotiate or cooperate then we can't complain when the country is royally screwed.

                1. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: @ codejunky

                  @ Dan 55

                  "Brexit means the UK is a law unto itself and doesn't recognise 3rd party arbitration is absurd and unworkable and throws our relationships with other countries into doubt."

                  Thats cute but not what it is about. However that comment about 3rd party arbitration is actually why the EU trade deal with Japan (that they claim is done) isnt done. The EU rejects it while Japan demands the standard. But in this case the US do not overrule our court, nor Saudi Arabia or anywhere else. So no to the EU.

                  "If some EU citizens were to try to obtain citizenship, they may lose their other nationality (e.g. Dutch)."

                  Why? Is this a dictatorial thing from the UK? No? Who is it then?

                  "Some countries want you to renounce your foreign citizenship if you take up theirs, meaning they lose right to residency in the UK."

                  Ahhh we have an answer!

                  "Polls seem to be throwing that whole "we just wanna leave" thing into doubt, but anyway."

                  As they did before the vote, as they did after the vote, as they conflict with the.... RESULT of the rigged vote that still didnt return the predetermined answer. Thanks for playing.

                  "If we do cry and take our ball home without negotiating then we will end up economically fucked."

                  So much bull maybe it could be an export.

                  "Imports and exports require cooperation."

                  Yes. And that is why the world is lining up and hopefully the EU will be cooperative. But if they stick with the idiot suggestions of punishing us then they are not are they?

                  "If we make no attempt to negotiate or cooperate then we can't complain when the country is royally screwed."

                  Last I checked we had negotiators in a room with theirs. We now await the EU to make their opening offer (v2 with revised figures massively up after their initial colossal failure) which we will likely see to be about as cooperative as the garbage they have spewed so far.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: @ codejunky

                    "Yes. And that is why the world is lining up and hopefully the EU will be cooperative. "

                    Wow, the level of arrogance, even stupidity is mind blowing.

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: @ codejunky

                  Some countries want you to renounce your foreign citizenship if you take up theirs, meaning they lose right to residency in the UK.

                  You can't renounce British citizenship if you have it through right of birth. No matter what you might say to a foreign government to gain the right to live there you remain British with all the associated rights.

                  1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                    Re: @ codejunky

                    Wrong, you fill in form RN (Application to renounce British citizenship) from the Home Office.

                    If the other country is serious about it, they will want to see the reply confirming that you have renounced your British citizenship.

                    1. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: @ codejunky

                      Wrong, you fill in form RN (Application to renounce British citizenship)

                      If you read the notes to that form you will find "A person who renounces British citizenship or British overseas territories citizenship has a right (once only) to resume that citizenship if the renunciation was necessary to enable him or her to keep or obtain some other citizenship."

                      In other words it's a fudge to allow you to seem to have given it up, but you can still get it back just by asking, i.e. you haven't actually lost the right at all.

                      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                        Re: @ codejunky

                        You can't get it back just by asking, there are conditions attached - read the guidance notes for form RS1. Would you really want to plan your future on the whims of a Home Office civil servant?

              2. Yes Me Silver badge

                Re: @ codejunky

                I thought the remoaning position was that the EU was all powerful and we were irrelevant. Now you say we have all the power and should be telling the EU how to do things? That's not what he said or implied. They have 27 potential vetos, so yes, they are in fact all-powerful in the talks: it is their deal or no deal. But by being modest and realistic in the talks (highly unlikely with Davis in charge) we have a chance of getting a deal that might get through the Commons. If we don't, of course, the government will be thrown out (if it even survives that long) and I'm pretty sure that the 27 will then agree to putting Article 50 on hold until a sensible (centrist) government comes along. It would be better to withdraw the Article 50 letter straight away though; that isn't exactly foreseen by the Treaty but the right things would probably happen.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: @ codejunky

                  I'm pretty sure that the 27 will then agree to putting Article 50 on hold

                  Of course they will, they're desperately afraid that Brexit might be successful.

                2. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: @ codejunky

                  @ Yes Me

                  "That's not what he said or implied"

                  Yes it is. He said- "it's upon the UK to come up with some solutions" and so he thinks we have to come up with the EU's problems.

                  "it is their deal or no deal"

                  Actually it is for both to decide either to deal or not. That is why the EU keep getting laughed out of the room when they want to overrule our justice system or charge us a stupidly unfounded bill.

          2. Lars Silver badge
            Happy

            Re: @ codejunky

            "It isnt our incompetence we need to worry about yet.". So true, stupid will need to worry about nothing as it's always too late anyway.

            Dear Brits why do you accept this stupidity for absolutely no good reasons.

            Shitting here wondering what the hell made the year 2016 the "year of the talking arseholes". You Brits look at the USA and laugh at the Twat. We Europeans laugh at both the Twat and Brexit. It's not a nice laugh, not the kind a guy like Wodehouse produced, but rather the kind of laughter you can, or cannot, master when a guy steps into a heap of dog shit, turns angrily around accusing his wife of not warning him.

            Not a nice laughter, but also a laughter without any meanness.

      2. Smooth Newt
        Facepalm

        Re: @ Dan 55

        If the EU decide to be petty and make outrageous demands then our side just need to laugh and walk out.

        The EU represents 44% of the UK's current export market, and at the UK represents 16% of the EU's "export" market. So who do you think loses the most if the UK delegation walks out?

        And whilst we are on the subject, what are you going to live on for the decade or two that it will take the UK to replace nearly half of its export market with markets outside Europe. Markets for which many UK products and services are not designed, and which in any case are already saturated with foreign competitors who already have market share that the UK would need to displace.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: @ Dan 55

          The EU represents 44% of the UK's current export market, and at the UK represents 16% of the EU's "export" market. So who do you think loses the most if the UK delegation walks out?

          You can't compare percentages like that, the EU is a tad bigger than the UK.

          UK exports to EU, 44% of £550bn = £240bn

          EU exports to UK, 16% of £1800bn = £290bn

          so to answer your question, the EU loses more.

          1. Smooth Newt
            Happy

            Re: @ Dan 55

            You can't compare percentages like that, the EU is a tad bigger than the UK.

            UK exports to EU, 44% of £550bn = £240bn

            EU exports to UK, 16% of £1800bn = £290bn

            so to answer your question, the EU loses more.

            But the effect is far less significant to the EU than the UK because the EU is substantially larger. e.g. the UK loses about £4000 per head of its 60m population in export earnings, whilst the EU only loses about £640 per head of its 450m population (540m less the 60m British). So I'll take a £640 pay cut if you take a £4000 one...

            1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

              Re: @ Dan 55

              So I'll take a £640 pay cut if you take a £4000 one...

              If that's the price of leaving the EU, I'll take it.

        2. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: @ Dan 55

          @ Smooth Newt

          "The EU represents 44% of the UK's current export market, and at the UK represents 16% of the EU's "export" market. So who do you think loses the most if the UK delegation walks out?"

          Both in different areas. Which is why the EU need to decide on their position and then there will be something to negotiate. No hostility or mocking in it, just the situation as it is.

          "And whilst we are on the subject, what are you going to live on for the decade or two that it will take the UK to replace nearly half of its export market with markets outside Europe."

          Its almost like we will be a pariah in the world. Nobody will want to trade with us. Oh no. Erm wait. We might even end up with a trade deal with China before the EU get one! And if we are so over-reliant on such a failing and barely still standing trading block then we obviously need to move away dont we.

          1. Smooth Newt
            Happy

            Re: @ Dan 55

            Nobody will want to trade with us. Oh no. Erm wait. We might even end up with a trade deal with China before the EU get one!

            I cannot see hundreds of British companies just rocking up to China on 30 March 2019 and opening hundreds of widget shops or whatever which instantly displaces most of the existing competition selling widgets, and who may have spent decades building up their market share.

            How long do you think it takes to build up significant market share from zero in the face of existing competition and a mature market for your product, because in most cases that is what they will face?

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: @ Dan 55

              @ Smooth Newt

              "I cannot see hundreds of British companies just rocking up to China on 30 March 2019 and opening hundreds of widget shops or whatever which instantly displaces most of the existing competition selling widgets, and who may have spent decades building up their market share."

              I think I am seeing the problem with your view of trade.

              "How long do you think it takes to build up significant market share from zero in the face of existing competition and a mature market for your product, because in most cases that is what they will face?"

              Yup. Definitely seeing the error of your ways. I am not even sure where to start if your world view is that far wrong.

              1. Smooth Newt
                Meh

                Re: @ Dan 55

                Yup. Definitely seeing the error of your ways. I am not even sure where to start if your world view is that far wrong.

                Perhaps the Chinese will just buy various additional goods and services from us instead of whoever they are currently buying these things from, because We're British Dammit. Or perhaps because they like paying more for them, what with China having so much lower labour costs. Plus, unless you are already selling into China, your business's sales force etc won't speak Chinese, won't understand the Chinese market, and your company's products won't be designed for it or conform to their regulations.

                The economic consequences of Brexit might be relatively painless if it was spread over a generation or so, but not if we have just 618 days, 6 hours and 46 minutes.

              2. Triggerfish

                Re: @ Dan 55

                Yup. Definitely seeing the error of your ways. I am not even sure where to start if your world view is that far wrong.

                So some kit you have to get approved, electronic kit for example, so you have to go through the rigmarole of negotiating the Chinese Bureaucracy, everything will be done in Chinese, all a paperwork etc, you better not just understand Chinese, you better understand "The Chinese" you have to establish a presence and China is huge Shanghai has somewhere like 70m people alone, so that can be a problem, you better worry about IP issues, you are in competition with a major manufacturing country, your products might be priced out of the market depending on what they are. Lots of businesses have rocked up to China and tried to just start selling shit, most fall on their arse doing so.

                1. codejunky Silver badge

                  Re: @ Dan 55

                  @ Triggerfish

                  Oh god your right! That is nobody trades with each other unless they are in a block. Oh how do Iceland trade with China? They must have special powers beyond our imagination! Its a wonder we can trade with the many languages in the EU. Good job the US doesnt trade with the EU (yes they do). And that nobody trades with anyone of any other language, culture or economy!

                  Instead I guess we all live in a tiny bubble afraid of the world and hating those foreigners. We must be strong and form a new superstate to compete with the likes of the US and the USSR. We must protect our industries from those poor countries with starving people so we can keep people employed in inefficient industry.

