You don’t understand the point. The time to plan was actually before the plebiscite; the time to brief business on the possible outcomes was right afterwards. Level with them, warn them of the worst, so that they could make contingency plans. That’s how we dealt with it over here. Fear of the known is much less paralysing than fear of the unknown.When a lot of that time was wasted by diversion it’s bullshit to say there was 5 years to prepare. There would have been 5 years if everyone had accepted the outcome of the referendum and govt + business had planned for it from there. We had 2 GE’s during that 5 years when we could have ended up with a different govt! It’s not even a controversial point, it’s so obvious.
What do you think business leaders meant when they were complaining about a lack of certainty over whether brexit would happen, whether it would be a hard brexit, a soft brexit or any other kind of brexit? In what way was there genuinely 5 full years to prepare properly?
I am already aware of what you say and I agree.Brian there is a saying “Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics” Brexit didn’t really have an objective, except a barely hidden one to allow the spivs to hide their money offshore which is why it is such a fvcking road crash, leave didn’t know what they were voting for and had even less of a clue what to do when it happened.
No, you don’t understand the point.You don’t understand the point. The time to plan was actually before the plebiscite; the time to brief business on the possible outcomes was right afterwards. Level with them, warn them of the worst, so that they could make contingency plans. That’s how we dealt with it over here. Fear of the known is much less paralysing than fear of the unknown.
So what if governments changed. The job of the civil service would still have been to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Let’s say six months, or four years, had been spent with businesses to prepare for a no-deal Brexit, but miraculously government had changed, sense had prevailed, and the UK ended up in more of an EFTA-type Brexit-lite arrangement (what I personally believe would have best reflected the voter’s actual intentions, but that train departed a long time ago...). Having that happen would be a lot better outcome than what actually happened: five years of stonewall and diversion then a snap hard-Brexit that still hasn’t played out fully yet. In the grown-up world, you don’t help people by lying about bad news.
I feel the reason that business was not properly informed is because once the full impacts of the Tories’ intended track were visible, the shareholders of those companies who so generously supported the Conservative Party would be baying for the blood of whoever was making those payments. Of course, that wouldn’t work for those privately-held businesses like Dyson and JCB, but Whetherspoon is a public company, as are many other big donors.
Yawn. Another post entirely about the poster, so ad-hom from you as usual.You are talking to a barn door there.
Throughout the negotiations it has been reported many times that the UK team meeting their EU counterparts might have been very heavy they arrive each time very light on preparation. But you could outline that till the cows come home but it can't be allowed to penetrate as it means he couldn't continue to use the straw man argument.
Do you remember the entire year David Davis, grandly styled Chief Negotiator for Exiting the EU, spent going back and forth to Brussels without any documents? All he had in his briefcase was a ball of string and a packet of Werther’s Originals. How do you negotiate with that? It’s what’s going on here.You are talking to a barn door there.
Throughout the negotiations it has been reported many times that the UK team meeting their EU counterparts might have been very heavy they arrive each time very light on preparation. But you could outline that till the cows come home but it can't be allowed to penetrate as it means he couldn't continue to use the straw man argument.
Do you remember the entire year David Davis, grandly styled Chief Negotiator for Exiting the EU, spent going back and forth to Brussels without any documents? All he had in his briefcase was a ball of string and a packet of Werther’s Originals. How do you negotiate with that? It’s what’s going on here.
The Tories have lost a seat they have held since 1832 to the only mainstream party that's Pro Eu... I know I'm clutching however, there you go.
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)There has actually been very little time to prepare properly for such a massive change.
Listen, I don’t like the tory govt, I don’t support their policies but some are so blinded they can’t see the wood for the trees and it’s impossible to have an objective discussion. I hate making any post where the usual suspects will shout ‘ tory supporter’, ‘alt-right’ etc but the points I made earlier are valid. It is important to remember that the leave campaign was not the UK govt, the UK govt stood for remain, why on earth should a remain UK govt start planning for brexit ahead of a referendum? Why would a remain UK govt start working immediately on preparing for a no-deal brexit when it didn’t want to leave at all? There was not a majority for leave in the UK govt until 2019. People keep banging on about 5 years, it is simply not correct. There has actually been very little time to prepare properly for such a massive change.
Anyway, as said earlier, I’m happy to agree to disagree and that’s it for me.
All the Best
More than that, the outcome of any such thinking about the consequences could have informed and driven the 'remain' campaign before the vote and, just possibly, steered enough people away from 'leave' based on some well-argued modelling of the range of possible outcome scenarios.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.
More than that, the outcome of any such thinking about the consequences could have informed and driven the 'remain' campaign before the vote and, just possibly, steered enough people away from 'leave' based on some well-argued modelling of the range of possible outcome scenarios.
Well yes, I know, but easier to disarm that charge if you can point to detailed, academic, rigorous modelling.'Project fear'?
According to a post on twitter if this swing was repeated in a GE the Tories would end up with 3 seats... which is nice
Project wot eva'Project fear'?
@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.