Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[mongrel]

It won't go ad infinitum, by March next year a choice will need to be made. However if the UK does not have a firm plan by October, or if tMPs work over Christmas (unlikly) January, the Brexit project is doomed. One can't expect public servives to be ready to implement Brexit if they no idea what the policy is, and without a budget to pay for it.

[Copperknickers II]

It won't go ad infinitum, by March next year a choice will need to be made. However if the UK does not have a firm plan by October, or if tMPs work over Christmas (unlikly) January, the Brexit project is doomed. One can't expect public servives to be ready to implement Brexit if they no idea what the policy is, and without a budget to pay for it.

There's a 2 year transitional period so they don't have to implement anything drastic in March, in theory. The problem is the Hard Brexiteers want to see concrete change after March because they fear the transitional arrangement will become permanent if negotiations don't go well. They're prepared to threaten no-deal to avoid this. But the irony is the longer they obstruct, the more likely it is we get an initial deal which is very unfavourable to their position (which would be good for the rest of us, if not for the fact that the chance of no deal, which even they don't want, also increases, as well as the chance of the government collapsing).

[Dante Von Hespburg]

There is always time for one more vote or at least there is until the power structure is satisfied with the vote. This was May's problem and will be with her until she leaves government service as a Prime Minister. She had nothing to put forward for a new vote and she did feel an honest obligation to honor the vote. Politicians always want to kick the can down the road, but in this case the time for that ended with the Brexit vote.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ters-on-brexit


of course all opposed want another vote and yet another vote. Never ends. The longer this drags on, the more political opportunity there will be for mischief under the guise of fixing a previous vote. This Scottish party is simply being opportunistic with their scheduled rally.

The issue being taking this poll into account alongside most others of late:

https://news.sky.com/story/public-op...veals-11453220

This sky one is particularly damning- with most people from leave and remain keen on a second referendum with a choice between May's deal, No deal and Remain in the EU- and further down it seems that 'Remain in the EU' would now be the 'winning option' in such a referendum.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/07/04...t-going-badly/

This one is far more interesting though for me- For brexit going badly (Majority believe this)- 77% of Remain and 58% of Leave would blame the Conservative party. This is incredibly troubling for the party, and i think highlights both the points we all made earlier about brexit having no political capital- only pitfalls for any party who attempted it, but also my point that Conservative brexit supporting MP's have failed to even attempt to 'win' breixt post-referendum and convince the public of its benefits to turn it into a stable policy ideal. I know of only Reese-Moggs who has finally realized the necessity to try and bring round the general electorate to brexit and is iirc going to release his own white paper on Brexit- but its too little, too late. For two years the 'will of the people' speel was poorly used to shut down any actual debate surrounding brexit as a lazy call card for brexit supporting MP's across the house to feign an actual long-term legitimacy (The result was a poor thing to try and base legitimacy off in the first place). This was a monumental error, that essentially i think even if brexit happens- will see it killed off a few years after leaving as we rejoin (Which i feel would be incredibly bad as i doubt from a position of weakness we'll have anything remotely resembling our current advantages and influence in ensuring a two-tier Europe).

May though of course has a key part alongside the brexiteer MP's in the blame for this mess as she also extolled the same mantra of 'will of the people' and attempted to avoid scrutiny at all costs. However, i don't think mate this is as you suggest- simply MP's kicking the can down the road. I think this is a Conservative party who is acutely aware that far from Cameron's brexit referendum solidifying their party internally and fending off a UKIP attack to their voting core, what's it down is signed possibly the death knell for their party, or at best fractured it wide open. In this context May's incompetence can be more easily understood (Though don't get me wrong- Domestically the Conservatives have been well and truly a mess), but its a paralysis of not having a clear path to avoid taking a large electoral hit- even with brexit going 'well'- the fact that there was never a concerted effort to 'win over' remain voters in such a close election would mean the Conservatives would face electoral consequences- but given how things have proceeded (which again is very much of the governments making, though i do believe that any British political party having to do brexit would be 'screwed' by the time-scale of both the original referendum and the self-imposed limits surrounding the activation of article 50) the failure to reach across that divide in a serious way (instead of actively antagonize opponents instead of creating compromise) has led to this.

