Says the brexit pioneer who ran away from his EU membership.
I voted “No” in 1975 it is true, perhaps you should have done it then rather than 40 years too late. At least I had the courage of my convictions and did something about it rather than subject the younger generation to declining wealth and an uncertain economic future because of some fairy tale about claiming back sovereignty.
Forget the EU, other nations jumping on the Global bandwagon was the inevitable flick of the dominoes.
Nobody voted to join the EU Bruce.
The IMF have admitted they were lying yesterday and have revised their forecasts which put UK growth ahead of Germany and most other EU member states.
1 Like
I thought that you were 100% certain that the IMF forecasts were always wrong…
1 Like
Hi
The IMF where not lying, 2 economists are like 2 doctors, you end up with 3 different forecasts.
Everyone got Brexit Wrong.
We did not as a Country go immediately Bankrupt.
Cameron and Osbourne were wrong.
So where Boris and Co, we have not controlled immigration, it has got worse, neither have we made the £350 million a week to pour into the NHS.
Brexit has not worked from either side.
It could have done, but we should never underestimate the stupidity of our |Politicians.
1 Like
What about the “Retained EU Law Bill”? I have not found a source where any of those 800-4000 EU originated to-be-removed laws are mentioned or listed. It seems that they are only to be removed because of their EU origin.
JRM described it as merely a “tidying-up Bill”. Difficult to believe when you do not know which laws will be affected IMO.
Does anybody of you know which laws will be affected?
I’ve read that while there has been 600+ laws identified there is no definitive list and its likely that there are a few not known about at this stage. The known ones cover employment rules, workers rights & protections, environmental rules, competition rules, food standards, GM foods, and more. And the risk of bad replacement laws seems quite high as the replacement was planned to be done solely by ministers, that is, without parliamentary review. I never understood the burning need for this bill, so happy to see it punted into the long grass.
The hope now is that where a retained EU law needs to be re-addressed it can be done with normal parliamentary scrutiny and review. Stopping the Retained EU Law Bill is not the same as obliging the UK to adhere to the hereditary EU based laws for ever.
The Scottish Govt provides a good (if rather biased) overview:
They were they’ve had to correct them they can’t continue lying forever
1 Like
Thank you for that interesting link. Although there are many "could happen"s in the text my feeling tells me that exactly that will happen. If not, I would have trouble seeing the need for that bill in the first place.
On the other hand, it will take ages to replace all those laws with other ones, independent of wether they are better or worse than the current ones.
It is unlikely to expect “better” laws as the EU typically sets minimum standards and their members can very well improve the laws and set higher standards. The UK could have done that also but chose not to.
So is it time to say goodbye to workers rights?
2 Likes
Yup, losing workers rights has always been my fear over Brexit.
They’ll use the economy etc as an excuse, of course, but really losing the protection of EU law gives the Tories a golden ticket to do what they’ve always wanted to do and put the peasants in their place
Turkeys often vote for Christmas
1 Like
In that case it might be useful to have laws (already) which forbid people to protest, at least if the protest is “noisy” or “annoying”.
Well done tories…
1 Like
I understand. It must be hard to constantly live with two conclusions in your head. You are certain the IMF are fakers and form false & foundationless forecasts when the forecast is not to your liking. Then you are also certain that the IMF is an insightful and commendable operation when the forecast is much more to your liking. Your ability to pivot your thinking is remarkable.
1 Like
Something perhaps “under reported” (by which I mean ignored) by the tory press in the UK.
The large Chinese electric car maker is going to make a massive investment in a production facility in Europe. They plan to be making 800,000 cars a year in Europe by 2030. It’s likely to be France or Spain but Germany is also being considered. One place that is not being considered … guess. Another benefit, we don’t want them foreigners in the UK.
(Apologies for the pay-wall limit on the article shared, but you get the basic info.)
Exactly, the perfect stitch up
Pew, my French from school was just good enough to understand the article… I had Latin as second and French as third language.
Anyway, wow, the benefits are rolling in now. Let us start a list of them shall we?
I would have loved to hear Sunak defend this “benefit” in PMQs next week. However I am afraid that he will only be responding with his five promises to every question, like always.
Besides keeping those furriners out, you also do not have to take care for the river-dumping of all that toxic waste that comes along when producing batteries.
That sound like 2:0 (UK vs. China).
However, I bet the Tories will have a majority after the next GE.
Let us bet, shall we?
1 Like
Apologies, I should have given a rough translation. In short, the article says that the French are trying to secure the Chinese companies investment in a new factory. It is cited as the largest automotive investment in Europe in years. It also says that BYD is the second largest electric car maker behind Tesla. So a serious player and not a start up.
No apologies needed, all fine. On the page there is a translation to English (which I read second) but it was my personal challenge to figure out the text in French first 
.
That’s not what I told you.
I said IMF forecasts are always wrong -they are. They had to tell the truth when they couldn’t hide their BS anymore.
Meanwhile, in Germany, recession hits.
1 Like