Urmstongran and Kandinsky, you mean THIS Lord Frost, who in June 2016 knew very well the dangers of Brexit, and was 100% remainer.
DAVID FROST, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE SCOTCH WHISKY ASSOCIATION
‘As an industry we live on our exports. Scotch whisky is the biggest single contributor to Britain’s trade balance in goods. Ninety percent of our production – £4bn a year – is exported. About a third of that goes to the EU. The single set of rules in the single market makes it easier for us to operate across all of Europe.
‘Outside Europe, when we export, we face all kinds of barriers: high tariffs, like the 150% tariff in India; discriminatory taxes; burdensome licensing; or complex labelling rules. The EU helps us secure fairer access to those markets. For example, the free trade deals with Korea and Vietnam will cut the tariff on Scotch to zero.
‘The EU also helps us protect the term “Scotch whisky”. European rules make it illegal to misuse the term within the EU, and help us chase down those unfairly taking advantage of our reputation by embedding it in free trade deals.
‘Of course, many point out – rightly – that we would still trade with the EU without being a member of it. And it is true that Scotch whisky’s existence does not depend on the EU – but, without it, life would be much more complex, burdensome and uncertain.
‘Exports to the EU would face additional paperwork and other border formalities. We would find it much harder to influence EU rules that affected the Scotch whisky industry. And Scotch whisky would no longer be covered by European free trade deals, so tariffs could go up.
‘In short, we have nothing to gain, and a lot to lose, from Britain having the status of Norway, Switzerland or Canada, the models pushed by the proponents of Brexit, still less from relying on WTO rules only.
‘For all the EU’s frustrations, it makes production easier, paperwork simpler and competition stronger – and hence prices cheaper. Let’s not turn our back on the world's greatest free trade area, on our own doorstep: instead, let’s make it work.’''
Johnson and Frost knew EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE SIGNING - every word - and they knew exactly what the consequences would be. But they signed it. Why did they do that? Are you saying they planned all along to tear it up. If so, how can it possibly be justified.
If France signed a Treaty that would mean a border had to be put between Europe and Corsica- do you think they would have signed it? How do you believe the EU 'annexed' anything, anywhere.
I have tried to be polite and debate, with evidence and without getting angry- and it has been hard, I must say.
But surely, at this stage, if you are calling for triggering article 16, that will show to the world that the UK's word cannot ever be trusted again- and that will get the EU to raise all their shields in unison- then you must be utterly mad.
The UK is an Island surrounded by the EU- nothing can come in, or out, without the EU blocking it. And we are massively dependent on the utilities and services the UK has, quite freely, sold on to them. And for labour too for the jobs the UK people don't want to do, or can't do, furlough or not. Would you want your unemployed grand-daughter to go and work in an abattoir? It is not for the faint hearted, for sure, and highly skilled and dangerous.
Completely and utterly MAD.