The SNP- of course their capitalizing on this, the issue being though that the public already have had enough. Its not the SNP creating the circumstances for mischief of a second vote on indy (EU or from the rUK) but its an electorate who the Conservatives have failed to compromise with regarding the manner of brexit (and here the hard brexiteers are very much to blame- trying to impose their vision over what is a plurality of differing opinions on 'how' and what shape the UK leaving the EU takes) and have further ostracized through a seeming contempt for transparency, but what i think actually has been in fairness- a party running scared and internally paralyzed over brexit and the impact it will have at the next GE potentially.

So its less 'kicking the can down the road'- more the Conservatives have royally messed up (and arguably did so from the start with the referendums timescale not allowing for any serious support base to bridge the polarized divide) and the public is now providing openings through rather consistent polling about the Governments progress on and indeed of brexit itself for opposition parties to tear chunks out of them.

The one saving grace is that Corbyn is also a polarizing figure. But a nightmare scenario would be his stepping down and almost any other replacement running on his policy platform (Which had widespread support from the British left and right)- that would make a bad situation into a nightmare electorally from which the Conservatives probably wouldn't recover- and the interesting thing about Labour is that their essentially 'don't ask, don't tell' policy regarding brexit wouldn't have much of an equivalent negative impact, as the time to make political hay of that has long passed with such a short time left to 'do brexit' (pending an extension to the negotiations of the transition of course). But the current time-frame politically does not suit any faction within the Conservatives in terms of keeping the opposition in its place. What might be interesting is to find data though on what a post-brexit landscape may look like, i'm equally intrigued and nervous on this as the FPTP framework doesn't lend itself easily to wild swings. However its likely we may see given that a significant minority of the Conservative base are more liberal than 'Traditional' Conservative- and likewise for Labour that a centrist party may gain support from both with a diminished Corbyn-Labour and a rump Conservatives. I've considered UKIP, but can't see given FPTP (PR a different story) how they would given the supports geographic spread and lack of big-time funding (A new centrist 'party' concept is said to have already secured potential backers and would probably attract a lot of big business funding) make any serious inroads that had a lasting effect. Another possibility of course is that the Conservatives manage to successfully re-brad (as their trying to with the new Home Sec's policy platform) as a 'wet' Conservative party once more- however that implies that not only can the taint of a poor brexit deal be brushed over (Moggs statements on rising foodbank use among working people for instance, combined with the recent scandal that the Tories have been telling the DWP to actively NOT record who is using a foodbank so they can continue to smudge the actual figures), but the past few years of domestic policy incompetence also be 'fixed'- a tall call i think.

Regardless of this spitballing though essentially Brexiteer MP's and the Government at large have squandered the referendum result through inaction and an unwillingness to compromise that has now seen the public shift to majority supporting a second referendum from both sides, that Remain will likely will win and thus has indeed galvanized their opponents to leap on this- the emphasis though is that its their own fault here for the electorate not being on-board with them in any meaningful numbers. To try and demonize opposition parties for exploiting the shift and the fact this is a mess of the Hard-brexiteer MP's own making (And it largely is given it is they who early on influenced May and have done nothing to bridge the referendum divides to ensure brexits long-term sustainability)- and i'd even argue, without the short-term bumps and opposition growing to brexit, it was rather doomed longer term due to this as there was no-way under the context they created (legitimacy resting on that vote) that it could have lasted beyond this government potentially, let alone 5-10 years down the line- in the case of a 'hard brexit' probably sooner as the electoral arithmetic kicks this Government out for one that would 'fix' the attendant economic difficulties (however harsh- my point here is that economically the UK domestically is already in dire straits, so you don't actually need any 'significant' economic impact to come from brexit to place blame on it politically) by rejoining/ 'going soft' a-la Norway.