                  No thanks. I voted leave.

                  1. Dan 55 Silver badge
                    Happy

                    Re: @ codejunky

                    Instead I guess we all live in a tiny bubble afraid of the world and hating those foreigners.

                    I take it you're talking about the Brexiteer vote, the ones still hanging on believing in spite of all the evidence for it being a national tragedy enacted by an incompetent government?

                    Any half-way competent government would have taken Brexit to mean a move to the EEA and once in the EEA tried to push for a two-speed Europe.

                    1. Triggerfish

                      Re: @ codejunky

                      @ Dan

                      Apologies hit down vote when I meant to hit the upvote.

                    2. codejunky Silver badge

                      Re: @ codejunky

                      @ Dan 55

                      "I take it you're talking about the Brexiteer vote"

                      You may want to read again. And if you come to the same conclusion read again and maybe get someone to read it with you and explain. The fact that you cant understand such an easy comment is probably why you think there is all this evidence of a national tragedy (I wont defend the gov ofc).

                      "Any half-way competent government would have taken Brexit to mean a move to the EEA and once in the EEA tried to push for a two-speed Europe."

                      Wasnt the warning that leaving the EU even for the EEA would remove our influence? So is this another one of those fantasies of somehow reforming the EU against all evidence of their will to do so? I was amazed how so many remain arguments centred on the political union being incompetent, incapable, awful, unworkable and headed for disaster but we should remain to try and fix it. I guess its a possible masochist enjoyment but outside of that it seems a pointless exercise.

                      The good news I can give you is you are so wrong that even if everything went tits up it is very unlikely to be as bad as you think things will be.

                    3. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                      Re: @ codejunky

                      a move to the EEA and once in the EEA tried to push for a two-speed Europe

                      You're confusing EEA and EFTA. The UK is already a member of the EEA, because EU members are required to apply to become EEA members, but EEA rules are unclear on whether leaving the EU would neccessarily mean leaving the EEA. It seems they didn't consider that when drawing up the EEA agreement. The current argument is whether the UK could join EFTA after leaving the EU, at least one EFTA member (Norway) isn't keen due to the change in the balance of power which would result.

                  2. Triggerfish

                    Re: @ Dan 55

                    @Codejunky

                    Listen it's quite simple, you do not turn up to a country and just start selling. It takes time.

                    You may disagree with this and say we do not know trade, but I can tell you most of the comments about China you have disagreed with actually stand and reflect comments I hear from government advisors and people in chambers of commerce who actually do operate, trade and work out there.

                    Don't know how much experience you have with dealing with Asia but if you think you just toodle up and a week later you are selling things you are so wrong. It could take you a fair few months just to establish a representative office in any country. Combine that with how things may be done differently in Asia as well and it can get tricky especially if you are so Britain centric you think that's the way things will be done everywhere.

                    I'll agree you do not need a voting block any company can try it independently in fact many business do just that, and I will say again many fall on their arse because they do not pay attention to all the detail and problems they will face.

                    There seems to be the idea because we voted Brexit and are now a proud nation that everything will fall in line, people will try and give us beneficial trade deals that may hurt them but that's how it works right? Cos Britain is actually Great Britain. Personally I voted remain because I think that attitude is rubbish and naive.

                    There's a lot of "you do not understand international trade argument" your giving here, yet no real depth in the counter argument. So if you do think you can just rock up to China and start selling stuff within a matter of say a couple of weeks please tell me how?

                    1. codejunky Silver badge

                      Re: @ Dan 55

                      @ Triggerfish

                      About your vote for dan, if you hit the upvote it will change your vote.

                      "Don't know how much experience you have with dealing with Asia but if you think you just toodle up and a week later you are selling things you are so wrong"

                      The problem is I havnt said this. Yet all I hear is defeatist rejection of interacting with the world because it might require work. The fact that there is a line of countries wanting trade deals with us already shows there is desire to trade with us in ways impossible as part of the cartel.

                      "many fall on their arse"

                      Interestingly this is the argument for the private sector. Most do fail in any market. But by trying there are successes.

                      "because we voted Brexit and are now a proud nation that everything will fall in line"

                      No.

                      "people will try and give us beneficial trade deals that may hurt them but that's how it works right"

                      What delusional rubbish have you been told or are you making this up to argue against? I have never heard anything this mad.

                      "Cos Britain is actually Great Britain."

                      I love this. Remain argument against 'Little England', the response is 'Great Britain' and when we vote leave suddenly Osborne and such started talking about Great Britain and not Little England. It is so funny to watch people so catastrophically wrong shamelessly change their attitude like true hypocrites. Similar problems with the eurosceptic / pro-euro when we were shown right no matter how loud the others cried out.

                      "Personally I voted remain because I think that attitude is rubbish and naive."

                      Thats fine, I can respect that view. But voting the other because some people on one side seem misinformed would have left us with nobody voting. I truly expect those views of leavers you have claimed are made up or from some fringe loony drunk who would normally be shouting about the coming of christ.

                      "So if you do think you can just rock up to China and start selling stuff within a matter of say a couple of weeks please tell me how?"

                      This is a problem. I dont just say that. Remove the straw man and you see your arguing against arguments you have presented. I point out pretty solidly that the claim we would be global pariahs and such fell at the first hurdle, we have a line for trade deals. We can be signing them the minute after getting out of the EU. Trade with members of the EU wont just stop that minute either, hell if the EU stops mucking about they might even be able to negotiate a trade deal although I do side with remainers that the 27 countries are not necessarily competent or adult enough to do such a thing.

                      We are at the front of the queue for a US trade deal. That doesnt mean start negotiating after we leave. That means our gov aught to be sorting it out and having the pen ready the minute we leave the EU. Same with China, Australia, New Zealand, etc. And our policies on trade and law will also matter. The fact that we are making serious roads to recovery from the recession almost a decade ago since the brexit vote means we might be in a better position before the next one hits. The EU still isnt and if we are tied to them they can drag us down.

                      I dont claim an easy life due to voting leave. I believe it is the best decision to make for a number of reasons and yet I get the same remain arguments (read dan) arguing against their own straw men and misrepresentations. In my book that is talking to ones self.

                      1. Triggerfish

                        Re: @ Dan 55

                        @ Codejunky

                        Cheers for that tip about voting

                        I would say people here have said companies are not going to be just turning up and starting trading immediately and you have been pretty dismissive of the idea that's not possible. I'd refer to your comments to smooth newt several comments back which I quoted from.

                        "I cannot see hundreds of British companies just rocking up to China on 30 March 2019 and opening hundreds of widget shops or whatever which instantly displaces most of the existing competition selling widgets, and who may have spent decades building up their market share."

                        I think I am seeing the problem with your view of trade.

                        "How long do you think it takes to build up significant market share from zero in the face of existing competition and a mature market for your product, because in most cases that is what they will face?"

                        Yup. Definitely seeing the error of your ways. I am not even sure where to start if your world view is that far wrong.

                        Likewise your response to me when I said it's not a simple process was to go on about Iceland, like I had said trade would not happen without a voting block, when did I ever say that?

                        This seems to be twisting my argument, and your argument and now being an accusation that I have created a straw man, whereas I feel there's some obfuscation in your response now to change it to a new argument itself.

                        I have not said it's impossible, I have said it's tricky will not happen quickly and it's a big risk takes time and investment for a lot of companies, especially if they have no idea how to approach it and it won't be a quick process. Smaller companies especially. Many are going to fail hard, if they lose trade from Europe and have to replace that with China then they may fail even harder.

                        Also as far as I understand trade deals mainly sort out taxes and tariffs etc, a company that has to make up it's trade short fall has to actually go and do it themselves, the government will help a bit, but those companies for the large part are on their own and have to figure it out themselves, or pay someone to figure it out for them.

                        the comments

                        "because we voted Brexit and are now a proud nation that everything will fall in line"

                        Seems to be an attitude amongst a lot of Brexiters, and some of the attitude our current gov seems to be taking to the table.

                        "people will try and give us beneficial trade deals that may hurt them but that's how it works right"

                        OK that was hyperbole based on the prev statement. :)

                        As for loony fringe, some of the example i have been given for voting Brexit

                        "I don't like David Cameron"

                        "You don't understand what it was like in the 70s we should go back to that"

                        "You do not understand manufacturing, this will be a great boost, doesn't matter if the pounds weakened people will buy more from us"

                        "I voted Brexit, just to see what would happen, but I thought it wouldn't go through"

                        "We need to secure our borders against people like the Syrians"

                        None of these struck me as irrational people, but their arguments for Brexit ... fuck me.

                        1. codejunky Silver badge

                          Re: @ Dan 55

                          @ Triggerfish

                          "I would say people here have said companies are not going to be just turning up and starting trading immediately and you have been pretty dismissive of the idea that's not possible."

                          Not at all. Originally I said we can walk out when the EU make outrageous demands (they have) and newt seemed to argue the EU has us over a barrel in trade. I said the EU need to figure out their position and then we can negotiate. I dismissed his comment on the basis that we are not some pariah in the world and amusingly we might end up with a trade deal with China before the EU manages it. The last line of my comment being the important one- "And if we are so over-reliant on such a failing and barely still standing trading block then we obviously need to move away dont we.". Since then I have been responding to interpretations of my comment.

                          "Likewise your response to me when I said it's not a simple"

                          But this is where I am chasing interpretations. I am talking about world trade and your talking about speaking Chinese. My point is we dont need a trade block to negotiate in the world nor the trade-off that is the EU. You can tell me its not simple and I agree. But it doesnt change anything.

                          "Seems to be an attitude amongst a lot of Brexiters, and some of the attitude our current gov seems to be taking to the table."

                          Some nutters maybe and I dont like the attitude of the gov. I do hope they are putting it on for the public like the EU members but I find it childish.

                          "some of the example i have been given for voting Brexit"

                          The Cameron one doesnt surprise me but it is irritating. That tribal politics rubbish causes more harm than good. Just as bad as the 'I didnt think it would happen' argument.

                          I dont understand any argument to go back to the 70's as it is the EU that is designed on that era and leaving would be very different. I hear it from remainers trying to mock leave voters so I point out this amusement often.

                          The manufacturing argument is actually pretty sane. Before the referendum the Sterling was considered overvalued and needing to fall. Then the brexit referendum was announced and suddenly it was a bad thing. As far as I am aware it has been a boost.

