Brexit discussion thread II

flatty · 22-11-2017 10:11AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

The sea border won't happen anyway. The UK should keep calm and think about alternative options before December.

You mean that in the next ten days or so they need to do what they have failed to do for the past sixteen months? Yes, but I wouldn't be wildly optimistic that they'll actually do it.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Although you claim with scant reason that a sea border is better for the Republic than progressive trading terms with Britain post-Brexit there's no reason to believe this.

Progressive trading terms would undoubtedly be better for Ireland. Unfortunately the UK has decisively ruled this out by insisting on withdrawing from the single market and the customs union. Unless the British are willing to reconsider that stance, then a sea border is better for us in the Republic than a land border - no question. From the perspective of NI, as noted above, it's a more mixed judgment.

Peregrinus, you are the most informative, and most constructive poster here, and I always enjoy reading your posts. I would emphasise, however, that it is not "the UK" who have decided to leave the single market and customs union, it is teresa may, and her inner coterie of hangers on, appointed by teresa herself, purely as a means of clinging to power.
I have my suspicions about solo, but was banned for voicing them previously. I try to gloss over a lot of what is written here now, but never your posts.
It is a life changing period for my family and I.

Leroy42 · 22-11-2017 10:11AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

I don't accept this. Both this article by Laura Kuenssberg and this article by Tony Connelly in the RTE offer interesting analysis on it. There's much more going on here.

The UK won't accept a bad deal - which a high sum of money and this would constitute. Therefore alternatives need to be discussed. Parliament won't vote for a bad deal either.

Being calm and working towards a more amenable outcome is what negotiating is about.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I agree that I think the NI border issue is being talked up more than it needs to be. The Irish government should not be wasting such political capital on it. Instead they should be looking to EU to provide alternatives to help us deal with the fall out. The positioning of the regulatory bodies for example. Had we spent as much time on that as we do on the border we may have secured them, and many others.

The border is going to happen, simply because the UK don't have any other ideas and when put up against free movement etc then it is simply a non runner.

Ireland really needs to get over that and start to plan for that. We should be planning on a commerce border and a domestic border. No need for the average person to be stopped for a customs search. A simple Tag system (like e-flow) could be introduced for people to preregister etc (ok, its not a full plan but its an example of what I think we should be spending our time on). Leop shouldn't be wasting his time trying to talk to May. Even if she was capable of understanding his position (not certain that she is) she simply does not have any authority on which to push anything. Its a bad situation but it is what it is. Leo needs to deal with what is in front of him rather than wishing it was different. If the UK are seemingly totally ignoring any impact of the Scots, why do people think they will care about NI and even more so Ireland?

A much bigger issue is the issues that all exporters are going to face with the UK mainland. Even transporting goods through the UK will be a nightmare, are we planning to develop Rosslare to take the extra freight?

On the bad deal, the UK keep going on about this. Nobody, so far as I am aware, has shown me that walking away is any better than any deal being put forward.

Reverting to WTO rules for example is only the start. UK, as much as they seem to pretend they are going to do without any trade with EU, will want to continue to trade, and for that they will need trade deals. Do you think and EU country is going to look favourably on the UK if they have only recently been stiffed by them?

And why would other countries look to deal with the UK with the UK has shown it is very willing to walk away from its commitments.

Finally, I really don't understand why there isn't more anger in the UK. Had a party lied to the public in the run up to an election with the same disregard of the leave campaign there would be marches.

£350m per week - lie
Easiest trade deal in history - lie
Maintain a special relationship with EU - Now apparently a walk out is the preferred option
We won't lose any EU reg offices - 2 gone in the last week.
Not much effect on the economy - this is harder as downturn only now appears to be kicking in. But no matter how you look at it, things are going worse now than before the vote.

LeinsterDub · 22-11-2017 10:11AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So when will they throw this grenade? Is there anyone in Scotland even intimating this?
Has anyone in Westminster said it in relation to an Irish sea border?

Scotland are currently letting the English put their own head in the noose. One would think so they can either demand a deal to stay in the EEA if NI can or be indy ref 2

solodeogloria · 22-11-2017 10:12AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Are you a member of the UK Cabinet? You sound like you might be.