[Daruwind]

Can I ask curious question? Looking from Czech Republic to me the current situation seems like May got the task to keep it going as long as possible. Progress seems to be little so in March there won´t be any final agreement maybe just some smaller parts. Which will be not enough for one political part and too much for other, what is the chance of falling into new election before of 2022? Basically anybody comming with "stay" campaign might rally a lot people and probablywin. (there is a lot marketing issues from brexit campaign that could be use to boost stay campaign...leaving was false advertisement, lies, look at some like Farange, general favour is turning probably...) But basically they have to wait long enough with such campaign, not start ahead. Start in right time...like once special election are announced.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Can I ask curious question? Looking from Czech Republic to me the current situation seems like May got the task to keep it going as long as possible. Progress seems to be little so in March there won´t be any final agreement maybe just some smaller parts. Which will be not enough for one political part and too much for other, what is the chance of falling into new election before of 2022? Basically anybody comming with "stay" campaign might rally a lot people and probablywin. (there is a lot marketing issues from brexit campaign that could be use to boost stay campaign...leaving was false advertisement, lies, look at some like Farange, general favour is turning probably...) But basically they have to wait long enough with such campaign, not start ahead. Start in right time...like once special election are announced.

Good questions honestly. The likelihood of a General Election before 2022 is a really mixed bag depending on which political commentator you ask. On the one hand- When Parliament gets off its break, there is a high possibility that May is dead in the water, the hard brexit faction of her party had made it clear they want the Chequers plan changed, or she goes. Likewise the 'softer brexit' faction feel her plan isn't pragmatically minded enough- not to mention the whole party and most of the Conservative associations do not want her leading them into another GE, as beyond brexit its easy to lose track of the fact she's an incredibly poor campaigner and has botched up domestic policy in a terrible way- most of it indeed being directly her fault from her time as Home Secretary.

If/When she's toppled a GE will follow shortly as a de facto minority government will need a mandate and also will want to try and shake the current 'zombie parliament' arithmetic.

However, the rather ironic fact is that the Conservatives have made numerous noises before about toppling her from both factions and nothing has ever came of it. This is partly because no candidate wanted to be tarred with being the one who 'did brexit' (As there is no political capital to be gained here- just a lot of blame from all sides in different ways- its essentially career suicide). On top of that though, if the hard brexiteers made good on their threat and tried to topple her, its likely she'd either survive it (as they're a very small minority within the Conservative party), or indeed a 'soft brexit' candidate would replace her (again due to the Conservative party arithmetic and the fact the 'hard brexiteers are not GE winnable- its also likely though a 'remain' candidate would not get in for the same reason, you need a party unifying candidate, and one who could unify the polarised electorate)- Ones to watch for this role are Gove, Hunt or Javid- all newly reformed 'centrsits' who have toned down their various remain or leaver leanings. However this would be terrible for the hard brexiteer faction, as all their influence thus far has stemmed from May adhering to them because she has very few political allies in her 'own' faction. Once they lost control of her (Which seems likely to have happened now), there is no regaining the initiative easily.

May herself of course would not call a GE i feel, simply due to how badly she did last time. She essentially single-handedly threw away a 20 point lead over Corbyn's Labour and currently most polls have Labour at 4 points ahead (and that's with the anti-semitism scandal and Labours incredibly poor PR...and its civil war over Corbyn)- so the Conservatives would be in true 'self destruct' mode if they willingly called an election/toppled May (As a GE would have to follow soon on its heels, at least currently their handling of brexit has the legitimacy that the public sorta chose them...but with a far diminished mandate to act on their own accord, something they frequently seem to forget). So i can't see the Conservatives toppling her for love nor money, essentially meaning her Chequers plan is the most likely outcome, unless it becomes a case of brexit over party (and in which case puts brexit at risk anyway)- but desperate people do desperate things.