                          The borders thing isnt a daft one since border control was dismantled around the time of letting in Europe. Even labour admitted its failure here and while a good job we are out of the Schengen area, as Europe is finding, we still have increased threats to the country. I can understand why people doubt the capability of managing the borders while they are intentionally ruined and I have to agree with them.

                          1. Triggerfish

                            Re: @ Dan 55

                            @Codejunky

                            I dismissed his comment on the basis that we are not some pariah in the world and amusingly we might end up with a trade deal with China before the EU manages it. The last line of my comment being the important one- "And if we are so over-reliant on such a failing and barely still standing trading block then we obviously need to move away dont we.". Since then I have been responding to interpretations of my comment.

                            So you was being dimissive of the idea that just turning up in say China and selling widgets is not going to happen straight away.

                            But this is where I am chasing interpretations. I am talking about world trade and your talking about speaking Chinese. My point is we dont need a trade block to negotiate in the world nor the trade-off that is the EU. You can tell me its not simple and I agree. But it doesnt change anything.

                            As I said we I agree we do not need a trade block, I never brought that up in our coversation at all though you did. In fact I have pretty much reffered to companies themselves as seperate business entities. Trade deals sort tariffs, companies will have to do the rest themselves.

                            I was not just talking about speaking Chinese, I was pointing out that in response to what was a dismissive comment about smooth newt saying you cannot just turn up in China, To say that it's actually quite a complex processess in any country, I was using China as an example because thats was where the conversation was.

                            The point is, during the period when a company who now may have lost trade in Europe have to start looking at expanding into other regional markets is that there is a lead time, it's not short, it can be fraught with difficulties and it can be bloody trciky to do so, especially outside the EU market. A company that is suffering from a profit loss is going to have to weather a couple of years of investment, risk taking and reduced cash flow whilst still surviving long enough to actually hopefully break into that region, thats going to break a hell of a lot of companies, and saying well the other trading block was a bit shit so that's all good then is not really good sense to me.

                            I would disagree on the manufacturing arguement though, with a reduced pound the price of materials to manufacture goes up, so increasing the BOM, that cost has to be absorbed somewhere.

                            The border thing is tricky, but I think us throwing our cards out of the game, does not help us, working within and trying to change it might have, for a start we also lose a lot if we take away free movement, there's reasons the NHS wanted an exemption from the fallout. Likewise there are plenty of brits in the EU who are going to suffer. Also by dropping it we could lose the trade rights which I guess takes us back to the top again. :)

                            1. codejunky Silver badge

                              Re: @ Dan 55

                              @ Triggerfish

                              "So you was being dimissive of the idea that just turning up in say China and selling widgets is not going to happen straight away."

                              No

                              "Trade deals sort tariffs, companies will have to do the rest themselves."

                              Agreed. That is why I am pretty dismissive of the power and influence of the EU and their daft demands.

                              "To say that it's actually quite a complex processess in any country, I was using China as an example because thats was where the conversation was."

                              Thats fine. But still it doesnt change the situation. We are not overnight stop trading with the EU nor be some pariah in the world where we cant trade with them either.

                              "start looking at expanding into other regional markets is that there is a lead time, it's not short"

                              Yup. And businesses that are so EU centric they are useless outside of it will likely retreat within its borders assuming they can survive there. The rest will do some kind of mix of moving to the EU or possibly setting up an office there to get around the EU's threats (like the banks have done). Adaptation takes time but the remain argument seemed to forget that until it was convenient.

                              "I would disagree on the manufacturing arguement though, with a reduced pound the price of materials to manufacture goes up, so increasing the BOM, that cost has to be absorbed somewhere."

                              While we are in the EU yes. But then instead of importing it brings opportunities to manufacture here

                              (this is the time lag we discussed in this comment). It makes exports cheaper. A good example is to look at the currency manipulation of Greece and Germany. Same currency but it is too strong for Greece and too weak for Germany. The proof is in what would happen should they leave the euro and stand by themselves. Greece would devalue and quick, but just as quick Germany would have a much stronger currency

                              "working within and trying to change it might have"

                              The EU had no interest in that. France was very happy to support illegal migration in their attempt to get here. Germany caused a migration issue into Germany affecting some EU countries and then made it an EU problem.

                              "for a start we also lose a lot if we take away free movement"

                              Not at all. Labour already admitted their failure on this and it was a serious miscalculation. We interestingly get a lot of non-EU people coming into our NHS. Why would we ban useful people from the world and why would we give special treatment to the EU?

                              "Likewise there are plenty of brits in the EU who are going to suffer"

                              That shows how friendly the EU is if they do that. How is appeasing the EU a good thing in this case?

                              "Also by dropping it we could lose the trade rights which I guess takes us back to the top again. :)"

                              It is nice to talk to someone who also sees humour in this. I do enjoy reading your posts on the reg

                              1. Triggerfish

                                Re: @ Dan 55

                                @Codejunky

                                I do enjoy reading your posts on the reg

                                Likewise, but it's bedtime over here, and I fear we are taking over the board so gonna have to say g'night. :)

                          2. Dan 55 Silver badge

                            Re: @ codejunky

                            Experts say a no-deal Brexit would spawn 'legal morass and economic disaster', but hey, people have had enough of experts.

                            And, by the look of it, exports.

                            1. codejunky Silver badge

                              Re: @ codejunky

                              @ Dan 55

                              "Experts say a no-deal Brexit would spawn 'legal morass and economic disaster', but hey, people have had enough of experts."

                              Which experts? Carney provided a damning report of doom and gloom. Except his predecessor King pointed out that he was misrepresenting good news, the report was of all the things the gov and BoE had been trying to do for almost a decade to recover from the recession. Since the expert comment was from Gove (a politician) I guess you will stand by Camerons comments that we will be fine outside the EU, backed by Osborne. That is before the referendum and they did a swift 180.

                              If I remember correctly we had to join the Euro or become some pariah whos trade would be down the pan. **roll on tumble-weed**

                              1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                                Re: @ codejunky

                                Liam Fox has said this morning the UK can survive if there's no deal. Perhaps that should have gone on the big red bus instead.

                                If a politician, whose job it is to talk up whatever point is making, says it's a matter of survival then whichever way you look at it this is a shit sandwich.

                                1. codejunky Silver badge

                                  Re: @ codejunky

                                  @ Dan 55

                                  Wow. So in your world the translation is-

                                  Go well- Doom

                                  No problem- Doom

                                  Be ok- Doom

                                  Survive- Doom

                                  Doom- All ok?

                                  No wonder you have such a bleak outlook if you interpret everything in negatives.

                                2. Uncle Slacky Silver badge
                                  Facepalm

                                  Re: @ codejunky

                                  Reminds me of that quote from one of the Matrix sequels: "There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept."

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: @ Dan 55

            The delusion of Brexiters is staggering. I think I'll organise a conference of psychiatrists just on this topic.

          3. strum Silver badge

            Re: @ Dan 55

            > We might even end up with a trade deal with China before the EU get one!

            Only if we're prepared to concede more to the Chinese than the EU is prepared to.

            That's the thing with sovereignty fantasists - they don't realise that every international treaty is a loss of sovereignty, in which the lesser power loses more than the greater power.

      3. strum Silver badge

        Re: @ Dan 55

        >The ball is now in the EU's court.

        The delusion with this one is strong.

        The EU have laid out their position, unambiguously and in detail. The UK hasn't demonstrated that it has a clue.

        There are a thousand and one issues on which the EU's position needs no review - they simply continue as they are. Every one of them needs re-thinking by UK - with no evidence that the UK has even started adding them up.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: @ Dan 55

          @strum

          "The EU have laid out their position, unambiguously and in detail."

          Have they? it took some messing to get them to look at right to remain (idiots here calling for unilateral decision to be the better people). Is it £60bn or £100bn or do they need to go think about it? What happened to the rules of negotiating whole deals and not blocking progress with singular details? They are demanding we agree to pay up before they allow discussion. Have they decided if they are punishing us or mutual benefit?

          No wonder I guys dont have a clue what they are on about. And now the creator of the article 50 wants it scrapped. I guess once you join the cartel your not ment to leave?

  2. wolfetone Silver badge
    Mushroom

    Got my popcorn, now to wait for the comments to become something akin to The Daily Fail.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Tabloid press

      Rich people paying rich people, to tell poor people to blame immigrants.

      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Unhappy

        "Rich people paying rich people, to tell poor people to blame immigrants."

        Now that sounds like an accurate summary of the facts.

    2. Shades

      Lets just get this over with then:

      • You lost, get over it
      • Stop talking the country down
      • We're more important to them...
      • German cars
      • Soros
      • We managed okay before the war
      • The EU is an unelected dictatorship
      • REMOANER!!

      1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Lets just get this over with then

        Don't forget: "Get off my lawn!" and "Bloody foreigners!"

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Pint

      I'm a Yank, so this ain't anything I've a stake* in, but damn, this is better than Wimbledon.

      *Not quite true. Best damn place to get real beer, ale,... icon - - >

  3. LDS Silver badge

    "have the same influence in the future as in the past"

    Have the cake and eat it? I can't see how UK could have an active role in EDPB - if it will be an EU body reserved to member states and the Commission.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: "have the same influence in the future as in the past"

      Have the cake and eat it?

      That is the (rather timid and polite) English saying. Most of the continent uses a different metaphor which is significantly more apt in describing the situation:

      Have your p*n*s in both hands and your soul in paradise at the same time

      In any case, the issue with data-flows is that they are a reflection of business flows. If you cannot transfer the data you cannot do the business this data is for. This is the world we live in.

      1. LDS Silver badge

        Re: "have the same influence in the future as in the past"

        Don't know in other countries, but in Italy it's "to have the wife drunk and the barrel full" (which today may sound quite sexist).

        I'm sure UK and EU will need an agreement about data transfer, but it's hard to believe UK will have the same influence as in the past. Especially since data regulations may be seen also as a way to have businesses move inside EU.

      2. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: "have the same influence in the future as in the past"

        Well in Spain it's "you can't be at mass and ring the church bells".

        France's is "you can't have the butter, the money for the butter, and the dairymaid's smile".