You appear to speak with the authority of a senior Bexiteer Minister, or a very close adviser. You reject even the slightest deviation from the orthodox position of extreme right wing Brxiteers.

The only person I can think of that voted Remain and is now a very hard Bexiteer is Theresa May - are you the UK Prime Minister, Theresa May?

Good morning!

No, but I can read what the Government are saying in the same way that you can. Everyone in the cabinet from Gove to Brokenshire is saying that an internal UK border isn't a goer and rightfully so as far as I can see. It's a bad deal for Northern Ireland and for the UK as a whole.

If anything the Cabinet usually go further than my opinion on matters. I'm willing to go up to about £36bn net (not gross which would include extra funds from assets)

Continually I find that my views are rather moderate on these issues compared to the British public in polling. This is why the bizarre idea that the British public would vote for an EEA style (in the EU in all but name and less control) is absurd.

Leroy42: I think the public aren't angry more than frustrated. I think most people just want to get clarity on the exit and to finish the job off. Rejoining isn't on the cards.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Peregrinus · 22-11-2017 10:13AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So when will they throw this grenade? Is there anyone in Scotland even intimating this?
Has anyone in Westminster said it in relation to an Irish sea border?

The idea has certainly been floated before now, though I think nobody has seen it as very realistic. Scots Nationalists have generally reacted to Brexit by treating it as an illustration of the need for Scottish independence, rather than by try8ing to devise ways in which Scotland could remain in the EU and in the UK which, after all, is not what they actually want. But people have noted that Denmark has taken the "divided" route, and that in principal it would be one way to deal with the problems that flow from forcing Scotland out of the EU against its strongly-expressed preference. Here, for example, is an opinion piece in the Guardian from last December which discusses it. I've no doubt that with a spot of googling you can find more discussion of the possibility.

Basically, its the kind of compromise that up to now has appealed to neither side. Scots Nationalists want to leave the UK, and aren't interested in devising solutionss to keep it together, while Scots Unionists don't want Scotland treated differently from other parts of the UK. And neither side ever really thought it would fly in Westminster. So it hasn't been pressed very strongly.

But, if it were to be accepted for NI (which, by the way, I think very unlikely) that does change the consideration. If it's politically feasible for part of the UK to remain in the EU/EEA/CU, then why would Scotland not want to be included in that part? And how would a Scottish government justify not pressing to be included? And how would the Westminster government justify refusing, given that the Scots voted very strongly to remain?

I've no doubt that Westminster would refuse, but there'd be a political price to be paid, and it would be a fillip to the Nationalists who, as I said before, would ask why Scotland alone of all the four parts of the UK was being denied the right to choose its own destiny with respect to the EU. It's hard to see this not fuelling a sense of Scottish grievance, and contributing to a renewed pressure for an IndyRef- pressure which would grow still further when the Scots felt the practical impact of Brexit, which will not be good. And this is a sh!tfight that Westminster would much rather avoid, so it's yet another reason why they won't accept a sea border between GB and NI.

Peregrinus · 22-11-2017 10:16AM

flatty wrote: »

Peregrinus, you are the most informative, and most constructive poster here, and I always enjoy reading your posts. I would emphasise, however, that it is not "the UK" who have decided to leave the single market and customs union, it is teresa may, and her inner coterie of hangers on, appointed by teresa herself, purely as a means of clinging to power.
I have my suspicions about solo, but was banned for voicing them previously. I try to gloss over a lot of what is written here now, but never your posts.
It is a life changing period for my family and I.

It's very kind of you to say this.

I take your point about Teresa May having driven the decision to leave the EEA and the CU. But, from outside the UK, this is irrelevant. This is the decision of the UK. Whether the UK make a decision by referendum, by parliamentary debate or by the whim of a weak Prime Minister is an internal matter for the UK which makes no difference at all to the rest of the world. It's the red lines set in these discussions by the UK which mean that we can't have a progressive trading relationship with the UK.

FrancieBrady · 22-11-2017 10:20AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

The idea has certainly been floated before now, though I think nobody has seen it as very realistic. Scots Nationalists have generally reacted to Brexit by treating it as an illustration of the need for Scottish independence, rather than by try8ing to devise ways in which Scotland could remain in the EU and in the UK which, after all, is not what they actually want. But people have noted that Denmark has taken the "divided" route, and that in principal it would be one way to deal with the problems that flow from forcing Scotland out of the EU against its strongly-expressed preference. Here, for example, is an opinion piece in the Guardian from last December which discusses it. I've no doubt that with a spot of googling you can find more discussion of the possibility.