A more likely scenario though than a GE and one that would essentially allow May to escape her very own created brexit-hell would be to 'play the May game'- earlier in the year she was adamant there would be no GE.... she came off her holiday and immediately called one. Likewise she has been adamant at no second referendum...but now she's on holiday.... So will be interesting if she does another famous U-turn . But that would potentially solve a lot of problems considering the polling- neither her plan, nor a hard-brexit are popular currently, so she could either throw her lot in with the 'softies' or just scrap the whole thing depending upon the mandate (Given the referendum would likely have 3 options on the model the public seems to want- no deal, May's Deal, or Remain). However this is also a gamble, as referendums can be very interesting things- there is i'd argue a high likelihood of a similar small majority response for either Remain or Leave (I don't think her plan will feature heavily honestly given the reaction of remainers and leavers to it) and once again your bang center stuck with the same legitimacy issues in the long term for remaining or leaving.

But yeah- A GE will happen if either May or the Hard-brexiteers get desperate and a leadership change happens. A second Referendum though is more likely, and even the brexit supporting MP's are coming around to the idea as a way of saving the party.

[Muizer]

Parliamentary elections cannot solve this I think. As you know, there have been general elections since the Brexit referendum. There were parties with clear remain and leave positions, but neither won. It seems it's not just politicians of the conflicted Conservative and Labour parties failing to put a viable Brexit strategy ahead pof party political interests. The electorate too apparently thinks Brexit can be realised in the margins of political business as usual. In that sense they're getting pretty much what they voted for.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Parliamentary elections cannot solve this I think. As you know, there have been general elections since the Brexit referendum. There were parties with clear remain and leave positions, but neither won. It seems it's not just politicians of the conflicted Conservative and Labour parties failing to put a viable Brexit strategy ahead pof party political interests. The electorate too apparently thinks Brexit can be realised in the margins of political business as usual. In that sense they're getting pretty much what they voted for.

These are fair points. I don't necessarily think a GE would 'solve' brexit- its probably likely to cause things to get bogged down further- more though that a GE would be a 'must' politically soon after a successful leadership Challenge to May. The interesting thing about the previous GE was that May was very keen to (due to an absence of domestic policy- hence the very rushed and quickly u-turned social care disaster) make it about 'Brexit', but Labour successfully dictated that the terms of the GE would be fought as you say here, primarily on domestic policy, where the Conservatives were weak, and Labour stronger in terms of being able to point out flaws and other a very different approach. The Conservatives were keen to use brexit to hide their own domestic inadequacy, but also as this is where Labour is weakest- as again they particularly at that point in time were actively trying to avoid having to come out with a position of their own that went beyond 'testing' the Conservatives vision for it. I think if there was to be another GE in the wake of a leadership challenge, it essentially, pending some amazing feat (which could happen) of the Conservatives getting a domestic agenda together that is seen as radical enough to look likely to 'fix' the UK's economic and generational outlooks for elderly and young people, we'd be looking at a similar thing happening and possibly a 'coalition' involving Labour and 'others' (In fairness a Lib-Labour coalition would actually be beneficial to Labour as it would give Corbyn's 'feared' radical agenda the restraints of a centrist party that would satisfy the concerns of most opponents in the business world). Essentially as last time though the Tories only hope would be to shift the GE to a 'brexit' footing..and now the real crisis is that this is no longer a 'winner' for them as it might have been at the last GE given the changes of attitude in the electorate- particularly on how the Conservatives have handled it. Hence i just can't see them being willing to topple May and then go into a GE unless a faction felt truly desperate/no alternative.

So spot on a GE wouldn't solve it, but it could be the last gamble of the Conservatives. Though the appeal it once had to 'get the party off the hook'- as the opposition was always going to be somewhat sheltered from any political fallout from brexit, yet now its too late for the Conservatives to seek that shelter, by essentially hurling themselves from power as they've sat and screwed up the last two years of it.