      3. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Re: "have the same influence in the future as in the past"

        Most of the continent uses a different metaphor which is significantly more apt in describing the situation

        The German one is: Wasch mich aber mach mich nicht naß which translates as wash me but don't get me wet. Better get your towels!

        1. Paul Crawford Silver badge

          Re: "have the same influence in the future as in the past"

          "Better get your towels!"

          On the beach this morning! Oh I cam to late...

      4. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Unhappy

        "Have your p*n*s in both hands and your soul in paradise at the same time"

        Either one is of course delusional.

        Pretty much like the Brexiteers "vision."

  4. ArrZarr Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Newsflash

    Brexit has consequences.

    Some might be good, most will be bad.

    Thank you, protest voters.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Newsflash

      Try NOT to project your own mental capabilities onto people whose opinions differ from yours;

      1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: Newsflash

        Why all the down votes? Projecting an unreasonably high standard of mental capabilities onto others does not lead to a majority of satisfied customers.

    2. codejunky Silver badge

      Re: Newsflash

      @ ArrZarr

      That is a fairly good comment. I am sure something will be worked out for exchanging data but why would we influence the EU's rules and if we cant get on so be it. Seems a fuss about nothing.

  5. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

    So, the same as before then.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Gordon Pryra

    "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

    We are fucked then

    I am still wondering why I am being called a "Re-moaner", I guess this is the adult equivalent of being laughed at for being in the A-Stream at school by the idiots in the lower streams.

    It seems this country STILL laughs at people with more intelligence than them (I was going to say higher education).

    1. TonyJ Silver badge

      Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

      "...I am still wondering why I am being called a "Re-moaner"..."

      Probably because the majority of vocal remainers were adamant that another referendum should be taken (presumably over and over ad infitium) until they got the result they wanted. Despite democracy not working like that

      "...I guess this is the adult equivalent of being laughed at for being in the A-Stream at school by the idiots in the lower streams.

      It seems this country STILL laughs at people with more intelligence than them (I was going to say higher education)...."

      Also notable that the remainers seem to take on a very patronising "we know better" argument biased towards the whole "If you voted to leave you are a) a moron of massive proportions and/or b) a massive xenophobic racist".

      No. No one actually knows what the ultimate outcome will be.

      Some things will hurt. No doubt about it. How much? No one can say, yet, but there's bound to be a LOT of pain.

      Some things will be better off. What things and how much? No one actually knows yet but probably not as much as exit voters hope.

      Bit of advice - step down from your ivory tower of thinking you know best and that you are more intelligent than everyone else and look around. And just perhaps, try to see what caused that anger in the majority.

      1. channelswimmer

        Re: Trade deals with the EU

        > Probably because the majority of vocal remainers were adamant that another referendum should be taken (presumably over and over ad infitium) until they got the result they wanted. Despite democracy not working like that

        Erm, actually that is EXACTLY how democracy works, decisions are changed if the majority of the electorate are in favour of making that change. It is in dictatorships where decisions can never be changed regardless of the will of the people.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        "No one actually knows what the ultimate outcome will be."

        An excellent thought.

        Reflect on it.

        Think about it as hard as you can.

        Then ask yourself this question: What makes you think it's a good idea?

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          What makes you think it's a good idea?

          Because staying in a failing political empire that crashes from one crisis from another is clearly an even worse one? It's not like the UK is the only country where anti-EU feeling is steadily growing. Is there any EU country that is becoming more pro-EU over time?

          The economic partnership of the EEC worked, passably well. It was converted into the political unity of the EU, without consultation, by power-hungry politicians who wanted to show they had a bigger collective willy than the US. They never seem to learn from history.

          1. Dave Schofield

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            >Because staying in a failing political empire that crashes from one crisis from another is clearly an even worse one? It's not like the UK is the only country where anti-EU feeling is steadily growing. Is there any EU country that is becoming more pro-EU over time?

            France and Austria from the recent elections.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              France and Austria from the recent elections.

              France (where I live) is certainly not becoming more pro-EU, it's the exact opposite. Two-thirds of the French think the UE is not working properly, although there is still a majority in favour of remaining a member. The FN may be an anti-EU party, but it's also an unpleasant, racist, bigoted one which hurts it's support, as is also true for the Austrian populaits party. Despite that, the FN had its best showing ever. No surprise that Le Pen came second in the presidential election, but she did get elected as an MP for the first time. The parliamentary election result was more a comment on the total failure of the traditional socialist policies of the outgoing government than from any EU-related cause. Macron is pro-EU, so a lot will depend on whether his policies actually achieve anything positive, or if he's defeated by the unions as usual.

          2. H in The Hague Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            "Is there any EU country that is becoming more pro-EU over time?"

            Ermmm, France, where Macron did massively better than Marine Le Pen? The Netherlands, where the Eurosceptic PVV/Wilders got only around 13% of the vote in the recent parliamentary elections? If anything I get the impression that since the referendum (and the ensuing train crash) the EU has become more popular.

      3. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        Actually we do know how much pain there will be.

        The treasury did a report during the campaign and they applied worst case scenarios to everything - including the government acting in a way to create economic harm ( eg: setting tariff barriers to the maximum legally possible for all goods and service imports ).

        They managed to shave a tiny amount off GDP *growth*. ie: The economy will grow by slightly less than it otherwise would have by 2030.

        So we know that that is the worst that can reasonably happen, if we try to make Brexit as painful as possible, we do have a ceiling on the amount of pain.

        As it will obviously be better than that, it will all be fine.

        1. tiggity Silver badge

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          GDP growth (or lack of) is not the only issue. Already, since the brexit vote, pound is at a dismal exchange rate.lots of products are far more expensive (though fiddled inflation figures do not show it, but my weekly "essentials" shops, which are fairly consistent in their content, keep spiralling up and up in cost way beyond quoted inflation rate ), so the buying power of the pound in your pocket is hit, couple that with (for most people) below inflation wage rises. so, even if net tiny GDP growth, lots of people will suffer financially, and there will be less "decent" jobs (plenty of evidence of companies relocating, where most of the jobs "lost" are not minimum wage).

          Then all the (negative) health effects as the govt remove various EU environmental protections and the festering noxious substance laden waterways and beaches of back in the day become common again) - UK gov tries it's best to ignore enviro laws when we are in the EU, just imagine when we leave..

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            @ tiggity

            "Already, since the brexit vote, pound is at a dismal exchange rate"

            Your welcome. Keeping the bubble going was only going to cause more pain and the currency was considered too strong and needing to fall. Good job it happened sooner not later!

            "lots of products are far more expensive"

            This is where the argument 'but we are still in the EU' very well applies.

            "below inflation wage rises"

            No kidding. Prolonging this recession and dragging it on by remaining didnt work very well did it. Lets get out of the EU and let them recover at their own pace and bail themselves out.

            "and there will be less "decent" jobs"

            I guess it depends what you are thinking? Are you a head office banker needing to be sat at the brass plate or anyone else?

            "EU environmental protections"

            I know. BMW and others were bad. But at least without the EU environmental nuttiness we can use power plants instead of monuments to the sky. Might make the panic of winter blackouts vanish.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          >The treasury did a report during the campaign and they applied worst case scenarios to everything - including the government acting in a way to create economic harm ( eg: setting tariff barriers to the maximum legally possible for all goods and service imports ).

          Various members of our government keep talking about "No Deal is better than a bad deal". With the amount of essentials (like food and fuel) we are utterly reliant on imports into the country, "No Deal" would add about £50-100 per month due to tariffs onto the average household expenditure. 6 million households are currently "Just About Managing".

          It doesn't take a genius to see that could move a significant number of households from "Just About Managing" to absolutely can't manage and finding themselves homeless. If just 1% of those 6 million end up homeless, the net result of Brexit will be 60,000 homeless families across the country.

          According to the Chancellor last week, 40% of our exports are services (e.g. people not goods). Once we lose Freedom of Movement, we lose a significant portion of that. Euro trading (worth £60bn per year in tax) will probably also end up going into the EU.

          I really hope I'm wrong, but I can't see a way out of Brexit without losing 10-15% of GDP, 3-5 million full-time jobs (many may be replaced by zero hours contracts), and eventual blood on the streets.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            @AC

            ""No Deal" would add about £50-100 per month due to tariffs onto the average household expenditure"

            That is if we keep the EU punitive tariffs against the world even though we wouldnt be in the cartel and it makes no economic sense to do that anyway. So we would actually have cheaper imported food even after the currency drop.

            "to absolutely can't manage and finding themselves homeless"

            That is a terrible thing I cannot believe gov have supported this long. Our energy policy to appease the EU ramped up energy bills as well as food which harms the poor more than anyone but it hits us all and hits our entire economy. It is being in the EU causing that problem though.

            "Euro trading (worth £60bn per year in tax) will probably also end up going into the EU."

            Unfortunately those protectionists (if you consider the EU as one entity- nationalists) have been trying to demand this for some time without brexit. They want an international reserve currency but want to clear it in the EU, which is impossible as NY and HK are needed to do it too so this is purely political finger rubbing on their part. Nothing we can do about their greed but the banks seem to be resisting going over there. Probably because France is hostile to bankers and the EU is not trustworthy.

            "I really hope I'm wrong, but I can't see a way out of Brexit without losing 10-15% of GDP, 3-5 million full-time jobs (many may be replaced by zero hours contracts), and eventual blood on the streets."

            Chin up, the news is depressing but it sells. Reality is more mundane and less threatening. I aint going to lie and tell you all is milk and honey but I can tell you that what you appear to have been told is pure polished turd

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              @AC

              >>""No Deal" would add about £50-100 per month due to tariffs onto the average household expenditure"

              >That is if we keep the EU punitive tariffs against the world even though we wouldnt be in the cartel and it makes no economic sense to do that anyway. So we would actually have cheaper imported food even after the currency drop.

              WTO tariffs and schedules would come into effect on a No Deal Brexit. Let's ignore the fact that we would need to disentangle our schedules from the EUs (it took 5 years to merge the EU schedules with Romania and Bulgaria for comparison). We are then stuck by the WTO tariffs on all imports and exports until we arrange a trade deal - expect the quickest of those to take 2-3 years to ratify (and then it won't cover services). With an expected fall in the currency, those imports will cost more to buy, and more to transport here. And if we do manage to import food cheaper it would just be another kick in the teeth for our own farming industry that would be unable to complete.

              Expect food, clothes and fuel prices to rise. I maintain it will be £50+ per month for the average family.