Basically, its the kind of compromise that up to now has appealed to neither side. Scots Nationalists want to leave the UK, and aren't interested in devising solutionss to keep it together, while Scots Unionists don't want Scotland treated differently from other parts of the UK. And neither side ever really thought it would fly in Westminster. So it hasn't been pressed very strongly.

But, if it were to be accepted for NI (which, by the way, I think very unlikely) that does change the consideration. If it's politically feasible for part of the UK to remain in the EU/EEA/CU, then why would Scotland not want to be included in that part? And how would a Scottish government justify not pressing to be included? And how would the Westminster government justify refusing, given that the Scots voted very strongly to remain?

I've no doubt that Westminster would refuse, but there'd be a political price to be paid, and it would be a fillip to the Nationalists who, as I said before, would ask why Scotland alone of all the four parts of the UK was being denied the right to choose its own destiny with respect to the EU. It's hard to see this not fuelling a sense of Scottish grievance, and contributing to a renewed pressure for an IndyRef- pressure which would grow still further when the Scots felt the practical impact of Brexit, which will not be good. And this is a sh!tfight that Westminster would much rather avoid, so it's yet another reason why they won't accept a sea border between GB and NI.

Perhaps because the Scots know the reason why a different approach is needed in the Irish situation - namely the GFA. That is key to it and is why the EU is interested in supporting the Irish position.

That wouldn't fly if the Scots asked for a border and they know it - hence why it has no traction as a solution for the Scots. They will just let Brexit itself sell the idea of independence.

Gerry T · 22-11-2017 10:54AM

solodeogloria wrote:

The UK won't accept a bad deal - which a high sum of money and this would constitute. Therefore alternatives need to be discussed. Parliament won't vote for a bad deal either.

Solo so many posters on here have pointed out the divorce payment is for current UK commitments, you seem to ignore that, suggesting the now 40bn is a good will gesture and if talks fail then that money shouldn't be paid. I might have you wrong?

murphaph wrote:

Don't put words in my mouth. I only compared land border to sea border not with a FTA that may or may not materialise. If a super duper zero tariff zero regulatory difference (then why Brexit?) FTA materialises then the location of the border will be (as it is today) irrelevant.

The UK want the border primarily to control the flow of people. They want a FTA so they will happily alow goods to flow freely. The UK have all ready sold out NI, while a red line for then is the control of people they have said there won't be border controls in Ireland so we can only assume they don't care about freedom of movement of people from south to North. My guess is if this were to happen, travel from NI to the UK would involve a border checkpoint on "the main land" for people travelling....
That would include the DUP, but they haven't figured that out yet.

ancapailldorcha · 22-11-2017 11:08AM

Looks like we're losing the EU charter of Fundamental Rights:

https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/933093805678407682

Zubeneschamali · 22-11-2017 11:29AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

The UK should keep calm and think about alternative options

Did you even read that article? It simply says May and Co. are "confident" that the lack of a plan for the border will not block trade talks, and Leo & co. saying "Oh, yes it will".

Peregrinus · 22-11-2017 11:31AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Perhaps because the Scots know the reason why a different approach is needed in the Irish situation - namely the GFA. That is key to it and is why the EU is interested in supporting the Irish position.

That wouldn't fly if the Scots asked for a border and they know it - hence why it has no traction as a solution for the Scots. They will just let Brexit itself sell the idea of independence.

The GFA is a factor, I agree, and it's the reason why the EU might take the initiative to propose, or might push for, NI to be kept inside the tent rather than out. They'll never do that for Scotland.

But, hypothetically, if the UK were to propose it, I think the EU would be highly receptive, because (a) all other things being equal, they'd rather have Scotland in than out, (b) the feasibility and acceptability of part-in, part-out arrangements is already established by the Danish precedent, and (c) what's not to like? It's not as though they have a problem with land borders per se; they've already got one running all the way from the Baltic to the Black Sea and one running around most of the former Yugoslavia. One between Engand and Scotland poses no challenge at all.

