advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... XV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Our local Sainsbury’s have started putting cardboard fillers on the empty shelves, with kind of pictures of bottles and cartons on them, to fill the empty spaces.

This will allow the blinkered and demented to keep their heads firmly in the sand and continue to claim: “Rubbish, I haven’t seen a single empty shelf!”
 
KrisW said:
Again: A little over five years and six months passed from the date the Referendum Act was passed in 2015 to point where the first terms of the Withdrawal agreement took effect. (2026 days)

For Brexiter-friendly context, that’s the same timespan as from the Invasion of Poland on September 1. 1939 to well into the muster for the D-Day landings (to March 19th 1945, if you want precision). You think it’s perfectly okay that, in the time it took to plan and win a war, the UK government couldn’t put together a simple business-support and communications policy?

Your argument requires me to believe that the British are, to the last person, stupid and incompetent. Maybe you can believe that, but I can’t, and that’s why it’s a bullshit claim.

@tonerei - I’d like to see Labour put it out ahead of the next election that it is open to coalition with the Liberal Democrats... even as a junior partner; there are seats that Labour can never win from the Tories (like this one) that would flip to LibDem if Labour’s voters knew ahead of time that a LibDem MP would be in government with Labour. And I hope that the LibDem’s coalition price is the introduction of a proportional voting system.
Click to expand...
Explain ‘Brexiter-friendly context’.

Why do you make stuff up? Show where I said I think it’s perfectly ok( see bold ).

Your argument ignores there was not even a majority for leave in the UK parliament, let alone in govt. You appear to have no understanding of the uncertainty caused by the efforts to overturn a democratic referendum.

Again. What do you think business leaders were referring to when complaining not about a lack of planning, but about uncertainty over whether brexit would even happen and what it would be?
 
Joe Hutch said:
There's such a thing as scenario planning, which should always include a 'worst case' outcome. Even if the pre-Boris Tory administration didn't want anything like a no-deal outcome, they ought to have given some thought to what the consequences would be if one emerged after negotiations. If they didn't, they can't argue that there wasn't time. It was an abdication of responsibility and/or gross negligence.
Click to expand...
There is no ‘even if’ about it, May supported remain and her efforts were almost entirely aimed at getting a remain deal accepted while pretending it was a leave deal. It was never going to happen, so she was booted. Why on earth do you think she was removed?

‘Given some thought’ does not constitute 5 years of planning, which is specifically what is being ‘discussed’. :rolleyes:

I have no problem accepting there was an abdication of responsibility, that accusation can be aimed at many and for quite a long time.
 
When I did scenario planning it wasn’t just ‘giving some thought to’, it was looking at what would be the consequences if X or Y happened, and the likely costs of such consequences. However the Tories’ idea of planning seems to boil down to bluster, denial and wishful thinking.

May was dumped because she called a totally unnecessary General Election in which the Tories lost shedloads of seats.
 
Graham B said:
Our local Sainsbury’s have started putting cardboard fillers on the empty shelves, with kind of pictures of bottles and cartons on them, to fill the empty spaces.

This will allow the blinkered and demented to keep their heads firmly in the sand and continue to claim: “Rubbish, I haven’t seen a single empty shelf!”
Click to expand...
It’s like something out of Pyongyang- putting painted pictures of food on shelves when the western media are invited in.
 
Joe Hutch said:
When I did scenario planning it wasn’t just ‘giving some thought to’, it was looking at what would be the consequences if X or Y happened, and the likely costs of such consequences. However the Tories’ idea of planning seems to boil down to bluster, denial and wishful thinking.

May was dumped because she called a totally unnecessary General Election in which the Tories lost shedloads of seats.
Click to expand...
And that’s mirrored in their voters and Brexit supporters even to the extent that someone who normally comes across as financially astute, posted that business investment was at a record high in this country. It’s desperate.
 
Joe Hutch said:
When I did scenario planning it wasn’t just ‘giving some thought to’, it was looking at what would be the consequences if X or Y happened, and the likely costs of such consequences. However the Tories’ idea of planning seems to boil down to bluster, denial and wishful thinking.

May was dumped because she called a totally unnecessary General Election in which the Tories lost shedloads of seats.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm sure it was but I was replying to where you said "they ought to have given some thought to what the consequences would be".

I agree with you on the tories idea of planning, but that isn't what is being discussed. The point arose from the often repeated comment there was a full 5 years for brexit planning, suggesting leaving the EU was accepted across the board immediately after the referendum which it most certainly was not.