With that in mind, i do enjoy the pseudo-serious conspiracy theory that actually Theresa May was a political genius and was trying to save her party last GE by throwing the election and thus not having to do brexit... only to be stumped by her own genius with Corbyn being so divisive due to her successfully orchestrated political attacks .

So- my money is on a second referendum being pressured from all sides, as this is the 'safest' path for the Conservatives to navigate as it essentially passes the responsibility (and blame) from choosing the three remaining options from the Tories hands (where it will split the party) to the people, and i think while possible, its less likely you'll get a non-definitive answer- you may though get an answer for either Remain or Leave that still is not large enough to 'secure' either position in the political mid-term, with either side having a fair mandate to continue to agitate in the near future and build up to brexit/rejoining the EU again. But at this point, that's an election too far for the Tories, who probably won't win the next one at this rate, pending some miraculous domestic agenda (That essentially copies Labours nationalization plans, while putting a Tory spin on it...rather like they did last GE where they copied Millibands Labours manifesto with some suicidal additions (Like their unique take on social care)). So from there view i'm sure its ' NOMFuP' (for those who enjoy the 'Thick of it' ) for now potentially.

[Copperknickers II]

Can I ask curious question? Looking from Czech Republic to me the current situation seems like May got the task to keep it going as long as possible. Progress seems to be little so in March there won´t be any final agreement maybe just some smaller parts. Which will be not enough for one political part and too much for other, what is the chance of falling into new election before of 2022? Basically anybody comming with "stay" campaign might rally a lot people and probablywin. (there is a lot marketing issues from brexit campaign that could be use to boost stay campaign...leaving was false advertisement, lies, look at some like Farange, general favour is turning probably...) But basically they have to wait long enough with such campaign, not start ahead. Start in right time...like once special election are announced.

Dante answered these questions very well. I would point out some things, though:

1. The agreement that must be reached by March (actually it ideally needs to be October, in time for the EU to ratify it through its own internal processes) is not a 'final' agreement, it's a temporary agreement that will last only 2 years, during which the negotiations will take place for the final agreement. The problem is this transitional agreement may end up as permanent after that time, if negotiations stall. The Hard Brexiteers therefore are trying to make sure that at the end of March, we will at least have left the customs union and have control over our borders. May cannot easily agree to this though, as it would cause problems in Northern Ireland as well as in English ports as well as anger Remainers and moderate Brexiteers. If it looks like a transitional deal will not be agreed in time, there isn't really time for a new election or referendum nor is anyone likely to be willing to call one. What will happen is simply, a no-deal 'driving off the cliff' type scenario.

2. It's not unlikely that there will be upheavals next year, but probably not a new election. Probably simply a new leadership election. Under the fixed term parliament act there's no obligation to have a new election just because the party has a new leader. The problem is that the only party that could oppose the Tories, Labour, also have a euroskeptic leader, so he would be unlikely to run on a Remain platform. The Tories won't risk their already tenuous grip on power, Labour are a divided party and not likely to be capable of winning an election. I'd say another referendum is much more likely, and that may not come for nearly another 3 years when the final deal is on the table.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Dante answered these questions very well. I would point out some things, though:

1. The agreement that must be reached by March (actually it ideally needs to be October, in time for the EU to ratify it through its own internal processes) is not a 'final' agreement, it's a temporary agreement that will last only 2 years, during which the negotiations will take place for the final agreement. The problem is this transitional agreement may end up as permanent after that time, if negotiations stall. The Hard Brexiteers therefore are trying to make sure that at the end of March, we will at least have left the customs union and have control over our borders. May cannot easily agree to this though, as it would cause problems in Northern Ireland as well as in English ports as well as anger Remainers and moderate Brexiteers. If it looks like a transitional deal will not be agreed in time, there isn't really time for a new election or referendum nor is anyone likely to be willing to call one. What will happen is simply, a no-deal 'driving off the cliff' type scenario.