Which means, if the Scots were really keen on this solution, it's Westminster they need to press, not Brussels. But, in the real world, they're not really keen on it, and even if they were Westminster would not accede.

flatty · 22-11-2017 11:37AM

In fairness, we don't really know what the Scots are keen on, as they have said very little. I think it would be politically dangerous in the extreme not to attempt to stay in the eu. If Westminster veto this, the SNP hand is strengthened immeasurably. If Westminster, realising this, allow it, it will be letting go of one hand by the Scots, and perhaps, well certainly in my opinion, make it a lot psychologically easier to let go of the other hand in due course.
I think the Scots are playing a short term waiting game, which is entirely sensible from the SNP view, as Westminster at present will not tell the truth about anything. They are happier constantly telling half truths, downright lies, and obfuscating, which denies the Scottish leadership the firm and fair platform they would need to do anything.
I'd imagine that sturgeon has some back door diplomacy ongoing with the eu. If she doesn't, she is very foolish, and she is no teresa may.

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 11:39AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So when will they throw this grenade? Is there anyone in Scotland even intimating this?
Has anyone in Westminster said it in relation to an Irish sea border?

Why would anyone in Westminister say anything in relation to an Irish sea border other than rule it out? I haven't heard a single MP sitting in Westminister argue for an Irish sea border, certainly not a significant one. Of course, the problem here is that those who might argue for an Irish sea border sit on their hands at home in Belfast.

As for Scotland, the SNP are still pushing for the UK to remain in the EEA

https://www.snp.org/letter_to_jeremy_corbyn_why_is_labour_supporting_the_tories_on_brexit

https://www.snp.org/statement_from_scottish_and_welsh_first_minister_protecting_devolution

"The Scottish Government is doing all we can to prevent an extreme Brexit, keep the UK in the Single Market and protect devolution"

https://www.snp.org/nicola_sturgeons_speech_to_the_snp_conference_2017

"Our message to the Westminster Tories is clear.
Hands off Scotland’s Parliament.
We do want Scotland to stay at the heart of Europe."

"As I have always said, Scotland should have the right to choose our future when the terms of Brexit are clear.

We have a mandate to give the people that choice."

It is hopelessly naive and typically fantastical dreaming of Northern Republicans to believe that Scotland - both Scottish Labour and the SNP -wouldn't ask for and receive the same arrangements as Northern Ireland if Northern Ireland got to stay in the Customs Union and Single Market.

FrancieBrady · 22-11-2017 12:07PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Why would anyone in Westminister say anything in relation to an Irish sea border other than rule it out? I haven't heard a single MP sitting in Westminister argue for an Irish sea border, certainly not a significant one. Of course, the problem here is that those who might argue for an Irish sea border sit on their hands at home in Belfast.

As for Scotland, the SNP are still pushing for the UK to remain in the EEA

https://www.snp.org/letter_to_jeremy_corbyn_why_is_labour_supporting_the_tories_on_brexit

https://www.snp.org/statement_from_scottish_and_welsh_first_minister_protecting_devolution

"The Scottish Government is doing all we can to prevent an extreme Brexit, keep the UK in the Single Market and protect devolution"

https://www.snp.org/nicola_sturgeons_speech_to_the_snp_conference_2017

"Our message to the Westminster Tories is clear.
Hands off Scotland’s Parliament.
We do want Scotland to stay at the heart of Europe."

"As I have always said, Scotland should have the right to choose our future when the terms of Brexit are clear.

We have a mandate to give the people that choice."

It is hopelessly naive and typically fantastical dreaming of Northern Republicans to believe that Scotland - both Scottish Labour and the SNP -wouldn't ask for and receive the same arrangements as Northern Ireland if Northern Ireland got to stay in the Customs Union and Single Market.

There is no visible demand from the Scots for an internal UK border to keep them in the EU.
I don't have a problem with them asking by the way, it would be just another signal of the fact that the UK is breaking up as we watch.

They can ask but what makes the Irish situation distinct in the eyes of the rest of the EU, is the GFA.

And we know the current Westminster position is NO to a sea border. But that is just a position. They also had a 'position' on the divorce bill which they have significantly changed.

