Gransnet forums

News & politics

BREXIT: Planning for No Deal.

(298 Posts)
Urmstongran Sat 29-Dec-18 08:51:51

This morning in The Telegraph:
‘THE Government is failing to be frank with the public about the extent of no-deal preparations because it wants to shore up support for Theresa May’s “disastrous” Brexit deal, a civil servant says today.
The official, who is involved in drawing up contingency plans, writes in The Daily Telegraph that claims Britain will “crash out” in the event of a no-deal Brexit are “absolutely untrue”.
Describing the claims as “Project Fear Mark III”, the civil servant says “very detailed plans” have been made and are now being executed to ensure that a cliff-edge Brexit is “simply not going to be an option”. The official writes: “If the Government was to be frank with Parliament and the country, what justification would be left for its disastrous Withdrawal Agreement?
‘What would Remainers do without Project Fear? They would need… convincing positive arguments’
“What would Remainers do without a Project Fear? They would need to think up convincing positive arguments for staying in the EU, something that has so far proved beyond them.”’

GabriellaG54 Fri 25-Jan-19 23:28:20

Nah...count me out varian
Why do you want to persuade me to think differently?
I can do my own research if I'm so inclined (which I'm not) and frankly m'dear, I don't give a damn.
I and my 5 offspring plus their wives/husbands and children are all LEAVERS. All bar 1 are in jobs/professions which will not be affected in the slightest. One is at college so no problem there anyway.
Thanks for being concerned but you may have better luck offering the links to some of the undecided out there.
Que sera sera.
No matter what you, I or the masses think about staying or leaving, right now it's out of our hands.
I have better and more enjoyable things to think about and the subject has become boring.
Have a great weekend. smile

Jalima1108 Fri 25-Jan-19 23:42:18

Maizieit was not the content which was supposed to provide the clarity, rather it was that a poster asked a question and you gave a different answer. I was trying to provide the correct answer to the question, rather than what I would term a 'politician's answer'.

MaizieD Sat 26-Jan-19 10:01:06

Oh, I see, Jalima.

So I was right. The key issue wasn't what the SVP was saying about the effect of 'no deal' on Airbuses commercial decisions (which was just what the CEO said). The key issue was that the government put them up to it. As the two execs said much the same thing and the govt. 'prompting' was the only difference I can see that that was much more significant than the rest of the message..
Thanks for making this crystal clear.

Nonnie Sat 26-Jan-19 10:45:25

Maizie of course the gagging order are about the consequences of a no deal. My point is that they are only for the companies on government contracts and are probably a routing part of such contracts. Non-government contract companies have not had gagging orders inflicted upon them.

GG I disagree it is not out of the electorates control. If the electorate sends a clear enough message our government should listen. To paraphrase a saying attributed to various people all it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing

MaizieD Sat 26-Jan-19 11:37:14

Got it (re the gagging orders), nonnie grin

Jalima1108 Sat 26-Jan-19 11:52:07

Can we only send a clear message is we vote though Nonnie
Otherwise does anyone listen?

What you say about the contracts is true - as far as I know it's a routine part of these government contracts.

Jalima1108 Sat 26-Jan-19 11:52:18

if not is

Nonnie Sat 26-Jan-19 12:04:47

Jalima I have written to my MP and know others who have too. It was worth a try but he is so sycophantic that he didn't take any notice. Maybe some MPs would listen? I really cannot understand why they think it would be undemocratic to allow the people to decide. It is the only democratic way out of this mess!

I really hope some MPs are reading gn!!!

Jalima1108 Sat 26-Jan-19 13:01:16

Mine is a staunch Brexiteer.

GrannyGravy13 Sat 26-Jan-19 13:06:49

Nonnie we have a fixed term parliament, unless the government is "brought down" which even amongst this mess is hardly unlikely, we have several years before the next election.

As for a "people's vote" which is just a stupid name for a 2nd referendum, I really cannot see that happening.