2. It's not unlikely that there will be upheavals next year, but probably not a new election. Probably simply a new leadership election. Under the fixed term parliament act there's no obligation to have a new election just because the party has a new leader. The problem is that the only party that could oppose the Tories, Labour, also have a euroskeptic leader, so he would be unlikely to run on a Remain platform. The Tories won't risk their already tenuous grip on power, Labour are a divided party and not likely to be capable of winning an election. I'd say another referendum is much more likely, and that may not come for another 3 years when the final deal is on the table.

All good points. Would rep if they allowed repping to be a true free market Your spot on about the fixed-term meaning that a GE following a successful leadership challenge isn't required. My thoughts are politically it'll be necessary as post-May the Conservative party, no matter who takes up the reigns will need the mandate to act, and the legitimacy to change platforms (As lets face it, i think few in Cabinet or the party at large share her opinion on brexit or domestic policy), while they could hold off for a few months indeed, the political pressure would mount to go to the public, and also more importantly to solidify control over the party for their vision, as it'll still be divided on domestic and foreign policy, particularly as the parliamentary arithmetic is dire for getting anything done currently. Its exactly what happened to May, except she went when she thought she had the knock-out potential due to the polling of Labour. I can't see the current Parliament sitting all the way to 2022 as its simply impossible to 'do' anything that actually needs to be done- for better or worse particularly as compromise seems to have left the political vocabulary for now.

But with you totally on the second referendum being the most likely escape route. I can't help though now you've put the timetable quite starkly into perspective feeling absolutely dejected that we're going to essentially force a collapsing domestic front into the background for almost half a decade at a point when serious reforms are needed now on issues ranging from private rentiers, a terrifyingly spiraling level of private debt due in no small part to the misapplicaiton of austerity and concentration on public finances, which given the brexit context and need for QE/State-led path finding investment even if the negotiations went really well to bring Britain's infrastructure and institutions up to scratch for a free global trade policy- was pointless, a widening wealth divide, cost of living crisis, stagnating wages, extreme profiteering, changing nature of taxation, re-nationalization to a degree or reform of public services such as train infastructure, energy and water, education planning, automation safety nets, pensions, social care, the sustainability of a National Health Service and mental health services and recognizing the changing nature of 'work' to name but a few are just simply getting to be batted down the road to a point where it may be too late for some of them to be seriously dealt with before the issue becomes charged. These are things that the staus-quo spin is barely containing at this point, let alone two years or more down the line. Its not just that there was no actual plan for brexit, its there is no actual plan currently for anything else either- the soundbites like 'Rents will be capped as will energy prices' manifesto commitment- dropped and things just left to carry on rotting. Money being used to 'eliminate rough sleeping'- being A) Stolen from other stretched budgets and B) the 'plan' to essentially allow for more private charity hostels doesn't even remotely tackle the causes of this economically- so the problem of a growing number of homeless people continues...its just now, fear not- we can't see them for some of the week in quite the same numbers. It epitomizes the attitude of this current government to every single aspect- providing the facade is good, we're 'aight.

Rant over .

[mongrel]

Best tweet this year

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[mongrel]

The Government released more than two dozen documents covering the state of play , if there is no deal. It seems to prove that the oft-used phrase no deal is better than a bad deal was a masssive fat lie, not that I was fooled that nonsense.


https://www.gov.uk/world/brexit-ireland


Anyway here are some of the highlights. I can't imagine that business, nor any reasonable private citizen will tolerate this. Prices would inevitably rise, with inflation comes interest rate rises, you get the drift. This after a decade of pay squeezes and many workers having to rely on food banks. If we don't find a solution, the Conservative Party as we know it is finished.


The cost of using a credit card to buy goods or services from an EU company is likely to rise.

UK-based payment service providers such as PayPal would lose direct access to the EU’s central payments structure.Customers could face increased costs and slower processing times for EU transactions.

UK businesses would need to register for a UK Economic Operator Registration and Identification Number and submitting import declarations to HM Revenue and Customs.
Businesses are advised to look into buying up warehouse space for goods awaiting customs approval.