I know you people will argue to the end of time against anything that might suggest even the slightest grain of responsibility rests on the undemocratic actions of hard remainers, so let's just leave it at that, eh.
 
@Brian “Brexiter-friendly” shouldn’t be offensive to you, as you have never said you voted to leave, and I have never accused you of doing so. It’s a mild poke at the tendency of the Faragists to frame all of the UK’s dealings with Europe in terms of the Second World War.

Brian said:
Why do you make stuff up? Show where I said I think it’s perfectly ok( see bold )?
Click to expand...
I don’t make anything up. That was a question I was asking you: do you? (that’s what the question-mark at the end of the sentence was for). I asked because you seem to make a hell of a lot of implausible excuses for something that you actually think is a problem.

Your argument ignores there was not even a majority for leave in the UK parliament, let alone in govt. You appear to have no understanding of the uncertainty caused by the efforts to overturn a democratic referendum.
Click to expand...
You again miss the point: the government did nothing to prepare businesses for what could happen. Uncertainty is not an excuse for inaction. It is literally the job of government to plan for uncertainty - why else is there a Ministry of Defence with a standing army?

Brexit was always going to be disruptive: even those who claimed it would be of long-term benefit said there would be difficulties to begin with. Then they provided no information or assistance to businesses to help them plan for those difficulties.

“Five years of planning” for Brexit is what everyone else who traded with the UK did - it’s amazing to believe that the UK failed so abjectly to do the same. Your excuses for this inaction do not wash. The best fit for the known facts is the theory the planning was suppressed because their findings would show just how great an economic folly the government was embarking on. I know, for a fact, that at least one department was told not to do any contingency planning before the Brexit vote, despite being responsible for the most affected function (cross-border trade). Told not to.
 
Joe Hutch said:
I’m just surprised that you continue to blame ‘remainers’ for the shitshow that is Brexit. As the farmers of Shropshire are finding out, leave voters were sold a pup.
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised. Wonder how did these so called hard remainers control the whole civil service and prevent them from doing their jobs? Don't expect a coagent response to that from the barn door. Just more hot air and a leave it at that.

Never seen a Labour supporter expend so much energy defending the Tories. Priceless.
 
Joe Hutch said:
I’m just surprised that you continue to blame ‘remainers’ for the shitshow that is Brexit. As the farmers of Shropshire are finding out, leave voters were sold a pup.
Click to expand...
But I’m not doing that. All I’m doing is saying hard remainers ( not the same as remainers ) have some responsibility. There are others. People here continue to deny any responsibility for hard remainers and for obvious reasons.

I’ve listed before what I see as the groups with some responsibility, I won’t repeat it because although acceptable for some to repeat themselves day after day, it is not acceptable for me. ;)

By the way, I have to tell you I know a farmer in Shropshire and he doesn’t complain about brexit. It’s only one person though, nobody else talks about it.
 
KrisW said:
@Brian “Brexiter-friendly” shouldn’t be offensive to you, as you have never said you voted to leave, and I have never accused you of doing so. It’s a mild poke at the tendency of the Faragists to frame all of the UK’s dealings with Europe in terms of the Second World War.


I don’t make anything up. That was a question I was asking you: do you? (that’s what the question-mark at the end of the sentence was for). I asked because you seem to make a hell of a lot of implausible excuses for something that you actually think is a problem.


You again miss the point: the government did nothing to prepare businesses for what could happen. Uncertainty is not an excuse for inaction. It is literally the job of government to plan for uncertainty - why else is there a Ministry of Defence with a standing army?

Brexit was always going to be disruptive: even those who claimed it would be of long-term benefit said there would be difficulties to begin with. Then they provided no information or assistance to businesses to help them plan for those difficulties.

“Five years of planning” for Brexit is what everyone else who traded with the UK did - it’s amazing to believe that the UK failed so abjectly to do the same. Your excuses for this inaction do not wash. The best fit for the known facts is the theory the planning was suppressed because their findings would show just how great an economic folly the government was embarking on. I know, for a fact, that at least one department was told not to do any contingency planning before the Brexit vote, despite being responsible for the most affected function (cross-border trade). Told not to.
Click to expand...
Whatever.

Keep your sarcasm.
 
Tough. They can say what they like there is no benefit. We are worse off and in a worse position. If they egg can’t see that, then like their messiah Johnson, they are liars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top