So things are out of the electorates hands at this moment.

Nonnie Sun 27-Jan-19 11:27:12

GG I disagree, a different referendum would not be a second vote it would be very different from the previous one which, for all the reasons we both know, should be null and void. As we keep hearing that 'no one wants a no deal' the questions on the paper would be to accept the deal offered or to stay in the EU. Very simple and although there would still be lies it would be much easier to challenge them based on facts. In the first one we were told it would be easy to get a good deal and that the EU needed us more than we need them. Those and many other claims have been proved false. As I keep saying, what have Leavers got to lose from a new vote? Would love someone to answer, they haven't so far.

GrannyGravy13 Sun 27-Jan-19 11:40:19

1. Remain

2. TM's deal

3. Leave no deal

All above should be on the ballot paper, if the H of C decides on another referendum.

Nonnie Sun 27-Jan-19 11:56:52

Maybe the third option but if a huge number of MPs, not just a simple majority, were to say that leaving with no deal was a very bad idea I wouldn't want it to be there. We have to believe they know more than we do even though they don't give us any such evidence!

Urmstongran Sun 27-Jan-19 11:57:30

Oh no GrannyGravy13! 2 choices for us Leavers wouldn’t be fair. It would split the vote giving full steam ahead for the Remainers! Plus everyone has already said TM’s deal is a dead duck.
I’d be happy to vote for Remain or WTO.
My big concern is, as I’ve said before, we shouldn’t be asking a question (again) if we don’t know the answer!
What if the result ended at 50/50 split? It could happen &then we’d be in the doo doo.

GrannyGravy13 Sun 27-Jan-19 12:01:13

I see your point Urmstongran, I just keep forgetting that TM's deal is meant to be "leave"!

MarthaBeck Sun 27-Jan-19 12:26:16

Simple question, older people are suppose to have swung the vote to leave, whether that is true or not I question by the view. I read in these columns. What I do know for certain is that the views of the over 60 club I go to have changed since the referendum with more asking about the uncertain future we are creating for our grandchildren. Why are we putting them at unnecessary risk ?

varian Sun 27-Jan-19 13:41:36

I have noticed amongst the older people I know, it seems to be the ones without grandchildren who were most likely to vote leave and their views are quite entrenched.

They tend to read either the Telegraph or the Daily Mail and look backwards rather than forwards.

GrannyGravy13 Sun 27-Jan-19 13:48:51

I do not read The Telegraph, Daily Mail or any tabloids.

I have Grandchildren, I was going to vote remain, but our 5 adult children and partners (not including DIL not allowed to vote) all voted leave and won me round with their argument that I was voting for their future!!!

Nandalot Sun 27-Jan-19 13:59:37

Nonnie, Grannygravy surely TM managed to hold an election before the fixed term was up?

GrannyGravy13 Sun 27-Jan-19 14:04:09

Yes she did, not sure how, other than something to do with the fact that their had been a change of PM due to David Cameron's resignation.

Hopefully some GN who is more enlightened can confirm / prove otherwise that this was the case?

GrannyGravy13 Sun 27-Jan-19 14:04:42

Oops there not their, apologise.

varian Mon 28-Jan-19 15:00:52

The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.

The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

“No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule: 20 over goods and three over services.

To make it more complicated, there are no “default terms” Britain can crash out on, Howard said, while at the same time, the UK has been blocked by WTO members from simply relying on the EU’s “schedule” – its existing tariffs and tariff-free trade quotas.

The second hurdle is the sheer volume of domestic legislation that would need to be passed before being able to trade under WTO rules: there are nine statutes and 600 statutory instruments that would need to be adopted.

The government cannot simply cut and paste the 120,000 EU statutes into UK law and then make changes to them gradually, Howard said. “The UK will need to set up new enforcement bodies and transfer new powers to regulators to create our own domestic regimes,” she said.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/27/uk-cannot-simply-trade-on-wto-terms-after-no-deal-brexit-say-experts