              >>"to absolutely can't manage and finding themselves homeless"

              >That is a terrible thing I cannot believe gov have supported this long. Our energy policy to appease the EU ramped up energy bills as well as food which harms the poor more than anyone but it hits us all and hits our entire economy. It is being in the EU causing that problem though.

              Perhaps privatizing the utility and transport companies didn't help, or closing the coal mines, or using the North Sea gas revenues to subsidise tax breaks instead of investing in the future, or selling off the social housing, or pursuing austerity to the extreme. Those were entirely Tory policies that have made it harder for millions of families. Increasing the electric bill to subsidize renewables didn't help, but that could be a long term goal that the majority of people would be happier with. Maybe we should have a referendum on the subject.

              >>"Euro trading (worth £60bn per year in tax) will probably also end up going into the EU."

              >Unfortunately those protectionists (if you consider the EU as one entity- nationalists) have been trying to demand this for some time without brexit. They want an international reserve currency but want to clear it in the EU, which is impossible as NY and HK are needed to do it too so this is purely political finger rubbing on their part. Nothing we can do about their greed but the banks seem to be resisting going over there. Probably because France is hostile to bankers and the EU is not trustworthy.

              We'll see at least some of this next week when Citi publish their Brexit strategy. London will not entirely lose all the Euro banking, but a lot of it could go - especially in the face of uncertainty about the future.

              >>"I really hope I'm wrong, but I can't see a way out of Brexit without losing 10-15% of GDP, 3-5 million full-time jobs (many may be replaced by zero hours contracts), and eventual blood on the streets."

              >Chin up, the news is depressing but it sells. Reality is more mundane and less threatening. I aint going to lie and tell you all is milk and honey but I can tell you that what you appear to have been told is pure polished turd

              One of us has. It might be me, I really, really hope I'm wrong. But that doesn't happen often and with the latest reports that the talks might be delayed due to the UK representatives *still not being ready* and the countdown ticking away ever faster I think we might all end up with a polished turd.

          2. inmypjs Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            "No Deal" would add about £50-100 per month due to tariffs onto the average household expenditure."

            At the moment we have no control over tariffs on imports. After no deal brexit it is our elected government that gets to set import tariffs and even if they did choose to take £50-100 per month from your just about managing families the government gets that money, it is re-distribution not loss.

            You lose money when tariffs force you pay more money for something you could import cheaper if not for the tariffs which is what currently happens across the whole EU. A stupid game that is not worth playing.

            Remoaners come out with crap like this and call brexiters stupid - sheesh.

            1. strum Silver badge

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              >At the moment we have no control

              Brexiteers keep repeating this lie. We are part of a Union. We have as much 'control' as everybody else. We are losing control.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

                We are part of a Union. We have as much 'control' as everybody else.

                i.e. precisely zero.

                We are losing control.

                Of nothing. Big deal.

      4. Uncle Slacky Silver badge
        Stop

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        "another referendum should be taken (presumably over and over ad infitium) until they got the result they wanted. Despite democracy not working like that"

        Well, it would be nice to have an actual BINDING referendum, unlike, y'know, the one that took place last year which everyone seemed to treat as binding for some reason.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          which everyone seemed to treat as binding for some reason.

          What's the point in asking the question if you aren't going to act on the answer? Isn't that one of the most common complaints about politicians, that they don't do what we tell them to? Now you're complaining that they are doing what they were told to do, and they shouldn't be!

          You don't like the result, fine, but stop using that as an excuse to say that it should be ignored, or re-voted, or wasn't real, or any of the other excuses that are the direct reason you're labelled remoaners.

          1. Uncle Slacky Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            "What's the point in asking the question if you aren't going to act on the answer? Isn't that one of the most common complaints about politicians, that they don't do what we tell them to? Now you're complaining that they are doing what they were told to do, and they shouldn't be!"

            Nobody asked Cameron to call a referendum - he just thought it would be an easy win and and easy way to shut down UKIP and the Brexiteer wing of the Tory party. They *should* have put some qualifiers on it, e.g. 2/3 majority, or 2/3 of the voting population had to vote leave for it to be valid.

            As a non-binding referendum, it should only have been a signal to formally review (e.g. via Royal Commission or similar) our membership and determine whether leaving would be a better alternative (which it clearly isn't...).

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              Nobody asked Cameron to call a referendum

              They did, actually. It was an election promise, he would negotiate a better deal with the EU and then call a referendum on it. His negotiation skills were clearly lacking, to put it mildly.

              They *should* have put some qualifiers on it, e.g. 2/3 majority, or 2/3 of the voting population had to vote leave for it to be valid.

              They should have had the same criteria for a referendum on joining the EU in the first place in 1992, but John Major wouldn't even call a referendum since he knew he would have lost.

              whether leaving would be a better alternative (which it clearly isn't...)

              Oh, it very clearly is. Staying in this slow-motion trainwreck of an empire will be an economic disaster.

            2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              Unhappy

              "he just thought.. easy win..easy way to shut down UKIP and..Brexiteer wing of the Tory party. "

              Exactly.

              Ever wonder what a Conservative leader will do?

              Whatever it takes to keep the party a) In power b) Together.

              So CMD will consider smoking the Kippers a job well done.

              And while he's getting a £100K to give speeches on the need for "austerity," while May remains hip deep in the s**t of Brexit and being nice to the DUP WTF should he care?

      5. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: @TonyJ

        Probably because the majority of vocal remainers were adamant that another referendum should be taken (presumably over and over ad infitium) until they got the result they wanted. Despite democracy not working like that"

        The neverendum petition was created by a Brexit supporter. It is clearly one of the few things that Brexit/Bremains agree on.

      6. MJI Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        "If you voted to leave you are a) a moron of massive proportions and/or b) a massive xenophobic racist".

        Well from my experience about 50% of them are.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          Well from my experience about 50% of them are.

          Maybe you should talk to people outside your normal circle of acquanintances?

          1. MJI Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            "Maybe you should talk to people outside your normal circle of acquanintances?"

            Funny but a lot of them voted remain, but of the leavers about 50% thought about it and thought it was a good idea. The other 50% were f**kwits.

            This includes some relatives, one particular uncle is really embarrasing about it.

            Are they one of my downvoters?

      7. Yes Me Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        Probably because the majority of vocal remainers were adamant that another referendum should be taken

        Not really - the point is that the referendum was deeply flawed and only advisory; Parliament could have, and should have, decided that the result was inconclusive.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          Parliament could have, and should have, decided that the result was inconclusive.

          It was considerably less inconclusive than any parliamentary election in the past 50 years!

      8. strum Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        >And just perhaps, try to see what caused that anger in the majority.

        And that, at last, is the point. No rational analysis, no sober consideration - just an outburst of witless anger.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          just an outburst of witless anger.

          Much the same is true of the remainers, though. Just an outburst of witless sheeple scared to leave their comfort zone.

      9. Voland's right hand Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        Probably because the majority of vocal remainers were adamant that another referendum should be taken (presumably over and over ad infitium) until they got the result they wanted. Despite democracy not working like that

        That is exactly how democracy works. There is no reason for something which has been voted for in the past not to be revisited in the future. It is a key principle of democracy that ANYTHING can be voted on at a later date.

        In fact, making a decision sacred is dictatorial. Hitler did it to great success with his referendum on changing the Weimar republic constitution. There were others.

        So I suggest you either go and learn what a democracy is or buy some brown shirts. They complete you.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          There is no reason for something which has been voted for in the past not to be revisited in the future. It is a key principle of democracy that ANYTHING can be voted on at a later date.

          True, but that would of course imply that if the decision had been to stay, it would have been entirely reasonable for the leavers to demand another referendum on the subject, and so on.

          You have to apply a certain practical restraint. You can't have a referendum on an issue every month, flip-flopping between decisons, but neither can you keep having them until you get the "right" decision (as decided by someone powerful) and then stop. That is no less dictatorial, and makes a mockery of any pretence to democracy. It is, unfortunately, what we've seen all too often in the EU. When countries voted not to accept an EU decision (Ireland, Denmark) they were made to revote until they did accept, then the votes stopped.

          It's 25 years since the UK joined the EU (without a vote). Now it has voted to leave. There's no reason not to have another vote to review that decision in perhaps another 25 years, if the EU (and UK) still exist in 2042. There is certainly no good reason to repeat the vote in 2017, and 2018, and 2019, etc. That leads nowhere.

    2. Dave 15

      Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

      First, clearly not a disaster, in fact not even an issue. Translating data from one format to the other is not new nor rocket science

      Second, it is clear we have little to no influence at the moment, at least once we are out we can decide not to store and share banking info with the USA (for example) if we wanted (I suspect our weakling governments will still fall over themselves to lick uncle Sams...)

      Third, I have never understood why you remain people think that voting to continue to make a massive payment to lose control over trade relations, energy policy, tax policy, purchasing policy, ability to support industries we consider vital, important or strategic while at the same time also suffering a massive trade imbalance with the group is actually somehow the brainy thing to do.

      This last one I equate to a simple analogy...

      I pay my next door neighbour a fee (£10 a month). This allows me to sell my car washing service to him for £10 a month. He sells me his grass cutting and window cleaning services for £15 a month. This allows me to sit idle most days.

      Meanwhile the fee I pay him:

      allows him to setup all the car washing, washing up, grass cutting and window cleaning deals in the country

      allows him to create a rule that requires me to take the lowest price for everything

      and what is left of the fee is then used to subsidise his other neighbours children so they can do the washing up cheaper than my children.

      All in all it seems to me that I would do far better to cut my grass and clean my windows, pay my children to wash up and tell him to stick his fee where the sun doesn't shine. Still, I guess it must be nice to know others think the original story is the most beneficial version and clearly gives me great control over the dividing up of washing up in my street and not agreeing makes me a total idiot.

      1. Shades

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        The fact that you think this is an issue of "translating data from one format to another" leads me to believe you haven't got the first f*cking clue what you're talking about. This is why many "remoaners" hold leavers in such contempt.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

          "This is why many "remoaners" hold leavers in such contempt."

          If I had an up vote to give for every leaver who had proved themselves to be a fucking idiot...

          In my experience it is the ones who say "we are not stupid" who go on to best prove they are.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

            @AC

            "If I had an up vote to give for every leaver who had proved themselves to be a fucking idiot..."