Pharmaceutical companies are asked to ensure they have an additional six weeks supply of medicines in the UK - on top of their own normal stock levels.

UK farmers face a nine-month wait for approval to export organic goods to the EU.That is because logos on packaging would need to change, with UK producers being forced to drop the EU's organic food logo. Farmers would not be allowed to apply for this change until 30 March 2019. Crops can wait for that long.

Brits in the EU with a UK bank account may lose the ability to borrow money and in accessing certain insurance. -


UK expats in the EU could lose access to their pension income and other financial services.

Any parcel from abroad worth up to £135 will cost 20% more (VAT)

UK workers will no longer be able to join a European Works Council

New EU medicines will need will need further UK approval before they can be made available to patients.

Queues at Dover

Irish border, UK citizens are advised to ask the Irish government for advice. This is the point where a Father Jack-style rant is in order.

10,000 extra Civil servants will be required on top of 7,000 already recruited for Brexit, literally trading one bureaucracy for another .

Aparrently there is a sperm donor shortage, we rely on EU imports. Perhaps the UK could rely on the s who came up with this economically suicidal project.

[caratacus]

Oh, the "you cannot leave me or it will be economic suicide threat". It's the type of thing that was quite common in keeping abusive marriages together.

Government's July surplus at 18-year high
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45256075
The government's finances were in surplus by £2bn last month, the biggest surplus for July in 18 years, official figures show.
The figure was up from a surplus of £1bn a year ago. At the same time, borrowing in the April-to-July period fell to its lowest level since 2002.

Analysts said the reduction in borrowing should give Chancellor Philip Hammond extra money to play with in the Budget this autumn.
Borrowing for the financial year so far has reached £12.8bn, £8.5bn less than in the same period in 2017

UK exports at record high
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/u...at-record-high
Exports of UK goods and services rose to a record high of £620.2 billion in the year to March 2018 according to new trade figures released today.

Government's July surplus at 18-year high
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45256075

Now you would think with these kind of headlines the Government would be positively crowing.
And yet the project Fear propaganda continues to spin, even by our own Chancellor.

Brexit: Conservative anger at Philip Hammond's 'dodgy project fear'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45292025

And as for the opposition benches, their opinions on Brexit are truly deafening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGLHadex0B0

Britain is a great country Mongrel, in or outside the EU, even if there are parts of our government that don't believe it.

[Aexodus]

Looks like we were never going to be allowed to leave in good grace by the EU from the start.

I’m not so sure we would have joined in 73 knowing this is the treatment we get when we try to leave. As caratacus says, it’s an abusive relationship.

We’re leaving the EU, not barricading ourselves out and raising the drawbridge for pete’s sake.

Those points you raise mongrel could have been avoided by May.

[Copperknickers II]

Looks like we were never going to be allowed to leave in good grace by the EU from the start.

Blaming the EU is all well and good but it doesn't absolve the Brexiteers, everyone with any sense knew that leaving the EU would cause economic harm to the UK and damage our relationship with our neighbours. It could not have been any other way. If you believe you're in an abusive relationship then by all means end it, but don't complain when you find out that, shock horror, you can't actually then still live in the same house and continue to sleep with your partner. Leaving the relationship means leaving the relationship, how is it in the interests of the EU to allow the UK to keep all the benefits but avoid the disadvantages? You're in effect asking them to just do whatever the UK wants regardless of how detrimental it is to them.

[caratacus]

Blaming the EU is all well and good but it doesn't absolve the Brexiteers, everyone with any sense knew that leaving the EU would cause economic harm to the UK and damage our relationship with our neighbours. It could not have been any other way. If you believe you're in an abusive relationship then by all means end it, but don't complain when you find out that, shock horror, you can't actually then still live in the same house and continue to sleep with your partner. Leaving the relationship means leaving the relationship, how is it in the interests of the EU to allow the UK to keep all the benefits but avoid the disadvantages? You're in effect asking them to just do whatever the UK wants regardless of how detrimental it is to them.

