The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[ENG601PM]

It's been demonstrated over 450 pages right here as well as through all the usual channels elsewhere. I even mentioned highlights a few posts back, which you ignores when you responded.

 

The clue is in the name, Project Fear. It's working on some people, not on others.

 

I think you have quite enough to work with and there's nothing that I could possibly add if you don't understand that already.

[Cyclone]

The made up name project fear demonstrates that some people will deny reality and pretend it isn't happening, even as the evidence slowly buries them.

[ENG601PM]

The made up name project fear demonstrates that some people will deny reality and pretend it isn't happening, even as the evidence slowly buries them.

 

Very true. It isn't happening. Don't be afraid.

[Cyclone]

Classic denial, absolutely detached from reality.

[ENG601PM]

Classic denial, absolutely detached from reality.

 

There's plenty of space below to itemise the Project Fear prophecies which have come to pass

[truman]

There's plenty of space below to itemise the Project Fear prophecies which have come to pass

 

And plenty of space for you to show it to be wrong...

[Magilla]

And just for magilla

 

Greg Clark, the Business Secretary, has written to the EU to warn that removing UK encryption technology could delay the project by three years at a cost of around €1 billion.

 

Well, he would, wouldn't he

 

No link... which means you're hiding something if past experience is anything to go by

 

..... ahh found it, now I see why you didn't want to link the full article (tut tut):

 

CGI is the largest supplier of security systems for the Galileo programme.

The EU offered a contract to CGI UK to transfer to Thales of France its expertise in the cryptography protecting Galileo’s highly secure navigation arrangement for government users.

British officials admit that they cannot legally prevent CGI UK from selling its technology to the EU.

Senior UK industry executives said the British government’s offer of a “gentleman’s agreement” would not be sufficient to persuade any company to withdraw from working with the EU on space projects.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/8294b680-4d48-11e8-8a8e-22951a2d8493

 

And... the slightly awkward fact that the system has been delivered and started working in 2017.

https://www.gsa.europa.eu/newsroom/news/galileo-public-regulated-service-ready-action

 

So we're back to what I said earlier... “gentleman’s agreement” == massive bung and/or begging.

Edited May 23, 2018 by Magilla

[Car Boot]

Real household incomes £900 lower than forcast since the referendum?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/22/brexit-vote-cost-uk-mark-carney-bank-of-england

 

As unemployment is still falling, wages are increasing, and government finances are growing this latest scare from the remnants of 'Project Fear' is obviously aimed at those who are still trembling under their beds at the thought of us leaving the economically failing EU.

 

The BoE Governor, Mark Carney, is merely stating the difference between where the experts predicted GDP would be by now, and where it actually is. Unfortunately, this mode of scaremongering requires the forecasting model to be accurate.

 

And it never is.

 

The £900 of 'lost' forecast household income also relies on GDP to be shared equally between each and every household in the UK - and it never is.

 

I wonder when the Mark Carney BoE forecast economic recession due to us voting to leaving the EU, not actually leaving, is due to arrive? Still waiting.

[L00b]

Woosh. Right over your head, GPS guided too.

 

Your links do not say what you think they say. Whoosh again. I'm not sure whether it's lack of understanding or simple comprehension but no matter, I'll try not to agitate you more than necessary and just ask you again to point out the WTO hard border requirements. I don't think you can but am always happy to learn something new if I'm wrong.

 

Please post them here to avoid any potential ambiguity with a random 255 page pdf. Thanks.

Ok, then I look forward to your explaining how and why my links ‘do not say what I think they say’.

 

Feel free to facilitate my understanding, rather than post unsubstantiated denials and hyperbole which add nothing to your credibility.

 

You still have a question to answer as well, about how the U.K. intends to police goods tariffs at its NI border (and all other U.K. borders: no difference-) in the event of the U.K. ending up trading on WTO terms.

 

4th time I’ve asked. There’s a bit of a pattern developing, not helped by your similarly-continuing failure to answer other posters’ questions.

Edited May 23, 2018 by L00b

[ENG601PM]

Ok, then I look forward to your explaining how and why my links ‘do not say what I think they say’.

 

Feel free to facilitate my understanding, rather than post unsubstantiated denials and hyperbole which add nothing to your credibility.

 

You still have a question to answer as well, about how the U.K. intends to police goods tariffs at its NI border (and all other U.K. borders: no difference-) in the event of the U.K. ending up trading on WTO terms.

 

4th time I’ve asked. There’s a bit of a pattern developing, not helped by your similarly-continuing failure to answer other posters’ questions.

 

Ask all you like. You have not shown that the WTO requires a hard border and I'm not wading through 250 pages to find something that isn't there. Demonstrate it and we'll discuss it civilly.

 

As regards the policing of goods I refer you to my post on the relevant Irish border thread yesterday. I'm not repeating myself in response to your goading.