            Try listening to arguments for remaining. The repetition of the same dis-proven rubbish or just statements/insults without any factual backing. It reminds me of when they supported the euro in this country and people like me were called eurosceptics. The most amusing part is how I cant find a single person who supported the euro in this country since the point in time when the word eurosceptic stopped being used. And the similarities between that argument and this feel like deja vu.

            @ Doctor Syntax

            "What makes you think it's a good idea?"

            I know I have answered this many times but I have yet to hear a remain answer to it.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              "I know I have answered this many times but I have yet to hear a remain answer to it."

              This was the biggest blind spot of those favouring the EU: assuming that the benefits are so obvious, they didn't need to be articulated. In that assumption, they over-estimated the other half of the country, and are making up for it now.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              What makes you think it's a good idea?

              Excellent question. Why is the EU a good idea?

              Why did American companies gain global dominance in the 20th century, while British companies declined? American companies had an unfair advantage: a much larger home market. They could grow larger and wealthier before having to break into export markets.

              The answer: join a European single market. A single market means much more than just an absence of trade tariffs of course. For the whole of Europe to be a British company's home market, you need common standards and regulations. Yes, even regulations about bendy bananas - you don't have a single market if different regions have different grading rules for agricultural produce. To create and enforce the standards and regulations, you need a legislature and courts.

              A vote to leave was a vote to cut British companies off from seven eighths of their home market. I don't think you need to be an economist to work out that's going to be bad for all of us who work for those companies.

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: What makes you think it's a good idea?

                A single market means much more than just an absence of trade tariffs of course. For the whole of Europe to be a British company's home market, you need common standards and regulations. Yes, even regulations about bendy bananas - you don't have a single market if different regions have different grading rules for agricultural produce. To create and enforce the standards and regulations, you need a legislature and courts.

                Most of which we had before the EU, since that was exactly why the EEC, later EC, was created, and worked.

                The one thing we don't need is a political union created by empire-building politicians. And if they'd asked us in 1992 we'd have told them that.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: What makes you think it's a good idea?

                "A vote to leave was a vote to cut British companies off from seven eighths of their home market"

                That's got to be one of the very best retorts to Brexit that I have seen! Thank for providing that perspective!

              3. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: What makes you think it's a good idea?

                "A vote to leave was a vote to cut British companies off from seven eighths of their home market."

                The problem with Britain is that for many years it *did* have a much larger "home market"- and one it could pretty much dictate to- in the form of the Empire. Or rather, the problem is that too many of those in power never accepted the rapid loss of this captive market following the end of WW2, and continued to behave as if it was still the early 1950s.

                It got far too used to this, and never fully accepted Europe for that reason. Now it thinks it can go back to a position- and an era- that is long dead.

                Britain's approach to India seems to think it's going to be a very easy negotiating position thanks to the latter being a member of the Commonwealth and ex-empire chum. It's going to get a very rude awakening when it discovers that- shock, horror- it's not the 1950s any more, India is a *much* larger, rapidly-modernising country and not going to roll over and give everything it wants to the country that once ruled it- not always in as benevolant a manner as the romanticisers would like to believe.

                This has been summed up nicely as Britain being the school bully that turns up at a reunion 20 years later- when everyone else has moved on and is successful- and expects the same playground power structures and implicit privilege to still be in place.

            3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              "What makes you think it's a good idea?"

              I know I have answered this many times but I have yet to hear a remain answer to it.

              Note that the question was posed to a Leaver who'd stated outright that nobody knows what the outcome would be. As to Remainers - we don't think leaving is a good idea and can think of no reasons why it would be.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

                @ Doctor Syntax

                "Note that the question was posed to a Leaver who'd stated outright that nobody knows what the outcome would be"

                But that is understandable. Nobody can predict the future so we can only make the best decisions we can now.

                "we don't think leaving is a good idea and can think of no reasons why it would be."

                Thats fine except I have pointed out many good reasons from border control, trade, economy and so on. I cant think of a good reason to remain. I have heard many factless claims and utopian wet dreams but nothing of any reality.

            4. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

              > The most amusing part is how I cant find a single person who supported the euro in this country since the point in time when the word eurosceptic stopped being used.

              Hello. I supported (and still support) adopting the Euro. I'd currently be paid about 40% more if we had adopted it when the exchange rate was 1.5Euro to the £...

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

                @AC

                Well done for coming forward. I can understand not wanting your comment associated with your account and it would probably have more weight if you did though. Not sure if you have seen Greece and the other Eurozone issues however. You may think you would be paid more but you may just as easily been without a job.

              2. strum Silver badge

                Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

                >I supported adopting the Euro.

                Me too. What people miss is that the Euro+Sterling would have been a much, much stronger entity than the Euro alone. It would, almost certainly, have become the leading petro-currency, and replaced the USD as a trading currency in many parts of the world.

                This heavyweight currency might still have suffered from the US-created Great Recession, but a combination of Euro strength and London nous might well have eased the pain.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        I think I get your analogy but one question, if it's raining can you do the washing up in the garden?

      3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: "The potential downside of not getting this right is very serious,"

        "First, clearly not a disaster, in fact not even an issue. Translating data from one format to the other is not new nor rocket science"

        So the whole thing has gone over your head.

        Data formats are irrelevant. It's a matter of data governance. If we want to do business with the EU then it means exchanging data and ensuring that the data we receive from them is subject to their rules, rules to which we, at present, contribute to making but which, in future, we won't. Not contributing to making them doesn't mean we gain your much vaunted control. It means losing it. That applies to just about every aspect of trade with the EU. That has been transparently clear from the very start.

        The only way that this isn't an issue for you is if you think you don't want to do business with the EU. If that's your wish and you get your way then you'll have tipped a large part of the UK economy down the drain, including the jobs of a lot of people who voted Leave (all those car makers with EU bases currently in the UK; do you really think they'll stay?).

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm guessing that unless things change pretty quick, the brexit negotiations generally are going to be a complete clusterfuck. The election has taken away any mandate they may have had to negotiate, and they know it. The current lot are in office, but seemingly not in power. Best outcome from my viewpoint : we have a 'technical' brexit where we 'leave the EU', but remain in as many of the institutions of the EU as they'll let us. Hopefully then the leavers would have technically left (and can fondly remember the Empire as they sit in their chairs watching Countdown), but the remainers technically remain too, at least in most of the ways that actually matter. The blessed discourse would then continue pretty much as it has for the last 40 years, and we can then look back on this as a total waste of time and money, and ensure that David Cameron takes his rightful place in history : as a total knob end.

    1. wolfetone Silver badge

      "...and ensure that David Cameron takes his rightful place in history : as a total knob end."

      And pig molester. Don't forget about the pig.

    2. collinsl

      Sadly we'd lose the most important bit, the ability to influence future laws (which we currently don't use as effectively as we should be IMO)

      We may also lose all our rebates so we end up paying much more for reduced access

      1. Dave 15

        what?

        Pay for access.... pay to have access to a trade deficit, I know our politicians are thick as pig shit but even they can't be that stupid

        Influence... what damned influence? Cam-moron went to them asking for some stuff when they knew full well us leaving was a strong possibility, what was their response... sod off with bugger all as we don't care about you, your wishes or your country.

        1. LDS Silver badge

          "what was their response..."

          Your alternative facts? UK was offered highly advantageous conditions no other member had or has.

          1. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

            Re: "what was their response..."

            Highly advantageous conditions such as being allowed to prop up the EU's finances and the benefit of not being allowed to sign our own trade deals, etc.

            1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

              Re: "what was their response..."

              not being allowed to sign our own trade deals, etc

              Yes, because somehow the UK is bound to be able to negotiate better deals with Japan, China, India, etc. on its own than part of a bloc. All trade agreements impose some kind of non-compete clause on member states when it comes to trading with other groups. But being inside a bloc doesn't prohibit trade with other countries, viz. Germany's impressive record with India and China.

              The aim of being inside a free trading bloc is that most of a country's trade suffers from neither tariffs or non-tariff barriers. For various reasons, some nakedly political, some economic, the EU has never favoured being solely a free trade area. For example, the currency union was proposed as a way of reducing the costs of exchange rate fluctuation and a way around the fairly ruinous policy of competitive devaluation. Common standards for goods and services are essential requirement for removing non-tariff barriers.

              The UK is already providing a poor negotiator with the rest of the EU: turning up late and unprepared. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that it will be any better when it comes to negotiating new trade deals in a few years. And that's even if other countries are seriously interested in them,

        2. wolfetone Silver badge

          Re: what?

          "Influence... what damned influence?"

          Elected MEP Nigel Farage was on the board of the EU Fishing Board. Do you know how many meetings he went to?

          None.

          You can't influence a thing if you don't turn up to do the job you were elected to do.

          1. Shades

            Re: what?

            Wolfetone, I cannot upvote this enough.

            The self-fulfilling prophesy: "The EU doesn't work for us" - Well it won't if you keep electing fraud committing morons who don't sodding turn up and when they do do f*ck all.

            1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: what?

              "when they do do f*ck all"

              That's a bit hard on Farage. He worked reasonably hard at insulting anyone who disagreed with him.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: what?

                @ Doctor Syntax

                "That's a bit hard on Farage. He worked reasonably hard at insulting anyone who disagreed with him."

                Very true. Every time he pointed out a failing of the EU they would all squirm and hope nobody is listening. When he pointed out they didnt have unanimous support for the EU they laughed, and then panicked when he was proven right. His honesty didnt go down well there and their desperation toward the end of the referendum when their certain victory was shown to be only in their minds really made him a solid representative for those who voted for UKIP MEP's. He did us a great service and hopefully he has succeeded in representing us.

          2. Hollerithevo Silver badge

            Re: what?

            @wolfetone

            Yes, and he was happy to keep trousering the MEP's wages.

            1. inmypjs Silver badge

              Re: what?

              "Yes, and he was happy to keep trousering the MEP's wages."

              Yes, well done him for managing to recover a little bit of what we were paying the EU.

    3. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      the brexit negotiations generally are going to be a complete clusterfuck

      A cabinet consensus around a transitional period (ie. the status quo) seems to be forming. Hardly surprising seeing as the clock has been ticking for nearly four months and nothing has thus far been negotiated, except perhaps the cancellation of fishing rights for other countries in British waters. This, along with so many other flag-waving exercises, might well turn out totally shit for the UK. Data transfer is likely to one of the more straight forward aspects: accept EU rules with no influence.

      There are two things wrong with this: it will require the remaining 27 member states to agree and this will require sweeteners, which the UK will be expected to pay for somehow. But some kind of compromise is bound to be possible. More immediately whether government holds. The more it looks like there will be some kind of transitional arrangement, the more the hardliners are likely to try and force their own agenda. Cue leadership and general elections during which time even less gets done.

      1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

        Re: "cancellation of fishing rights for other countries in British waters"

        Works both ways.

        Take a look at the EU fishing areas (PDF). Except for the Bristol Channel, every area that includes UK territorial waters includes territorial waters of at least one other state.

        1. Shades

          Re: "cancellation of fishing rights for other countries in British waters"

          "every area that includes UK territorial waters includes territorial waters of at least one other state"

          And so does Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Belgium, Germany, Holland, Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, and Croatia.

          Your point is?

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    File under YMPFTSIF

    Yet More Project Fear The Sky Is Falling.

    Anyone would think that a delicate negotiation that one side was determine to undermine, is under way.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Stupid people don't know they're stupid

      If you speak out against the idiocy, that's "project fear".

      If it ends in failure, "it was sabotaged".

      Don't you think it's a little bit too convenient?

      1. austint

        Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

        If you speak out against the idiocy, that's "patronising elitism".

        If you speak up with legitimate concerns, that's "project fear".

        If you speak out against the whole thing, that's "anti-democratic".

        If it ends in failure, "it was sabotaged".

        FTFY.

        1. Dave 15

          Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

          I assume from the nature of the thread that you are speaking as if leaving was the stupid thing to do...

          a) I have nothing against you speaking out against it IF you are relying on fact not name calling. There are plenty if good reasons to leave not least the cost of staying and the serious lack of benefit that accrues for that cost. (and a trade deficit is NOT a benefit!!!!!)

          b) If the concerns are legitimate and have no work around then I would agree they need looking at, this load of cobblers is neither a legitimate concern nor one with no workaround (in fact it is a very simple workaround that has been used many times before)

          c) It is undemocratic to ignore the majority whether you think them right or wrong.

          d) I fail to see how leaving could possibly end up a bigger disaster than staying. Before we joined we had space programs, built our own planes, had armed forces worthy of the name (and not equipped by Spanish tanks and Belgium guns), control over our own sources of power (not told we can't burn coal and must import French energy), could grow and sell any apples we wanted, could produce enough milk for our needs, could sort out taxation as we wanted, could make enough steel for our industry and decide if an industry was strategic and important enough to support etc etc etc

          1. channelswimmer

            Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

            > Before we joined we had space programs

            No we didn't. When we joined we were a basket case (that's why we spent eleven years trying to join); since joining we have become the fifth largest economy in the world due to our close trading partners and the access that the single market gave us (a British idea by the way, Thatcher pushed it onto the Europeans and we have benefited hugely from it).

            1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

              Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

              When we joined we were a basket case (that's why we spent eleven years trying to join);

              You are conflating the EEC (a good idea that worked) with the EU (a very bad idea that is failing).

              Unfortunately the arrogant twats who run the EU refuse to recognise that most European citizens want an EEC model, not an EU model. They refuse to let go of the power they have as EU 'leaders", so we either let them jerk us around, or we leave and do the best we can on our own until the other members do the same.

              1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

                Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                You are conflating the EEC (a good idea that worked) with the EU (a very bad idea that is failing).

                That old canard again. The UK, as a fully sovereign state, participated in the negotiations that led to the treaties of Luxemburg and Maastricht and, hence, the EU. It's not perfect but it's not that bad either.

                Unfortunately the arrogant twats who run the EU refuse to recognise that most European citizens want an EEC model

                Speak for yourself; I much prefer the EU, despite its problems, to the EEC. Though I suspect most people couldn't tell you the difference and don't really care that much. Particularly the younger people across the continent seem to be pretty fervent Europeans.

                The EU is still largely run by the nation states, but they often find it politically expedient to blame "Brussels" for things they may well have approved but are not very popular at home, at the moment.

                1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                  Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                  That old canard again. The UK, as a fully sovereign state, participated in the negotiations that led to the treaties of Luxemburg and Maastricht and, hence, the EU.

                  (a) I don't see what that has to do with the EEC working, and the EU failing, and

                  (b) The opinion polls at the time of Maastricht clearly showed that the British people did not want the government to sign up to the EU, which is precisely why John Major didn't give us a referendum on the subject. Just as Tony Blair offered a referendum on Lisbon, and then reneged on the offer when he realised he would lose it. The decision to join the EU was undemocratic, as is the EU itself.

                  Speak for yourself; I much prefer the EU, despite its problems, to the EEC.

                  I'm not speaking for either you or me, just reporting what the polls say.

                  1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

                    Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                    Hm.

                    I'm not speaking for either you or me, just reporting what the polls say.

                    The opinion polls at the time of Maastricht clearly showed that the British people did not want the government to sign up to the EU

                    But you previously claimed

                    that most European citizens want an EEC model

                    Please try and stick to your argument; we're not in the pub now.

                    Governments routinely pass legislation that isn't popular at the time: ending capital punishment is one of the many examples but it's a long list. The UK is a parliamentary democracy and the aftermath of last year's referendum is another example of why we don't decide policy by referendum.

                    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                      Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                      Please try and stick to your argument; we're not in the pub now.<

                      Charlie, if you're going to quote my posts, please do so accurately and not by mix'n'match of fragments out of order in an attempt to support your arguments.

                2. Shades

                  Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                  "but they often find it politically expedient to blame "Brussels" for things they may well have approved but are not very popular at home, at the moment."
                  You mean live UK.gov have done time and time again... "It was the EU that dun it. Honest".

                3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                  Unhappy

                  "The EU..still largely run by the nation states,..find it politically expedient to blame "Brussels"

                  A very popular tactic in the UK.

                  Especially with some newspapers.

          2. Paul Crawford Silver badge

            Re: UK space launches

            "The Minister of State for Trade and Industry, Frederick Corfield, announced the cancellation of the Black Arrow project in the House of Commons on 29 July 1971", the UK joined the EC (later the EU) in 1973

            As for heavy industry, all gone to CHEAPER countries. Same in the USA and most of Europe. How do you get that back without slashing worker pay and conditions to 3rd world levels to gain a foothold in that area again?

            WTF are you on, maybe you should check your facts first.

            1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

              "maybe you should check your facts first."

              Maybe he did. In the Mail.

          3. Charlie Clark Silver badge

            Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

            not told we can't burn coal and must import French energy

            There's no EU rule over the burning of coal and French energy is imported because it's cheaper and because the UK has failed to ensure it has sufficient generation capacity. Successive governments have failed to come up with a plan for the UK's energy market. OTOH you can consider yourselves beneficiaries of the single market in energy, particularly when Germany has to dump its subsidised over-production cheaply: KWh in the UK is quite a bit cheaper than in Germany.

            What will happen after the UK leaves still needs to be worked out but 1970s style blackouts can't be ruled out: that monstrosity in Somerset certainly won't be ready in time.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

              French energy is imported because it's cheaper

              Figures, please? French consumers pay 0.15euros/kwh (13p) and UK consumers pay 12p/kwh, base rates. Doesn't look cheaper to me.

              1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

                Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                French consumers pay 0.15euros/kwh (13p) and UK consumers pay 12p/kwh, base rates.

                Cheaper to buy French energy than generate it in the UK. It's not as if people buy a couple of boxes of electricity while they're in the Calais supermarkets.

                As for consumer (industry pays a bit less) prices: €0.25 KWh here in Jormany because we subsidise renewables so heavily and still burn dirty coal. Still, with power, as with computing, you pay for what you provision, not what you use.

                1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                  Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                  Cheaper to buy French energy than generate it in the UK.

                  So you claim, but you still haven't provided figures. Downvotes don't invalidate facts.

                  1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

                    Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                    So you claim, but you still haven't provided figures. Downvotes don't invalidate facts.

                    I did or why do you think the power companies are buying French electricity? Have you seen the projected costs for power from Hinkley Point C? £92.50/MWh which is more than twice the current average and even more than what we pay in Germany!

                    This is how markets work. Largely down to a surplus of renewables from Germany the French often have over-generation to deal with and currently the UK power companies and, to a lesser extent, British consumers are the beneficiaries.

                    However, if Britain leaves the single market, it might be much harder and or expensive to buy that power. But what will the alternatives be.

                    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                      Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                      However, if Britain leaves the single market, it might be much harder and or expensive to buy that power.

                      It might, or it might not. It will obviously depend on how keen the two parties are to strike a deal which has little to do with Brexit. With the new French environment minister promising to close 17 reactors by 2025 I can't see France having much power to spare anyway, the transfers could start going the other way (which ironically could help pay for Hinkley Point C).

                      But what will the alternatives be.

                      Getting renewable power from Iceland seems to be in the news a lot recently

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Stupid people don't know they're stupid

                  Cheaper to buy French energy than generate it in the UK.

                  Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, the consequences of a large nuclear base in France which is happier with a steady load, and different consumption patterns. Obviously the UK buys in when it's cheaper. Last winter, though, France was a net importer of electricity (mostly from Germany, even at German prices)

          4. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            Trollface

            " I fail to see how leaving could possibly end up a bigger disaster than staying. "

            "Before we joined we had space programs,"

            Till a committee of the "great and good" decided those nice Americans could do it all for you, and anyway what does HMG need with satellites? that was in 1969.

            "built our own planes, "

            While civil service policy at the MoD (like that in the US) said the UK needed to have "national champions." That' lead ultimately to the formation of GEC and BAe. Nothing to do with Europe, except some countries were also stupid enough to ignore the fact that competition (if done right) can lower costs. Now the UK has El Reg's favorite defense con-tractor BAe.

            "had armed forces worthy of the name (and not equipped by Spanish tanks and Belgium guns), "

            Which might, just might be better than something that BAe builds (10 years late and as usual Billions Above estimate)

            "control over our own sources of power (not told we can't burn coal and must import French energy), "

            You'd like to follow the D and walk away from the Tokyo accords, or Tony Blairs legally binding requirement to lower green house gas emissions across all industry? It looks like you don't know that both of these were several decades after the UK joined the EU.