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 12:09PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is no visible demand from the Scots for an internal UK border to keep them in the EU.
I don't have a problem with them asking by the way, it would be just another signal of the fact that the UK is breaking up as we watch.

They can ask but what makes the Irish situation distinct in the eyes of the rest of the EU, is the GFA.

And we know the current Westminster position is NO to a sea border. But that is just a position. They also had a 'position' on the divorce bill which they have significantly changed.

The Scots have repeatedly said that they want a referendum on the Brexit deal. What would a no to Brexit mean other than an internal UK border? If the North gets one, they will want one too.

Of course the EU have to use the GFA issue as a negotiating tactic to try and force the UK to stay in the CU and SM. However, if that doesn't work, Plan B, a hard border comes into play.

FrancieBrady · 22-11-2017 12:14PM

blanch152 wrote: »

The Scots have repeatedly said that they want a referendum on the Brexit deal. What would a no to Brexit mean other than an internal UK border? If the North gets one, they will want one too.

Of course the EU have to use the GFA issue as a negotiating tactic to try and force the UK to stay in the CU and SM. However, if that doesn't work, Plan B, a hard border comes into play.

The point you are refusing to grasp is that the Scots will be told NO, the Irish situation is different because of the GFA. And it is, as has been pointed out.

The Scots will have to wear Brexit and lobby/campaign for independence after it happens.

Zubeneschamali · 22-11-2017 12:18PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The point you are refusing to grasp is that the Scots will be told NO

This is the idea. They ask for the same terms as NI and get told NO.

Then they leave the UK and apply for membership of the EU.

zetalambda · 22-11-2017 12:23PM

RTE reporting that Dublin was 7th on the list of locations to relocate the EMA.
I'd imagine it's way down the list for most companies and organizations relocating due to Brexit. In fact, many probably won't even consider a move to Dublin.

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2017/1121/921794-dublin-ranked-7th-in-ema-location-list/

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 12:28PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The point you are refusing to grasp is that the Scots will be told NO, the Irish situation is different because of the GFA. And it is, as has been pointed out.

The Scots will have to wear Brexit and lobby/campaign for independence after it happens.

The Scots will be told no??? In what alternative reality do you live in where the May government, propped up by the DUP, brings in an internal border with NI, keeps the DUP support, tells the Scots to get lost and keeps power?

I know we have been through some strange and interesting times, but that sequence of events takes the biscuit.

If the republicans who dream of a sea border being the harbringer of a united Ireland were being smart, they would want Scotland to also have an internal border within the UK, as that would be less threatening to the unionists and have a better chance of convincing them to accept a sea border.

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 12:32PM

zetalambda wrote: »

RTE reporting that Dublin was 7th on the list of locations to relocate the EMA.
I'd imagine it's way down the list for most companies and organizations relocating due to Brexit. In fact, many probably won't even consider a move to Dublin.

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2017/1121/921794-dublin-ranked-7th-in-ema-location-list/

Ireland is 1% of the European Union.

To benefit disproportionately from Brexit, we therefore need to get more than 1% of the relocations from London. 10% of the relocations would be a fantastic achievement and would probably break the infrastructure in Dublin.

I would guess that finishing 7th on the list of locations would give a result more towards 10% than 1%.

FrancieBrady · 22-11-2017 12:34PM

blanch152 wrote: »

The Scots will be told no??? In what alternative reality do you live in where the May government, propped up by the DUP, brings in an internal border with NI, keeps the DUP support, tells the Scots to get lost and keeps power?

I know we have been through some strange and interesting times, but that sequence of events takes the biscuit.

If the republicans who dream of a sea border being the harbringer of a united Ireland were being smart, they would want Scotland to also have an internal border within the UK, as that would be less threatening to the unionists and have a better chance of convincing them to accept a sea border.

If you could for once leave the 'dreaming republican' rants out of it, and listen to what is being said.
The EU will not consider it, May and the Scots and the DUP can ask, but they will be told NO because it is the GFA that makes the Irish situation require a unique solution.

blanch152 · 22-11-2017 12:38PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you could for once leave the 'dreaming republican' rants out of it, and listen to what is being said.
The EU will not consider it, May and the Scots and the DUP can ask, but they will be told NO because it is the GFA that makes the Irish situation require a unique solution.

