jam25mack

I'm not so sure. Even if they are (and they were generally UK standards and regulations to start with pre-buggerisation) at least we will have the freedom to modify as required back to something more workable.

scrubbedexpat141

What would be more workable though? Has the UK descended into anarchy because of EU red tape or is that just hearsay and propaganda?

Sort of rhetorical questions, because I'm just playing devil's helmet, but I don't think the EU regs / rules will be stripped away willy nilly.

jam25mack

Some will, some won't....... Some suit the EU but don't suit the UK. It's all relative. It's not like it's going to happen overnight though. I think it will have quite an impact on the construction industry though.

Millhouse

Anyone who thinks brexit or remain will solve some the deep structural issues (i.e lack of housing, opportunity, poor productivity, declining services etc.) in the UK is very naive.

littlejimmy

Don't see anyone arguing that, more like which situation would leave the UK best placed to address those issues, but then you'd need a fundamental change in government policy as well. Brexit may leave us as nothing more than a corporate tax haven where most of the infrastructure is owned by foreign companies. Or it could turn us into the land of milk and honey. I know which one I think will happen, but I guess the proof will be in the pudding. Think I might come back to the ME for a few years until it all settles down...

Arnold S

Your first outcome is inevitable. There was an amusing line the other day "David Davis, a Chief Negotiator who looks like he'd end up paying full price on a DFS sofa".

Personally, I don't think those steering this ship are particularly inept. As you said there has to be a change in government policy and that's not going to happen while they're on the books of these corporations.

Even bigger mansions in the shires for them, Virgin hospitals and McSchools for us when we go back.

uk_grenada

Dont assume SOME privatisation of health is a bad thing.

I worked at one stage for - The commissioners of services [one ivory tiwer per town, called a clinical commissioning group - ccg] they are career civil servants driven by groups of gp's but influenced by national policies.

They have for sone years been farming out some operations in some areas to private concerns, and saving a lot of dosh while improving outcomes [we can all relate to that.]. So long as its selective its a good thing. One of the biggest problems is ideology. Dear granny smith, can we do your hip in thailand, give you 2 weeks after in a 5 star and fly you back? Half the world would want to burn her and the nhs at the stake for doing it BUT ITS CHEAPER AND THE OUTCOME IS THE SAME... Similarly belgium has been on offer in sussex.

I have huge faith in the nhs getting 90% of it right. People run round like headless chickens because 10% costs 20 billion a year...

captainflack

Here is my 2 euro cents.

The problem is not 5 or 10 years in the future. The problem is March 2019. The UK triggered article 50, so unless anything else happens, it's hard brexit in March 2019.

The UK does not have anywhere near enough port capacity to process EU trade with customs, etc. under WTO rules. The present customs system they are implementing took some 8 years. They have about 18 months to expand the ports to handle several times the amount of trade. Hire a bunch of staff. Bulldoze a load of brexitter's houses around Dover and some east anglian ports. And then train all the UK companies that presently ship stuff all across Europe with hardly any paperwork how to export stuff. And this is even assuming they can trade under WTO rules, as it only takes one member to raise an objection (Argentina, or any EU country) and that's years more negotiations.

But the UK is doing nothing to actually expand port capacity, so it's betting the farm on a deal, that's obvious.

They've fooked it up and they know it. Brexit, hard brexit needs 10 years of preparation. They should have held fire on article 50 and just got on with building the ports etc. so they'd be ready when they fired the cannon. But they were too worried it might be cancelled, so they went and fired the first shot and committed the UK. That handed all the power to the EU.

What they've committed it to is economic suicide unless they get a transitional deal from the EU. It's not about what new fancy trade deal they might get in the future 5 or 10 years, it's about a collapse in trade akin to an economic blockade in 2019 that will bring the economy to its knees in days.

The EU would have to process more customs too, but the UK exports less tangible goods, more services. And the EU is far bigger, so Rotterdam and other ports have capacity to cope. Like almost everything, it will be negative for them too, but only a fraction as much.