            "could grow and sell any apples we wanted,"

            And could continue to use toughened glass windscreens, despite laminated types being safer (the DoT blocked their introduction but cited "National Security" as they couldn't tell anyone why only they thought it was safer for about a decade).

            " could produce enough milk for our needs,

            Maybe the privatization of the Milk Marketing Board had something to do with this, or the low quotas to allow the UK to continue to import NZ butter instead?

            "could sort out taxation as we wanted,"

            Because it's the EU that sets VAT at 20%?

            Oh no it isn't, is it. That's set by the Treasury.

            As are taxes on drink, tobacco and fuel.

            " could make enough steel for our industry and decide if an industry was strategic and important enough to support etc etc etc"

            Did you know that it's possible to specify in govt contracts a "buy local clause" ?

            Completely within EU rules. AFAIK most of Europe uses such things but the UK does not.

            UK civil servants believe they must (at all times) demonstrate they are getting "best value for money."

            Besides making a decision to buy local would require the UK to formulate something (let's call it an "industrial strategy") to support it's UK industries. But that's a waste of time "Let the markets decide," has been the battle cry for decades.

            And they have.

            There are something like 3000 "non tariff barriers" countries can use to encourage their local producers and discourage foreign competition according to the WTO.

            But the UK civil services does not like using them.

            Just like penalty clauses to government con-tractors or the PFI contracts.

            So if you were just trolling, congratulations, I have been trolled. Well played.

            But if you sincerely believed any of the bo***cks you spouted, and voted in the UK Referendum based on your ignorance and prejudices, then as the yoof are inclined to say "you been played like a b**ch."

            You'd do better to vent you spleen at the British Civil Service, who BTW through the Home Office f**ked up support to migrants to the UK, helping to create all those "immigrants overwhelming council resources" stories so popular with most of the UK press.

  9. deive

    "This is because the UK's data protection laws will have to stay up to date with, and possibly change based on, those made at an EU level."

    ...

    "The committee is also concerned that the UK will lose its influence over the setting of those laws"

    Considering how most of our governments want Orwellian controls, this is a GOOD thing, in my opinion :-) Not that I don't trust our government or anything.

  10. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge
    Paris Hilton

    What data ? whats the problem?

    I just cant get the gist of this article.

    Why do we want to "influence" the EUs data protection rules?

    Do we influence khazakstans? or Australias?

    I really dont understand the problem , the way I see it any "Leaving EU" panic can be reduced to simply "what do other contries not in the EU do?"

    Its not like we're leaving the planet , just the EU - amd even when we've left it'll still be there , so you can still go skiiing , or buy a BMW , after all Americans and Argentinians do.

    1. collinsl

      We talk to people in the EU. Companies share data between their various EU branches.

      There are options to restrict what data gets passed, but that will lead to companies having to spend more on data storage in different locations, and it will mean their efficiency and effectiveness is reduced as parts of the business won't have access to some or all of the data from another country, necessitating them setting up copies of bits of the company in other countries.

      The problem is not that it's impossible, it's that it's going to cost £££ in productivity

      1. Dave 15

        Rot

        At worst it will cost a trivial amount to filter some data that can't be sent. This can be done 'in the pipeline' and doesn't even require multiple copies. Its not rocket science nor is it expensive. Most companies already have multiple data sites if for no better reason than backup.

        1. strum Silver badge

          Re: Rot

          >At worst it will cost a trivial amount to filter some data that can't be sent.

          An assertion without a shred of evidence to support it. You don't know what the data is, or what the rules about that data are - how the fuck can you claim that filtering is even possible, let alone cheap?

      2. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        "There are options to restrict what data gets passed,"

        Sorry Collins . still not getting it . Can anyone give an example?

        Do you mean like , the EU might ban holding credit card numbers?

        Or , they might ban storing someones address outside the EU?

        They might insist on x amount of encryption?

        They might restrict storage to 30 days?

        what? what?

        example ... please

        I've never heard of laws regulating transit of data , just storage of it . although there was that business with the eu "safe zone" or something ...

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge

          The data is not allowed to be moved outside the EU if the destination country's data protection rules aren't good enough.

          Which basically means the EU will be deciding its data protection rules without UK input but if the UK wants to do business with EU countries it has to implement those rules anyway.

          So the UK might end up with tougher data protection rules as a result.

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          "Can anyone give an example?"

          OK.

          Let's say you want to offer some service of goods for sale. You require the customers to set up an account - name, address, phone, payment details - nothing out of the ordinary. But do you know what that is? It's personal data. And handling personal data is going to be very much more closely regulated. Most of us think that's a Good Thing.

          Whilst we're in the EU we're subject to the EU rules so the EU PTB are going to be cool with you doing that because you're subject to their law.

          Now imagine the situation when we're not in the EU. Unless we can ensure the EU that we as a country can ensure that you as a business are going to be subject to equivalent rules then you're not going to be able to accept that data from an EU customer. You're not going to be able to sell to them.

          1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

            Ok, thanks for the examples guys.

            Which basically means the EU will be deciding its data protection rules without UK input but if the UK wants to do business with EU countries it has to implement those rules anyway.

            So the UK might end up with tougher data protection rules as a result.

            Tougher? oh no! isnt that a good thing? They arnt going to make them ridiculous just to piss us off, because everyone in europe will be living by them too.

            Unless we can ensure the EU that we as a country can ...

            Really? Because I'm pretty sure I could buy a product made in china where they probably have less regulations on said product , because they have deliberately manufactured it to meet UK/EU standards.

            Also If I wanted to purchase some stuff from a dodgy foreign website hosted in a country with no laws for storing data ,say, dealextreme.com , I was under the impression I could.

            ..and anyway , like all these leaving the EU fear campaign stories , the easysiest way would be to make our standards match the EU , better yet , just follow the same rules even when not a member.

            With all the laws and regs that will have to be redefined into uk law when we leave - just put a standing order on it : Rules the same as EU regs until we get around to looking at them.

    2. Shades

      "What data ? whats the problem?

      I just cant get the gist of this article.

      The fabled Brexiteer "intelligence" on display again.

    3. Aitor 1

      Banking

      The main issue here is what services we provide in the uk. And the main bread winner is banking. In order to continue being a leader in banking we must comply with eu rules, or they will take it from us, as simple as that. Now, they probably dont want the repercussions of that, but they can do it and there is little we can do about it.

      We just have to deal with that.

      1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

        Re: Banking

        ok , so comply with them. It's only the same as if we didnt leave. we are already doing it.

        1. strum Silver badge

          Re: Banking

          >ok , so comply with them

          Yes, fine. So who sorts things out when there's a dispute between customer & supplier (in different countries)? Their courts or ours (or some third party)?

        2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          Unhappy

          "ok , so comply with them. It's only the same as if we didnt leave. we are already doing it."

          I think you'll find that also means needing that "tariff free access" to those markets people talk about, so every transaction, or deal, does not get a surcharge on it, which would discourage people from using the UK.

          So it's quite important for the UK that this get sorted out.

          But both France (Paris) and Germany (Frankfurt) would quite like to move up the league table of "World Financial Centres" which might make the negotiation a tricky one.

          Along with all the other "tricky ones" in the Brexit process.

          It comes down to this. The UK wants free movement of goods, services and capital but not people.

          The EU feels that if you want that you have to have free movement of people as well.

          Time will tell if the UK position is a pragmatic one which the rest of the EU will accept, or a complete fantasy which should only have been accepted by well informed people if they'd nosed up a kilo of cocaine.

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

  11. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    "European courts will have no more influence after Brexit"

    Of course not - as long as you have no more dealings with the EU.

    Oh, you still count on having economic exchange with the EU ? Then I'm quite sorry, but European courts will have just as much influence as before - and you have no more say in it.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: "European courts will have no more influence after Brexit"

      European courts will have just as much influence

      As things currently stand the ECJ might end up with even more as the court charged with ensuring the settlement, which is bound to include stuff which the UK has to enforce but will have no say in.

  12. inmypjs Silver badge

    could put the UK "at a competitive disadvantage"

    Yes because the EU exists to competitively disadvantage those outside the union.

    Companies which depend on that protection from competition from outside the EU will have to adapt, or suffer, or die which is fine because we have been paying far more for the protection they get than it is worth.

    While superficially attractive trying to avoid competing with the rest of the world just ends up making you poorer.

  13. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    I think we can guess how this report is going to be regarded by HMG.

    The HoL is an unelected body. What's that? They took expert evidence? Well, there you go. Experts; what do they know?

    Our PM is a housetrained Home Sec. Getting access to personal data is the very thing that GDPR and the ECJ will make difficult. This report will go down like a Xenon filled lead balloon.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The only positive thing that the UK leaving the EU had going for it in my eyes was to get rid of the ridiculous European arrest warrant. The current policy has a way too low of threshold for someone to get extradited for really minor crimes, that sometimes took place decades ago. Yet unfortunately I doubt we will get rid of it since when May was Home Secretary she was vocal that she thought it was a good policy.

    1. Shades

      Yeah, imagine those foreigners wanting you to be accountable for your crimes committed in their countries. What a bunch of selfish bastards.

  15. ecofeco Silver badge

    It boils down to this

    The back and forth of the ramifications of Brexit are quite fascinating, but to get back to the subject of this article, think of it this way:

    Currently, many European countries will no longer use U.S. based cloud and large data systems due to the inability of U.S. companies to ensure strict adherence to EU privacy standards. Those that are still used are under constant legal pressure and severe penalties for not doing so and are losing.

    This is not speculation, it is everyday news.

    GB has decided that's the boat they want to be in.

    Cui bono?

  16. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

    "... the committee said it was "struck by the lack of detail on how the government plans to deliver this outcome"."

    Is that a rather nice way of saying "those cockwombles obviously haven't got one fucking clue on how to do any of this"?

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      ""those cockwombles obviously haven't got one fucking clue on how to do any of this"?"

      Pretty much.

      For something that's been in play now for more than a year (specifically from 24/6/16), and the whole of Whitehall knew they were going to be (and are) being affected by they don't seem to produced much in the way of how their Ministry/Department/Agency is going to be changed by what is probably the biggest single change in the UK in the last 45 years.

      Which is odd, as I'd always thought the UK civil service did contingency planning ("No it's probably going to be a remain vote, but just in case it isn't...") and best case/worst case scoping quite well.

      But the silence seems deafening.

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