Is Turkey an EU member?

Turkey and EU reset sights on improved customs deal
The odds of Turkey joining the bloc are long — a revised customs union is more likely
https://www.ft.com/content/29579bae-...e-ea0c2bf34a0b

"Turkey remains committed to seeking EU membership, for which it formally applied in 1987, some 24 years after it signed an association agreement with what was then the European Economic Community. Entry talks started in 2005 but were partially frozen one year later. Some EU governments are now in favour of a new form of partnership with Turkey rather than allowing it full membership.

If full EU membership is a receding objective, some European and Turkish policymakers nevertheless hold out the hope that the two sides can make progress on upgrading a customs union launched in 1995. The customs union propelled Turkey’s industrial modernisation and forged such close economic links that, by 2016, Turkey’s trade with the EU had increased fourfold and made the nation the fifth-largest exporter to the bloc.

"According to a Brookings Institution study published last August, an expansion of the customs union to cover trade in agricultural goods, services and government procurement would transform Turkey’s commercial relationship with the EU. Kemal Kirisci and Onur Bulbul, the authors, contended that “an upgraded customs union would help boost foreign direct investment and promote innovation in Turkey, while also helping Turkey adapt to the increasing digitalisation of the global economy”.

In principle there would be benefits for the EU, too. European companies would gain non-discriminatory access to the Turkish government’s procurement market and foreign providers would expand their presence in a liberalised Turkish services sector."

[Aexodus]

You're in effect asking them to just do whatever the UK wants regardless of how detrimental it is to them.

Everything mongrel mentioned would harm the EU as well, my issue is they seem to be okay with making an example of the UK at their own detriment when there’s a better alternative.

[Heathen Hammer]

Any negative outcome of Brexit vote is not electorate's fault (as British people were correct in choosing to leave the corrupt and subversive organization), but fault of incompetent and inept politicians like May. UK will need some kind of lustration program to get rid of the inept deadweight within its political elite.

[mongrel]

Oh, the "you cannot leave me or it will be economic suicide threat". It's the type of thing that was quite common in keeping abusive marriages together.

Empty slogans aren't going to help businesses or real living individuals who will be adversly affected in a significant way. A no-deal Brexit will make the ERM debacle look like a picnic. I will reserve judgment as to whether it will also rival the fiscal incompetence of the 70s.

Looks like we were never going to be allowed to leave in good grace by the EU from the start.

I’m not so sure we would have joined in 73 knowing this is the treatment we get when we try to leave. As caratacus says, it’s an abusive relationship.

We’re leaving the EU, not barricading ourselves out and raising the drawbridge for pete’s sake.

Those points you raise mongrel could have been avoided by May.

Time has elapsed and the consequences will now need to be addressed. I suggest you read the 24 documents released so far. I don't beleive that magic unicorns will pay VAT and tarrifs on our behalf, nor will they provide infrastructure the UK hasn't got. The only way this daft idea had a chance was if plans were in place before triggering Article 50.

Everything mongrel mentioned would harm the EU as well, my issue is they seem to be okay with making an example of the UK at their own detriment when there’s a better alternative.

The EU didn't trigger Article 50.How the UK deals with it's mistake is down to the UK Government

[Muizer]

We’re leaving the EU, not barricading ourselves out and raising the drawbridge for pete’s sake.

Actually that, aka a hard brexit, was the only thing on offer during the referendum. The negotiations are about what might come in the place of what you already gave up, not about what will be taken away from you. And yes, you're in a negotiation position, but that too was to be expected. No room for playing the victim. Not for politicians, nor for the electorate (except perhaps the ones who voted remain, but they're victims of their own countrymen).

[Aexodus]

We could have done things differently yes. The UK has a portion of the blame, yes. But Theresa May has been god-awful in these negotiations, our brexit secretary only had about an hour of talks, and Barnier has been a dip to us in general.

British voters have a right to feel betrayed.