Both the EU and the UK know this. It seems the UK's plan is to try to convince the EU that it is mad enough to play chicken in a mini vs a juggernaut, and would rather destroy itself than cave in.

I very much doubt the EU is likely to chicken out. Ultimately, they know that whatever damage it causes them, it will cause 5 times as much to the UK. There is nothing the UK can do now except try to get the best terms it can just to kick the can down the road, otherwise it's curtains.

captainflack

If British women have children, those will take 18+ years to enter the workforce, and require a whole bunch of money to educate and support while they're contributing nothing.

Immigration solves this, by bringing in people of working age, so the benefit is immediate.

It's true those people will eventually grow old too, but the UK is finally doing what it should have started doing 50 years ago, and edged the retirement age up. Because the demographic time bomb is hardly a surprise, the boomers have been there ageing for 60 odd years. The UK needs both, immigration to solve the immediate problems, and a longer term plan of raising the retirement age to balance the number of pensioners against the working population at a level that won't cripple the workforce with unsustainable taxes.

The UK has done spectacularly well out of immigration economically. And the EU immigration in particular has come with fewer of the integration problems that other immigration has led to. Highly doubt there are going to be second generation Poles or Bulgarians blowing themselves up on tube trains.

Miss Ann Thrope

This all just brings it back to where the f@@k was the hapless Remain campaign? Why was it so impossible to coherently articulate the factual and emotional case for the UK being at the heart of Europe? Just a little better job on making the case would have sufficed. But they were useless...

The citizens of the rest of Europe, while they may not be happy with some of the EU institutions (nor with their own governments, surprise surprise), are still able to recognise that rearranging the furniture is not best accomplished by burning down the house.

Arnold S

1 - Leave had huge amounts of funding, largely from people who will clean up once the distress sale begins.

2 - Sharon law and the boarders is an easier message to get across than seaport capacities.

uk_grenada

Oh dear, do a little research before dribbling here, the Thames gateway port and free area is currently being doubled in size, not because we need more red tape. Its because our trade is growing and logistics ops are getting smarter.

Who is Sharon, I assume she runs a boarding house?

captainflack

I think the problem is that if you cast your mind back to the campaign, hardly anyone on the 'leave' side suggested that the UK would leave the single market and customs union. They sold the position that the EU would continue to grant the UK membership of those, but let it opt out of freedom of movement and make its own trade deals.

Even Farage repeatedly used Switzerland and Norway as examples of successful European countries outside the EU, but both are in the single market and hence have freedom of movement. This was often pointed out by remainers, but brexitters never quite seemed to get it and many still don't.

The model the UK is aiming for isn't Switzerland or Norway now, it's Albania. Things aren't really so great over there.

But I am firm believer that brexit has to happen. It's going to be like Suez, a national humiliation. But it's the only thing that will put this nonsense to bed. It won't take nearly as long as many people think to answer the question. It really is a cliff edge, and if the UK stumbles over it without a deal, things will move very quickly. The country won't have 5 or 10 years of Foxy going around signing deals, it will be in crisis in days.

captainflack

The issue is not the port capacity. The goods need to come into the UK regardless of whether the UK is in or out of the EU if trade is to stay the same or increase moderately.

The issue is with customs. Presently the vast majority of trade is with the EU, hence no customs. After brexit, the number of customs checks at Dover and elsewhere is expected to go from 60m a year to 300m. There will need to be a similar increase in the capacity of customs systems to handle this, that means more space for storage of goods in customs, more officers, more training, upgraded computer systems, etc.

Of course, the UK could just decide to wave things through without any customs checks for the several years it will take to put systems in place. But the EU will be busy trousering tariffs on everything the UK ships there, 40% on beef, etc. So I very much doubt brexitters will be happy about waving EU imports through willy nilly.

Moses2013

With no border here in Ireland, you can just ship to Belfast, relabel and drive to Dublin to avoid tax. Another reason why both countries don't want a border and already plenty of business ideas in place.