Sorry, do you have a link to a definite EU position paper on this?

You were repeatedly asking earlier who in Scotland was looking for it. I pointed you to the SNP website where they want a referendum on the Brexit outcome which implies a possibility to stay in the EU.

So now it is your turn to come up with an official EU position that says they will not consider it.

FrancieBrady · 22-11-2017 12:40PM

The signs of desperation as 'control' spirals away from Unionism are reaching new comedic scaremongering heights.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/offbeat/former-unionist-politician-says-donegal-should-leave-southern-urekand-1.3300847

Professor Moriarty · 22-11-2017 12:40PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Looks like we're losing the EU charter of Fundamental Rights:

https://twitter.com/jrmaidment/status/933093805678407682

Ordinary people vote in a party of elites. The party of elites deletes their charter of rights. Quelle surprise.

zetalambda · 22-11-2017 12:41PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Ireland is 1% of the European Union.

To benefit disproportionately from Brexit, we therefore need to get more than 1% of the relocations from London. 10% of the relocations would be a fantastic achievement and would probably break the infrastructure in Dublin.

I would guess that finishing 7th on the list of locations would give a result more towards 10% than 1%.

It's not the EU that's moving. We're about 50% the population of London from where the bulk of relocations are happening. I would argue that being 7th on any location list will get you 0%.

And being the only other english speaking country in the EU,you would expect the vast majority of relocations would have come our direction but it's the exact opposite.

FrancieBrady · 22-11-2017 12:46PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Sorry, do you have a link to a definite EU position paper on this?

You were repeatedly asking earlier who in Scotland was looking for it. I pointed you to the SNP website where they want a referendum on the Brexit outcome which implies a possibility to stay in the EU.

So now it is your turn to come up with an official EU position that says they will not consider it.

I gave my 'opinion' of what the EU would say, based on what has happened so far.

Why would a sea border make the Scottish request for a referendum any stronger?

It won't because the answer will be that the Irish situation is unique, which the rest of the EU have already stated again and again and which Westminister also recognise.

Zubeneschamali · 22-11-2017 12:48PM

zetalambda wrote: »

It's not the EU that's moving. We're about 50% the population of London from where the bulk of relocations are happening. I would argue that being 7th on any location list will get you 0%.

We lost the banking agency to Paris only on the toss of a coin after the two bids drew 13-13.

Leroy42 · 22-11-2017 01:48PM

Hammond said today that they have already 'invested' £700m in brexit preparations and he is putting aside £3bn for the next two years.

THat is just the tip of the costs, the cost of the legal and extra civil servants etc. It takes no account of the economic costs.

Round to £4bn. Jebus, think of what they could be doing with that money instead of spending it redrafting laws that are already there.

Also, growth estimates have been revised down. They are now:

2017 - 1.5%

2018 - 1.4%

2019 - 1.3%

2020 - 1.3%

2021 - 1.5%

2022 - 1.6%

It was 2.2% in 2015 and 1.8% in 2016.

Harika · 22-11-2017 01:54PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Hammond said today that they have already 'invested' £700m in brexit preparations and he is putting aside £3bn for the next two years.

THat is just the tip of the costs, the cost of the legal and extra civil servants etc. It takes no account of the economic costs.

Round to £4bn. Jebus, think of what they could be doing with that money instead of spending it redrafting laws that are already there.

That has to be taken in consideration when people dream of stopping Brexit. The EU also encountered some costs like listed above and they will ask Britain to pay.

demfad · 22-11-2017 02:00PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Hammond said today that they have already 'invested' £700m in brexit preparations and he is putting aside £3bn for the next two years.

THat is just the tip of the costs, the cost of the legal and extra civil servants etc. It takes no account of the economic costs.

Round to £4bn. Jebus, think of what they could be doing with that money instead of spending it redrafting laws that are already there.

Also, growth estimates have been revised down. They are now:

2017 - 1.5%

2018 - 1.4%

2019 - 1.3%

2020 - 1.3%

2021 - 1.5%

2022 - 1.6%

It was 2.2% in 2015 and 1.8% in 2016.

Apparently this is the first time in modern UK history that growth forecast has been under 2% every year over the forecast horizon.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments