The walter Mitty of Parliament David Lammy

Mrs May Our Brush With Authoritarianism

The week that was. The week the UK went from being a tolerant bastion of democracy with a rich history of parliamentary procedures.

An advocator of consensus a great protector against authoritarianism. An apologist for colonialism. A fair and just legal system, the envy of the world. A nation of loyal patriots led by wise statesmen and women leaders who have carried us forward in difficult times. Through the ages have repelled invaders. We are a people of placid pagan virtues, whose warrior instinct emerge only in self-defence. 

This week that saw a decline even demise in centuries of honourable traditions, traditions admired from around the world. A legal system that has influenced many a nation bringing a form of civilization to many a doctrine of predestination. We are the epitome of human rights, of legal fairness. A nation built on sound honest principles honed over centuries of blood sweat and tears. Rights immortalized within the magna-carta. 

March 29th a date enshrined in law cast aside as though it were a toffee wrapper. No mention, no change just discarded as though it mattered not one jot.

A vote to discard no deal as though this is a magic wand to a better time when indeed we handcuff our negotiation. As an example who would look at a house, tell the owner I'm buying this house come what may, I'm not leaving without it. All the time the sellers are rubbing their hands in glee.

An MP released from prison who has no voting rights is allowed and her vote accepted carrying the motion by 1 vote. Duplicity, double standards, all this from a parliament established honourably over centuries of evolution. 

Democracy flaunted with calls of a 2nd referendum. Calls that are done so that the result can be thrown out from the previous referendum. Consensus of the cabinet cast aside like some bed cover in a working boudoir. Plummeting our democracy, its founding principles to that of an authoritarian state.  

Handing the keys to number 10 by way of elevating the biggest threat to the UK corporate standing since Brezhnev controlled the soviet empire, making Corbyn appear the saviour of the day, and if he's not he can portray you Mrs May as obstinate misguided and out of touch with reality. If you’re in any doubt Mrs May look to the press, Corbyn will not even need to lift his rear off his threadbare sofa to do just that. 

Look to the local elections, activists who will not activate. Doorsteps have become Conservative no go zones. Funds are withheld on the basis of why throw money after bad. The Conservatives are doomed for this was not a week in politics, this was several years in the making.

I'm sorry to say, I for one held Boris and Jacob in high esteem, that was until they supported May's deal.  This was a mistake that will come back to haunt you. I realize your intentions were well-founded that you saw a risk to Brexit, but Brexit will happen. Maybe the Blair's will overturn the will of the “stupid 17.4 M people of which I am one. But, Brexit will happen. 

What leader would sit by and allow a predecessor to undermine her to the extent that Blair has. Another blatant example as to how weak we have become when a person of some considerable notoriety can undermine the government with impunity. Blair should stand trial for war crimes, Churchill nor Thatcher would have allowed this.

Our standing whether obvious or not has been weakened under your leadership. You have given hope to every despot intent on human rights violations across the globe. You have destroyed our great legal system. A beacon, a bastion of our rich fair history. You are casting aside our principles our integrity as though it was a discarded Mars bar wrapper. 

Stand aside, lets us try to bring stability to the UK, restore the Great. But I fear the conservatives are but a foot note in history. The party that brought and failed to bring authoritarian leadership to the UK. 

The week that was. The week the UK went from being a tolerant bastion of democracy with a rich history of parliamentary procedures.

An advocator of consensus a great protector against authoritarianism. An apologist for colonialism. A fair and just legal system, the envy of the world. A nation of loyal patriots led by wise statesmen and women leaders who have carried us forward in difficult times. Through the ages have repelled invaders. We are a people of placid pagan virtues, whose warrior instinct emerge only in self-defence. 

This week that saw a decline even demise in centuries of honourable traditions, traditions admired from around the world. A legal system that has influenced many a nation bringing a form of civilization to many a doctrine of predestination. We are the epitome of human rights, of legal fairness. A nation built on sound honest principles honed over centuries of blood sweat and tears. Rights immortalized within the magna-carta. 

March 29th a date enshrined in law cast aside as though it were a toffee wrapper. No mention, no change just discarded as though it mattered not one jot.

A vote to discard no deal as though this is a magic wand to a better time when indeed we handcuff our negotiation. As an example who would look at a house, tell the owner I'm buying this house come what may, I'm not leaving without it. All the time the sellers are rubbing their hands in glee.

An MP released from prison who has no voting rights is allowed and her vote accepted carrying the motion by 1 vote. Duplicity, double standards, all this from a parliament established honourably over centuries of evolution. 

Democracy flaunted with calls of a 2nd referendum. Calls that are done so that the result can be thrown out from the previous referendum. Consensus of the cabinet cast aside like some bed cover in a working boudoir. Plummeting our democracy, its founding principles to that of an authoritarian state.  

Handing the keys to number 10 by way of elevating the biggest threat to the UK corporate standing since Brezhnev controlled the soviet empire, making Corbyn appear the saviour of the day, and if he's not he can portray you Mrs May as obstinate misguided and out of touch with reality. If you’re in any doubt Mrs May look to the press, Corbyn will not even need to lift his rear off his threadbare sofa to do just that. 

Look to the local elections, activists who will not activate. Doorsteps have become Conservative no go zones. Funds are withheld on the basis of why throw money after bad. The Conservatives are doomed for this was not a week in politics, this was several years in the making.

I'm sorry to say, I for one held Boris and Jacob in high esteem, that was until they supported May's deal.  This was a mistake that will come back to haunt you. I realize your intentions were well-founded that you saw a risk to Brexit, but Brexit will happen. Maybe the Blair's will overturn the will of the “stupid 17.4 M people of which I am one. But, Brexit will happen. 

What leader would sit by and allow a predecessor to undermine her to the extent that Blair has. Another blatant example as to how weak we have become when a person of some considerable notoriety can undermine the government with impunity. Blair should stand trial for war crimes, Churchill nor Thatcher would have allowed this.

Our standing whether obvious or not has been weakened under your leadership. You have given hope to every despot intent on human rights violations across the globe. You have destroyed our great legal system. A beacon, a bastion of our rich fair history. You are casting aside our principles our integrity as though it was a discarded Mars bar wrapper. 

Stand aside, lets us try to bring stability to the UK, restore the Great. But I fear the conservatives are but a foot note in history. The party that brought and failed to bring authoritarian leadership to the UK. 

Brexit - Whose MPs are they? They don't represent me

If you saw Barry Gardiner on questiontime you will see an example of how Blind arrogance attempts to overcome incompetence 

Written below is an exert from the withdrawal agreement, the language is flowery but its intent is quietly serious. Regardless of the backstop, the way we can or can not leave, that part is written such that it is the EU that has to agree that we exit, not us unilaterally. Which of course we all know they would never do as it would never be in their financial interest.  In fact if I were them, I would use it as a model for all states membership. Having 28 subservient states with no say would be perfect for the un-elected autocracy presiding in Brussels.

If you read the withdrawal agreement in particular article 4:

“ARTICLE 4

Methods and principles relating to the effect, 

the implementation and the application of this Agreement

1. The provisions of this Agreement and the provisions of Union law made applicable by this Agreement shall produce in respect of and in the United Kingdom the same legal effects as those which they produce within the Union and its Member States.

Accordingly, legal or natural persons shall in particular be able to rely directly on the provisions contained or referred to in this Agreement which meet the conditions for direct effect under Union law.

2. The United Kingdom shall ensure compliance with paragraph 1, including as regards the required powers of its judicial and administrative authorities to disapply inconsistent or incompatible domestic provisions, through domestic primary legislation.

3. The provisions of this Agreement referring to Union law or to concepts or provisions thereof shall be interpreted and applied in accordance with the methods and general principles of Union law.

4. The provisions of this Agreement referring to Union law or to concepts or provisions thereof shall in their implementation and application be interpreted in conformity with the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down before the end of the transition period.

5. In the interpretation and application of this Agreement, the United Kingdom's judicial and administrative authorities shall have due regard to relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down after the end of the transition period.”

Not only is it probable that the EU will not agree our departure. If they did they would extract a considerable penalty from us, fishing rights etc. We will still be subject to the ECJ after we have left. This is not Brexit!

If this agreement is signed then it is clear the interest of the populous matters not one jot. It is indeed clear our MPs have a vested interest as they are not acting as our representatives.

Any attempt to run the referendum again allowing 2 options defined as discussed on questiontime is wrong. Should they do this, have these 2 options 1. May's deal 2. Remain this would be a complete travesty of our rights, defying our rich history. In my opinion this would be treachery and completely unacceptable.

We have to leave for all the reasons stated in previous posts. The EU has been strangled by the euro, its regulation and tariffs. Euro zone economic growth is poor, average 2% over 10 years. We've had 8.8%. The EU is heading deeper into recession, their looking to the US to help move them forward, at a time when the US is looking inward. Regulation continues to grow, most of which makes no sense but, burdens businesses. Only 10% of our GDP is from our exports to the EU.

Tariffs continue to grow, seemingly for no reason. Indeed you can not find any rationale as to why some tariffs are applied, for example "frozen prawns" 20% tariff, increased from 14%! What is the purpose? It appears that there is no rational reason for this tariff, let alone the increase.

Raoul Ruparel Head of Economics research, open group and adviser to the government stated in 2016 "Were the UK to strike a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU, pursues very ambitious deregulation of its economy and opens up almost fully to trade with the rest of the world, UK GDP would be 1.6% higher than if it had stayed within the EU". 



Leave we must. Our politicians have lied far to often and far to much about the negative affects on leaving the EU. The UK is now a euro sceptic country, that will not change anytime soon.

If you saw Barry Gardiner on questiontime you will see an example of how Blind arrogance attempts to overcome incompetence 

Written below is an exert from the withdrawal agreement, the language is flowery but its intent is quietly serious. Regardless of the backstop, the way we can or can not leave, that part is written such that it is the EU that has to agree that we exit, not us unilaterally. Which of course we all know they would never do as it would never be in their financial interest.  In fact if I were them, I would use it as a model for all states membership. Having 28 subservient states with no say would be perfect for the un-elected autocracy presiding in Brussels.

If you read the withdrawal agreement in particular article 4:

“ARTICLE 4

Methods and principles relating to the effect, 

the implementation and the application of this Agreement

1. The provisions of this Agreement and the provisions of Union law made applicable by this Agreement shall produce in respect of and in the United Kingdom the same legal effects as those which they produce within the Union and its Member States.

Accordingly, legal or natural persons shall in particular be able to rely directly on the provisions contained or referred to in this Agreement which meet the conditions for direct effect under Union law.

2. The United Kingdom shall ensure compliance with paragraph 1, including as regards the required powers of its judicial and administrative authorities to disapply inconsistent or incompatible domestic provisions, through domestic primary legislation.

3. The provisions of this Agreement referring to Union law or to concepts or provisions thereof shall be interpreted and applied in accordance with the methods and general principles of Union law.

4. The provisions of this Agreement referring to Union law or to concepts or provisions thereof shall in their implementation and application be interpreted in conformity with the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down before the end of the transition period.

5. In the interpretation and application of this Agreement, the United Kingdom's judicial and administrative authorities shall have due regard to relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down after the end of the transition period.”

Not only is it probable that the EU will not agree our departure. If they did they would extract a considerable penalty from us, fishing rights etc. We will still be subject to the ECJ after we have left. This is not Brexit!

If this agreement is signed then it is clear the interest of the populous matters not one jot. It is indeed clear our MPs have a vested interest as they are not acting as our representatives.

Any attempt to run the referendum again allowing 2 options defined as discussed on questiontime is wrong. Should they do this, have these 2 options 1. May's deal 2. Remain this would be a complete travesty of our rights, defying our rich history. In my opinion this would be treachery and completely unacceptable.

We have to leave for all the reasons stated in previous posts. The EU has been strangled by the euro, its regulation and tariffs. Euro zone economic growth is poor, average 2% over 10 years. We've had 8.8%. The EU is heading deeper into recession, their looking to the US to help move them forward, at a time when the US is looking inward. Regulation continues to grow, most of which makes no sense but, burdens businesses. Only 10% of our GDP is from our exports to the EU.

Tariffs continue to grow, seemingly for no reason. Indeed you can not find any rationale as to why some tariffs are applied, for example "frozen prawns" 20% tariff, increased from 14%! What is the purpose? It appears that there is no rational reason for this tariff, let alone the increase.

Raoul Ruparel Head of Economics research, open group and adviser to the government stated in 2016 "Were the UK to strike a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU, pursues very ambitious deregulation of its economy and opens up almost fully to trade with the rest of the world, UK GDP would be 1.6% higher than if it had stayed within the EU". 



Leave we must. Our politicians have lied far to often and far to much about the negative affects on leaving the EU. The UK is now a euro sceptic country, that will not change anytime soon.

Brexit - Deselection - adaptation of a beautiful song

HOPES AND ASPIRATIONS FOR BREXIT

Goodbye to you my untrustworthy friends

We've known each other since I don't know when

Together we've climbed different hills and different trees

You've learned of love for the EUs failings

You've skinned our pockets and skinned our beliefs

Goodbye my friends it's not hard for you to leave

When all the time you’re in brexit denial

Now that spring is in the air

A pretty UK future can be seen everywhere

Think of us as we'll be there

We had no joy, we had no fun

We had seasons without the sun

But the hills that you climbed

Were just not from our time

Goodbye MPs please don't say a word

You and others are the black sheep of the family

You tried to teach us all the EU wrongs, claimed they were the only way

Too much of Junker’s wine and too much of Junker's song

Wonder how you ever got along

Goodbye Guys it's not hard to say

When all the birds are singing in the sky, you'll be gone

Now that the spring is in the air, coz you won't be their

Little children have a future everywhere

When you see them, we'll be there

We had no joy, we had no fun

We had seasons without the sun

But you had Junker’s wine and sang Junker's song

Like the seasons have all gone

We had no joy, we had no fun

We had seasons without the sun

But you had Junker’s wine and sang Junker's song

With you it was like the seasons have all gone

Goodbye MPs you are the devious ones

You gave us fear and hid the sun

And every time you put us down

You would always come around

And sweep our feet from on the ground

Goodbye Members you need to see,

All the birds are singing in the sky

Now that the spring is in the air

With the flowers everywhere

We're pleased you four won't be there!

Conservatives,  Labour, Amber Rudd,  Philip Hammond,  Dominic Grieve,  Labour Party,  Destruction Of Europe,  

Seasons in the sun a more perfect version on spotify today! 

HOPES AND ASPIRATIONS FOR BREXIT

Goodbye to you my untrustworthy friends

We've known each other since I don't know when

Together we've climbed different hills and different trees

You've learned of love for the EUs failings

You've skinned our pockets and skinned our beliefs

Goodbye my friends it's not hard for you to leave

When all the time you’re in brexit denial

Now that spring is in the air

A pretty UK future can be seen everywhere

Think of us as we'll be there

We had no joy, we had no fun

We had seasons without the sun

But the hills that you climbed

Were just not from our time

Goodbye MPs please don't say a word

You and others are the black sheep of the family

You tried to teach us all the EU wrongs, claimed they were the only way

Too much of Junker’s wine and too much of Junker's song

Wonder how you ever got along

Goodbye Guys it's not hard to say

When all the birds are singing in the sky, you'll be gone

Now that the spring is in the air, coz you won't be their

Little children have a future everywhere

When you see them, we'll be there

We had no joy, we had no fun

We had seasons without the sun

But you had Junker’s wine and sang Junker's song

Like the seasons have all gone

We had no joy, we had no fun

We had seasons without the sun

But you had Junker’s wine and sang Junker's song

With you it was like the seasons have all gone

Goodbye MPs you are the devious ones

You gave us fear and hid the sun

And every time you put us down

You would always come around

And sweep our feet from on the ground

Goodbye Members you need to see,

All the birds are singing in the sky

Now that the spring is in the air

With the flowers everywhere

We're pleased you four won't be there!

Conservatives,  Labour, Amber Rudd,  Philip Hammond,  Dominic Grieve,  Labour Party,  Destruction Of Europe,  

Seasons in the sun a more perfect version on spotify today! 

Brexit - These policies in the past gave rise to domestic violence.

What a fantastic headline: 

Britain's economy set to boom and become the largest in Europe.... why? Because we are leaving the EU! Employment is at record levels unemployment 4% vs Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy at approximately 25%. Germany and France heading into recession, Italy contracting. The worst the UK can see is from the media and vested institutions anti brexit rhetoric.

When this is over we should have a twinning session, a ceremony linking key anti Brexit and therefore anti British individuals, link with those that tried to bring us under the soviet empire during the 70s. I think the first such union would be Philip Hammond twinned with Red Robbo the British Leyland destroyer.  Anna Sourby with Arthur Scargill etc. I'm open to suggestion for Grieves, Cooper perhaps names such as Blunt, Philby or Burgess should be included. They tried hard to make us a satellite of the Soviet Empire.

Norway's “Sovereign wealth fund” has readied $1trillion to invest in the United Kingdom. Yngve Slyngstad CEO is committed to the UK even in the event of a no deal Brexit.  Comment from the Telegraph. “This kind of grown-up analysis from professionals contrasts starkly with endless doom-mongering rhetoric we hear from the subsidy-hungry politicos of the CBI”.

The UK attracted record foreign investment through 2018 beating the US only China attracted more. Start-ups raised £8billion in venture capital, 70% more than their French or German counterparts. All of this when our revered institutions are telling us different. 

It is the Brexiteers that are the visionaries and it is the Brexiteers who have taken the unwarranted racism, certainly in my case, offensive abuse.  A comment I recently received from a city worker. “I earned £100k last year. What did you earn in your northern town?” he labelled me as somehow... well I don't know what but obviously he was implying that my views make me sub-standard. Another comment; the person told me to go back to my Thai Bride, my wife is not Thai. I use these as examples to counter the appalling labels that are directed towards us.

When history writes this up and many books will emerge it will show the Remainers to be similar to the “Red Kens" the "Robbo's” the "Arthur Scargill’s". Individuals who tried to bring this country to its knees.

For those that are not familiar with the 70s:

A general view not just mine, recollection the 1970s have gone down as the dark ages, Britain’s gloomiest period since the Second World War. The sombre seventies, set between Harold Wilson’s ‘swinging sixties’ and Margaret Thatcher’s eighties. They began with enormous trade union stoppages fighting Heath’s Industrial Relations Act. They continued with the financial crisis and us having to go cap in hand to the IMF for serious bailouts.  All the time we faced random atrocities of the Irish Republicans. They ended with the ‘Winter of Discontent’ when unparalleled strikes, official and unofficial, revealed a country ‘as governable as Chile’ in the populist view of one US politician, and reduced the Labour prime minister, James Callaghan, himself an old trade union official, to a paralysis of despair. He felt, as he told Ken Stowe, his private secretary that he had ‘let the country down’. The idea of ‘dark ages’ is indeed literally appropriate. Recollections of the seventies are coloured by memories of a public blackout, reminiscent of the second world war during the blitz, without the compensating feeling of national heroism and historic endurance. The earlier years of the decade featured not only many strikes by the engineers and electrical workers, but Edward Heath’s catastrophic three-day week in response to the miners’ strike of 1974 when London’s major thoroughfares were cast into darkness, shops and restaurants were unlit and gloomy, public television services were suspended for several nights a week, and suburban families ate their sombre dinners at home not very romantically with the light of such spare candles as shopkeepers still had available.

There has been much written on this. On the sinister side the 70s gave rise to essentially four behaviours. These were conflict and class war in industry, a sharp downturn in the economy, a flight to extremism in political life, and a rise in public and domestic violence. Without doubt, each of these revealed a new pattern of internal vulnerability not experienced previously, and a marked contrast with the stable social democracy that the United Kingdom had appeared to be since the second world war, both under Labour’s welfare democracy under Attlee after 1945 and Wilson after 1964, and the thirteen years of emollient ‘one-nation Toryism’ in between. Now there were new challenges to which a post-imperial, once-great power seemed unable to respond.

Is this what we want for our future. I suspect not then we must bin any notion of staying inside the EU, either through devious means or directly. Next we must not elect a Jeremy Corbyn government.  The policies of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell will lead to there Callaghan era.

What a fantastic headline: 

Britain's economy set to boom and become the largest in Europe.... why? Because we are leaving the EU! Employment is at record levels unemployment 4% vs Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy at approximately 25%. Germany and France heading into recession, Italy contracting. The worst the UK can see is from the media and vested institutions anti brexit rhetoric.

When this is over we should have a twinning session, a ceremony linking key anti Brexit and therefore anti British individuals, link with those that tried to bring us under the soviet empire during the 70s. I think the first such union would be Philip Hammond twinned with Red Robbo the British Leyland destroyer.  Anna Sourby with Arthur Scargill etc. I'm open to suggestion for Grieves, Cooper perhaps names such as Blunt, Philby or Burgess should be included. They tried hard to make us a satellite of the Soviet Empire.

Norway's “Sovereign wealth fund” has readied $1trillion to invest in the United Kingdom. Yngve Slyngstad CEO is committed to the UK even in the event of a no deal Brexit.  Comment from the Telegraph. “This kind of grown-up analysis from professionals contrasts starkly with endless doom-mongering rhetoric we hear from the subsidy-hungry politicos of the CBI”.

The UK attracted record foreign investment through 2018 beating the US only China attracted more. Start-ups raised £8billion in venture capital, 70% more than their French or German counterparts. All of this when our revered institutions are telling us different. 

It is the Brexiteers that are the visionaries and it is the Brexiteers who have taken the unwarranted racism, certainly in my case, offensive abuse.  A comment I recently received from a city worker. “I earned £100k last year. What did you earn in your northern town?” he labelled me as somehow... well I don't know what but obviously he was implying that my views make me sub-standard. Another comment; the person told me to go back to my Thai Bride, my wife is not Thai. I use these as examples to counter the appalling labels that are directed towards us.

When history writes this up and many books will emerge it will show the Remainers to be similar to the “Red Kens" the "Robbo's” the "Arthur Scargill’s". Individuals who tried to bring this country to its knees.

For those that are not familiar with the 70s:

A general view not just mine, recollection the 1970s have gone down as the dark ages, Britain’s gloomiest period since the Second World War. The sombre seventies, set between Harold Wilson’s ‘swinging sixties’ and Margaret Thatcher’s eighties. They began with enormous trade union stoppages fighting Heath’s Industrial Relations Act. They continued with the financial crisis and us having to go cap in hand to the IMF for serious bailouts.  All the time we faced random atrocities of the Irish Republicans. They ended with the ‘Winter of Discontent’ when unparalleled strikes, official and unofficial, revealed a country ‘as governable as Chile’ in the populist view of one US politician, and reduced the Labour prime minister, James Callaghan, himself an old trade union official, to a paralysis of despair. He felt, as he told Ken Stowe, his private secretary that he had ‘let the country down’. The idea of ‘dark ages’ is indeed literally appropriate. Recollections of the seventies are coloured by memories of a public blackout, reminiscent of the second world war during the blitz, without the compensating feeling of national heroism and historic endurance. The earlier years of the decade featured not only many strikes by the engineers and electrical workers, but Edward Heath’s catastrophic three-day week in response to the miners’ strike of 1974 when London’s major thoroughfares were cast into darkness, shops and restaurants were unlit and gloomy, public television services were suspended for several nights a week, and suburban families ate their sombre dinners at home not very romantically with the light of such spare candles as shopkeepers still had available.

There has been much written on this. On the sinister side the 70s gave rise to essentially four behaviours. These were conflict and class war in industry, a sharp downturn in the economy, a flight to extremism in political life, and a rise in public and domestic violence. Without doubt, each of these revealed a new pattern of internal vulnerability not experienced previously, and a marked contrast with the stable social democracy that the United Kingdom had appeared to be since the second world war, both under Labour’s welfare democracy under Attlee after 1945 and Wilson after 1964, and the thirteen years of emollient ‘one-nation Toryism’ in between. Now there were new challenges to which a post-imperial, once-great power seemed unable to respond.

Is this what we want for our future. I suspect not then we must bin any notion of staying inside the EU, either through devious means or directly. Next we must not elect a Jeremy Corbyn government.  The policies of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell will lead to there Callaghan era.

BREXIT - Another shocking day in the disney parliament

Headlines Today!


Not since Anthony Eden has the UK looked so pathetic. He made us look weak to the world. Mrs May has made us feel weak to ourselves.

Telegraph:

• Nigel Farage - "The Brexit Betrayal is nearly complete".
• Philip Johnston - "A delay to article 50 could mean we will never break free".
• Allison Pearson - "Corbyn is committed to a second referendum that he better hope never happens".
• Pritti Patel and Grant Schapps - "Extending Article 50 is just overturning Brexit the people voted for".
• Tears of rage from kamikaze Remainers inside the Cabinet.

We could now be at the beginning of the end. Realisation appeared that shows Brexit could indeed be thwarted, this must not happen for all the reasons stated in my earlier posts. Our growth is better than the eurozone. But, it's not as good as the countries outside of the EU regulations. Our exports to the EU are shrinking whilst WTO countries are increasing. The EU applies high tariffs, as much as 50% on some food products, this we the consumer have to bear.

Twenty Eurosceptic MPs voted against the government, on the government's Bill enshrining Yvette Coopers amendment, delaying Brexit.  Eighty eight abstained.  Comments were discussed on how easy Mrs May buckled.  At least that's progress but it should never have passed and nor should it have been tabled, if the MPs were doing their constituents bidding. Yvette Cooper’s 70% voted leave, but my guess she and her husband Ed Balls were remainers, at least she is loyal to her house. The rest of her constituents just have to pay her to be all Baroness like. How history repeats itself, King John and his extravagant wars, together with the Barons raided the poor with taxes. That was after the magna carta was signed in 1215, as before they were the focus of the taxes. The Magna Carta was signed as the Barons threatened to kill King John. I wonder what the penalty is for not abiding by the Manifesto promises.

Never before have parliamentary parties been so exposed for their duplicity than they are today. I'm not sure that I have ever seen such examples of self interest, nor such extreme sabotage of ones career as we are seeing playing out today.

The UK people historically have always rallied around each other in times of adversity.  Leaders have always emerged pulling us from the mire. We can pray that such a person will emerge again, but, it will take an election.

Not since Anthony Eden has the UK looked so pathetic. He made us look weak to the world.  Mrs May has made us feel weak to ourselves.

Jacob Rees-Mogg has said he will back May's deal, purely because he believes Brexit will be stopped by the devious undemocratic elite.  For me that's simple call an election. Let's get a group of honest MPs who support the views of their electorate.

Another shocking day in the Disney Parliament!

Headlines Today!


Not since Anthony Eden has the UK looked so pathetic. He made us look weak to the world. Mrs May has made us feel weak to ourselves.

Telegraph:

• Nigel Farage - "The Brexit Betrayal is nearly complete".
• Philip Johnston - "A delay to article 50 could mean we will never break free".
• Allison Pearson - "Corbyn is committed to a second referendum that he better hope never happens".
• Pritti Patel and Grant Schapps - "Extending Article 50 is just overturning Brexit the people voted for".
• Tears of rage from kamikaze Remainers inside the Cabinet.

We could now be at the beginning of the end. Realisation appeared that shows Brexit could indeed be thwarted, this must not happen for all the reasons stated in my earlier posts. Our growth is better than the eurozone. But, it's not as good as the countries outside of the EU regulations. Our exports to the EU are shrinking whilst WTO countries are increasing. The EU applies high tariffs, as much as 50% on some food products, this we the consumer have to bear.

Twenty Eurosceptic MPs voted against the government, on the government's Bill enshrining Yvette Coopers amendment, delaying Brexit.  Eighty eight abstained.  Comments were discussed on how easy Mrs May buckled.  At least that's progress but it should never have passed and nor should it have been tabled, if the MPs were doing their constituents bidding. Yvette Cooper’s 70% voted leave, but my guess she and her husband Ed Balls were remainers, at least she is loyal to her house. The rest of her constituents just have to pay her to be all Baroness like. How history repeats itself, King John and his extravagant wars, together with the Barons raided the poor with taxes. That was after the magna carta was signed in 1215, as before they were the focus of the taxes. The Magna Carta was signed as the Barons threatened to kill King John. I wonder what the penalty is for not abiding by the Manifesto promises.

Never before have parliamentary parties been so exposed for their duplicity than they are today. I'm not sure that I have ever seen such examples of self interest, nor such extreme sabotage of ones career as we are seeing playing out today.

The UK people historically have always rallied around each other in times of adversity.  Leaders have always emerged pulling us from the mire. We can pray that such a person will emerge again, but, it will take an election.

Not since Anthony Eden has the UK looked so pathetic. He made us look weak to the world.  Mrs May has made us feel weak to ourselves.

Jacob Rees-Mogg has said he will back May's deal, purely because he believes Brexit will be stopped by the devious undemocratic elite.  For me that's simple call an election. Let's get a group of honest MPs who support the views of their electorate.

Another shocking day in the Disney Parliament!

Brexit - Damned if I do and damned if I don't.

Jeremy Corbyn or indeed Theresa May for that matter they are not leaders, if they were their branches would not be swaying every which way. I believe, that we the electorate matter not one jot any more.

To delay is to prolong this confusion, this vacuum until such time that the remainers predictions arrive at our doorstep. Not because of Brexit because of prolonged dis-unity and the fog of chaos that has descended across the UK. Self sabotage is an award that belongs firmly with the UK parliamentary parties, for some considerable time it looked as though the Irish Taoiseach could have the award.

Surely any sane person would know you can't negotiate if the other party know where you'll stop. The EU have not had to play this well they just had to play to the divisions in the country's political parties. They did not even have to be concerned by the British people and their vote.  Just like they weren't with the Irish or the Danes.  Just like they care not one iota for the under 25s across the med.  And, just as long as their authoritarian projects protect their vested interests.

How could these two parties emerge at the same time? Both are rudderless, both are led by their tails and neither give a damn about the electorate.



This should have been done and dusted by now. Life would be normal we would have found our balance in the world. We would have escaped the clutches of the failing project, with all its favouritism, protectionism and elitism.

Ten percent of our exports go into Europe, and we think that should concern us enough that we allow the behaviours of chaos and confusion to jeopardize the other 90%. I think the SMEs are being to British and should be speaking out more to end this farce, the pantomime season is over.  This is not some allegory, shadow in a cave, this is real life. The harm the politicians are doing is real and its tangible.

The parties of our government behave in a way that is reminiscent of Prometheus verses Zeus, Prometheus gave fire to the people, Zeus wanted it for himself, or Robin Hood verses the Sheriff together with the Cardinals, wrecked havoc to protect their ill-gotten gains and to keep the people down-trodden. This is the 21C we don't do down-trodden and nor do we do subterfuge.  Play your games, snipe at each other but do it at your own expense. You're not disciples of Zeus and we will not drink from your cup!



A second referendum is just another way to delay, wreck the economy further. For what? If you must have something, have an election, give us at least a fighting chance to have representatives who hummmm represent us?!

Jeremy Corbyn or indeed Theresa May for that matter they are not leaders, if they were their branches would not be swaying every which way. I believe, that we the electorate matter not one jot any more.

To delay is to prolong this confusion, this vacuum until such time that the remainers predictions arrive at our doorstep. Not because of Brexit because of prolonged dis-unity and the fog of chaos that has descended across the UK. Self sabotage is an award that belongs firmly with the UK parliamentary parties, for some considerable time it looked as though the Irish Taoiseach could have the award.

Surely any sane person would know you can't negotiate if the other party know where you'll stop. The EU have not had to play this well they just had to play to the divisions in the country's political parties. They did not even have to be concerned by the British people and their vote.  Just like they weren't with the Irish or the Danes.  Just like they care not one iota for the under 25s across the med.  And, just as long as their authoritarian projects protect their vested interests.

How could these two parties emerge at the same time? Both are rudderless, both are led by their tails and neither give a damn about the electorate.



This should have been done and dusted by now. Life would be normal we would have found our balance in the world. We would have escaped the clutches of the failing project, with all its favouritism, protectionism and elitism.

Ten percent of our exports go into Europe, and we think that should concern us enough that we allow the behaviours of chaos and confusion to jeopardize the other 90%. I think the SMEs are being to British and should be speaking out more to end this farce, the pantomime season is over.  This is not some allegory, shadow in a cave, this is real life. The harm the politicians are doing is real and its tangible.

The parties of our government behave in a way that is reminiscent of Prometheus verses Zeus, Prometheus gave fire to the people, Zeus wanted it for himself, or Robin Hood verses the Sheriff together with the Cardinals, wrecked havoc to protect their ill-gotten gains and to keep the people down-trodden. This is the 21C we don't do down-trodden and nor do we do subterfuge.  Play your games, snipe at each other but do it at your own expense. You're not disciples of Zeus and we will not drink from your cup!



A second referendum is just another way to delay, wreck the economy further. For what? If you must have something, have an election, give us at least a fighting chance to have representatives who hummmm represent us?!

Brexit - Feb 25th Delay really Why? Blair's A Brexiteer

Several headlines captured me this morning. That's my morning as l’m slightly North of Australia.  The one that concerns me the most is of course the possibility of delaying Brexit. Another which is of significance was an article I read on Linkedin. The article referred to the businesses that are struggling due to uncertainty.  They just need that we get on with it and leave, if it's no deal they can plan accordingly.  As I've pointed out in previous papers that I've written, 90% of our manufactured goods go outside of the EU (88% directly out with a further 2% entering the EU and then leaving via Rotterdam), yet we have to apply EU regulation across the board.

The terms that we will trade on need to be clarified and planned accordingly.  The MPs that are frustrating this process are no friend of the British people and should be removed. We are now at a point where a further delay is unacceptable.  With an oncoming recession this could do irretrievable harm to corporate UK.  The EU has been a sick segment of the world for far too long. Their collective growth since 2008 have been poor to say the least, they, the Euro zone have averaged a little over 2% in 9 years. The UK 8.8%, the USA 14.4%. If you show Germany they are at 7.6%, France 4.6%, Greece minus 27%.



Our exports to the EU have underperformed the exports from WTO countries. Businesses need clarity. Are we in are we out? To delay just drops a fog over the British Isles and the United Kingdom.  Soon the remainers will have their way and be able to prove Brexit will have damaged the economy. Yet it's not Brexit that will damage it, it is they! We are where the remainers want us to be! We should have no patience with this.

I also read an article in the Daily Telegraph written by Boris. He refers to the labels that are applied to us Brexiteers. Zealots, Xenophobic, Racist and so on.  That somehow unless you're right wing with fascists tendencies you would want to remain in the EU. Boris makes an excellent point that Tony Blair was a fervent Brexiteer (Although my gut tells me that was him telling us what we wanted to hear in order that he gets his way winning the highest office in the land.  It is also not beyond the realm of being possible that he is angling for Junker's job, but of course we have to remain.  History will go full circle!). But, nonetheless Boris refers to many other lefties that have expressed dis-satisfaction with the EU.



I for one can not be labelled in such terms.  My business is in Asia, it focuses on Indonesia in particular. I stand ready to support Corporate UK to establish a presence in the soon to be 5th largest economy. Who, incidentally trades with the EU on WTO. My wife is a legal and financial expert, and she is Asian. My partners are Asian some are mixed and from many religious beliefs. To label Brexiteers this way is to do the UK an injustice, it is also an insult to our seafaring ancestry.

The facts are clear, regulation is absurd. Tariffs are ridiculous 50% on some dairy products, 30% on others reducing to 18% in some cases.  This is a tax on the people of the UK. It is a tax that benefits Europe and not us Brits!

Leave, and do it on March the 29th at 11pm. Take no nonsense from these vested self interested politician's. A delay is appalling behaviour.

Several headlines captured me this morning. That's my morning as l’m slightly North of Australia.  The one that concerns me the most is of course the possibility of delaying Brexit. Another which is of significance was an article I read on Linkedin. The article referred to the businesses that are struggling due to uncertainty.  They just need that we get on with it and leave, if it's no deal they can plan accordingly.  As I've pointed out in previous papers that I've written, 90% of our manufactured goods go outside of the EU (88% directly out with a further 2% entering the EU and then leaving via Rotterdam), yet we have to apply EU regulation across the board.

The terms that we will trade on need to be clarified and planned accordingly.  The MPs that are frustrating this process are no friend of the British people and should be removed. We are now at a point where a further delay is unacceptable.  With an oncoming recession this could do irretrievable harm to corporate UK.  The EU has been a sick segment of the world for far too long. Their collective growth since 2008 have been poor to say the least, they, the Euro zone have averaged a little over 2% in 9 years. The UK 8.8%, the USA 14.4%. If you show Germany they are at 7.6%, France 4.6%, Greece minus 27%.



Our exports to the EU have underperformed the exports from WTO countries. Businesses need clarity. Are we in are we out? To delay just drops a fog over the British Isles and the United Kingdom.  Soon the remainers will have their way and be able to prove Brexit will have damaged the economy. Yet it's not Brexit that will damage it, it is they! We are where the remainers want us to be! We should have no patience with this.

I also read an article in the Daily Telegraph written by Boris. He refers to the labels that are applied to us Brexiteers. Zealots, Xenophobic, Racist and so on.  That somehow unless you're right wing with fascists tendencies you would want to remain in the EU. Boris makes an excellent point that Tony Blair was a fervent Brexiteer (Although my gut tells me that was him telling us what we wanted to hear in order that he gets his way winning the highest office in the land.  It is also not beyond the realm of being possible that he is angling for Junker's job, but of course we have to remain.  History will go full circle!). But, nonetheless Boris refers to many other lefties that have expressed dis-satisfaction with the EU.



I for one can not be labelled in such terms.  My business is in Asia, it focuses on Indonesia in particular. I stand ready to support Corporate UK to establish a presence in the soon to be 5th largest economy. Who, incidentally trades with the EU on WTO. My wife is a legal and financial expert, and she is Asian. My partners are Asian some are mixed and from many religious beliefs. To label Brexiteers this way is to do the UK an injustice, it is also an insult to our seafaring ancestry.

The facts are clear, regulation is absurd. Tariffs are ridiculous 50% on some dairy products, 30% on others reducing to 18% in some cases.  This is a tax on the people of the UK. It is a tax that benefits Europe and not us Brits!

Leave, and do it on March the 29th at 11pm. Take no nonsense from these vested self interested politician's. A delay is appalling behaviour.

Brexit - The Grim Reaper Has Come Knocking

The benefits of EU and Single Market membership have been illusory, while its costs are real, onerous and unacceptable to the majority of the British people.

Michael Burrage 2017

To remain in the single market the UK must apply all regulations and controls as defined by the EU to its entire economy. So where is the problem? The problem is, only 12% of our total GDP goes direct to the EU, the rest we export to countries outside of the EU. The anomaly in all of this; even from the 12%, approx. 2% travels to Rotterdam or Antwerp for further export leaving the EU. Therefore, you could argue 90% of our GDP carries a burden of EU regulations that are not necessary. This is costly to UK businesses.

Consider rules and regulations governing employment law. Nearly all of our GDP comes from the domestic market: Whether it is health and welfare services, the retail trade, utilities, entertainment, bars and restaurants, services such as dry cleaning and home repairs and maintenance.

The rules and regulations are having and have had a serious impact. Particularly affected by this are the NHS. The EU issued a working hour directive in 2009, limiting the hours a person can work, to 48 hours a week. They must have designated rest periods and regular breaks. Therefore, and as an example, Junior Doctors are restricted as to the number of hours they can work. I can hear you say, so they should be they seem worked to death, but consider that as a Junior doctor you must attain certain skills and experience in order to progress. Individuals are taking much longer to reach the level required, to be proficient, let alone to attain “Consultant” status.  This has a serious impact on staffing levels.  Experience is low, a reduced numbers of Consultants able to practise. This issue is right across the NHS. This is not what a junior Doctor wants when entering this career / vocation.

These rules and regulations apply right across the service sector. A sector that the ‘single market’ has no benefit. It only applies an onerous cost, as Michael Burrage claims refer in the snippet above. 

Membership of the single market is not the same as the customs union. The customs union has been around since the very beginning of the EU, whereas the single market only since 1993. lt is the customs union that decides our tariffs. Within the custom union there are three (3) elements. 

1. Members may not impose tariffs or non-tariff barriers on imports from other member states; 
2. They do, however, impose the centrally agreed tariff rates on imports from the rest of the world, the so-called Common External Tariff (CET); 
3. They give up the ability to negotiate trade relationships with other countries. This power is transferred to the EU. 

Where Theresa May has come unstuck with the negotiation:

1. She wants tariff free trade with the EU whilst not applying tariffs on product and services brought into the UK from the rest of the world. Hence, the cake and eat it scenario. 
2. The election, the result weakened her hand considerably. Although in many ways it should not have done, 80% of the votes were won on a Brexit manifesto.

To achieve 1 above this was always a tall order, a modicum of compromise was always inevitable. But to find ourselves in the situation we are today well, that is due to dishonesty on the part of MPs that have obfuscated beyond their mandate.

For the EU to agree to 1 above this would result in the rest of the world driving their exports to the EU via the UK, therefore avoiding the CET. This would be folly on the part of the EU, not least for the loss of revenue. Of course advocates of the Customs Union are keen we remain a member. But again there are no intrinsic benefits to our membership. Food, clothing and footwear would still have considerable tariffs applied, and of course we would not be able to strike free trade deals from around the world. As I've said before the EU take less of our exports at a time when WTO countries trade has grown substantially. 

Not to make light of the tariffs more to show the bizarre way in which they are applied. Unicycles have a 15% tariff applied, whereby a sub orbital spacecraft has only a 4% levy. Food and beverages are subject to considerably more. Confectionery has a tariff just shy of 30%, some dairy products that's around 50%, Grapes 17% and frozen prawns 20%. If you research the tariff regime it's clear there is no logic to this and nor can anyone explain the rational, it is purely arbitrary. 

I'll leave this blog here. I continue to hope we follow through and free ourselves from these shackles. 

As Margaret Thatcher said:

The benefits of EU and Single Market membership have been illusory, while its costs are real, onerous and unacceptable to the majority of the British people.

Michael Burrage 2017

To remain in the single market the UK must apply all regulations and controls as defined by the EU to its entire economy. So where is the problem? The problem is, only 12% of our total GDP goes direct to the EU, the rest we export to countries outside of the EU. The anomaly in all of this; even from the 12%, approx. 2% travels to Rotterdam or Antwerp for further export leaving the EU. Therefore, you could argue 90% of our GDP carries a burden of EU regulations that are not necessary. This is costly to UK businesses.

Consider rules and regulations governing employment law. Nearly all of our GDP comes from the domestic market: Whether it is health and welfare services, the retail trade, utilities, entertainment, bars and restaurants, services such as dry cleaning and home repairs and maintenance.

The rules and regulations are having and have had a serious impact. Particularly affected by this are the NHS. The EU issued a working hour directive in 2009, limiting the hours a person can work, to 48 hours a week. They must have designated rest periods and regular breaks. Therefore, and as an example, Junior Doctors are restricted as to the number of hours they can work. I can hear you say, so they should be they seem worked to death, but consider that as a Junior doctor you must attain certain skills and experience in order to progress. Individuals are taking much longer to reach the level required, to be proficient, let alone to attain “Consultant” status.  This has a serious impact on staffing levels.  Experience is low, a reduced numbers of Consultants able to practise. This issue is right across the NHS. This is not what a junior Doctor wants when entering this career / vocation.

These rules and regulations apply right across the service sector. A sector that the ‘single market’ has no benefit. It only applies an onerous cost, as Michael Burrage claims refer in the snippet above. 

Membership of the single market is not the same as the customs union. The customs union has been around since the very beginning of the EU, whereas the single market only since 1993. lt is the customs union that decides our tariffs. Within the custom union there are three (3) elements. 

1. Members may not impose tariffs or non-tariff barriers on imports from other member states; 
2. They do, however, impose the centrally agreed tariff rates on imports from the rest of the world, the so-called Common External Tariff (CET); 
3. They give up the ability to negotiate trade relationships with other countries. This power is transferred to the EU. 

Where Theresa May has come unstuck with the negotiation:

1. She wants tariff free trade with the EU whilst not applying tariffs on product and services brought into the UK from the rest of the world. Hence, the cake and eat it scenario. 
2. The election, the result weakened her hand considerably. Although in many ways it should not have done, 80% of the votes were won on a Brexit manifesto.

To achieve 1 above this was always a tall order, a modicum of compromise was always inevitable. But to find ourselves in the situation we are today well, that is due to dishonesty on the part of MPs that have obfuscated beyond their mandate.

For the EU to agree to 1 above this would result in the rest of the world driving their exports to the EU via the UK, therefore avoiding the CET. This would be folly on the part of the EU, not least for the loss of revenue. Of course advocates of the Customs Union are keen we remain a member. But again there are no intrinsic benefits to our membership. Food, clothing and footwear would still have considerable tariffs applied, and of course we would not be able to strike free trade deals from around the world. As I've said before the EU take less of our exports at a time when WTO countries trade has grown substantially. 

Not to make light of the tariffs more to show the bizarre way in which they are applied. Unicycles have a 15% tariff applied, whereby a sub orbital spacecraft has only a 4% levy. Food and beverages are subject to considerably more. Confectionery has a tariff just shy of 30%, some dairy products that's around 50%, Grapes 17% and frozen prawns 20%. If you research the tariff regime it's clear there is no logic to this and nor can anyone explain the rational, it is purely arbitrary. 

I'll leave this blog here. I continue to hope we follow through and free ourselves from these shackles. 

As Margaret Thatcher said:

Myth and Paradox of the Single Market

Attached is a link to an excellent document put together by Michael Burrage of Civitas. It is an expose of the single market and the limited value, to be kind that membership offers. 

Myth and Paradox of 

the Single Market

How the trade benefits of EU membership 

have been mis-sold

Michael Burrage

Link to: Single Market Exposé

Part One: The Myth of the Single Market’s Trade Benefits

1. A doubling of trade? A minister’s claim to parliament 8

2. Reviewing the evidence 15

3. What business told, and didn’t tell, the Foreign Office 34

Part Two: The Paradox of Who Benefits from the Single Market

4. What would have happened

in the absence of the Single Market? 64

5. Is there a single market in services? 89

6. Does ‘helping to make the rules’

in Brussels help UK exports? 103

Part Three: Conclusions

7. Image without substance 114

8. The case for an EU research agency in the UK 125

Appendices

A: BIS reply to the author’s FOI request 134

B: A 2007 report by EC staff

on the impact of the Internal Market 138

The remainers paint the leavers as liars, thieves and vagabonds.  Consider just a few points below and then ponder over the insistence that we must be part of the Single Market.

From the beginning (a fairy tale this is not). Early 70s until 2015 there are just 37 FTA agreements that the EU have negotiated with small countries, in some cases collections of countries. This brings the total to 55 as of 2017. The total GDP of these countries is just $7.7trn.

In 2011 A report was produced by the Department for Business, Innovation and skills (BIS). This report was seized upon, misinterpreted forming astonishing results which have proved to be untrue. The Minister of state took the now fabricated version of this report and informed Parliament. He claimed that: ‘

• EU countries trade twice as much with each other as they would do in the absence of the Single Market programme’.

Under the freedom of information act the report was eventually published. Upon examination, it was shown that this claim was a lie. 

• Sir Edward Jonathan Davey MP FRSA is a British Liberal Democrat politician. He has been the Member of Parliament for Kingston and Surbiton since the 2017 general election, having previously been MP for the constituency from 1997 to 2015.

There were no such findings, there was no such research to prove this theory out. In fact the report was based on a report produced in 2007 by three French Academics. This report was taken compiled together with an EU report which was an attempt to find failings with the single market, to prove a case for more integration and central control.

With the upcoming release of the document the Minister perhaps sensing a discomfort added further reports, produced after his claims. In a vain hope to recover his now tattered image these reports were: 

1. An internal report the department had published, but this showed no reliable evidence on the benefits of the Single Market.
2. A Review of the Balance of Competence between the UK and the EU, which was conducted by the Foreign Office. Inclusive of claims by the bastion of impartiality the CBI, TheCityUK and various trade federations and businesses. They each claimed that UK exporters have benefited by ceding responsibility for trade negotiations to the EC.

No report cited any evidence which supported the Minister's claim, clearly he misled the house.

To come to the 55 trade agreements now in place with various small countries and collections of countries. In total a GDP of$7.7trn.  Michael Burrage of Civitas compares here with those negotiated by Chile, Korea, Singapore and Switzerland, four independent countries which have none of the ‘heft’ or ‘clout’ or ‘negotiating leverage’ which the CBI and many businesses consider essential in trade negotiations. 

The conclusions are:

• By contrast the aggregate GDP of all the countries with which Chile had agreements in force is $58.3tn, Korea’s totalled $40.8tn, Singapore’s $38.7tn and Switzerland’s $39.8tn. However, the agreements of these four countries include their agreements with the EU, which has a GDP of $16.7tn.

• About 90 per cent of the agreements of these four smaller, independent countries include services, whereas only 68 per cent of the EC’s trade agreements do so.

• The EC has therefore opened services markets of just $4.8tn to UK exporters, whereas the Swiss have opened markets of $35tn, the Singaporeans of $37.2tn, the Koreans of $40tn and Chileans of $55.4tn. However, we do not know if the EC agreements secured better terms than these independent countries, since the scope of these agreements has never been compared in detail.

• Analysis of the growth of UK exports of goods before and after EC agreements have come into force, for at least five years, shows that in most cases (10 out of 15) the post-agreement growth of UK exports has fallen. The five countries where the post-agreement growth of UK exports rose were Turkey, Chile, Lebanon, Papua New Guinea and Fiji. These therefore are the clear success stories of 42 years of EC negotiation on the UK’s behalf. Their total GDP in 2015 was $1.1tn, which is significantly less than the $1.5tn GDP of Australia with which the EC has yet to negotiate an agreement.

• By contrast most of Switzerland’s agreements (11 out of 15), most of Singapore’s (eight out of 12) and most of Korea’s (four out of five) have been followed by an increase in the rate of growth of their exports to the partner countries. Most Chilean agreements (13 out of 18) have been followed by a decline in the growth of their exports, though they differ from the British in that most of their pre-agreement rates of growth to these 13 countries were unsustainably high.

As you see the obfuscation dates way back, clearly indicating considerable vested interests which are not inline with the UK's or its subjects vested interests.

Attached is a link to an excellent document put together by Michael Burrage of Civitas. It is an expose of the single market and the limited value, to be kind that membership offers. 

Myth and Paradox of 

the Single Market

How the trade benefits of EU membership 

have been mis-sold

Michael Burrage

Link to: Single Market Exposé

Part One: The Myth of the Single Market’s Trade Benefits

1. A doubling of trade? A minister’s claim to parliament 8

2. Reviewing the evidence 15

3. What business told, and didn’t tell, the Foreign Office 34

Part Two: The Paradox of Who Benefits from the Single Market

4. What would have happened

in the absence of the Single Market? 64

5. Is there a single market in services? 89

6. Does ‘helping to make the rules’

in Brussels help UK exports? 103

Part Three: Conclusions

7. Image without substance 114

8. The case for an EU research agency in the UK 125

Appendices

A: BIS reply to the author’s FOI request 134

B: A 2007 report by EC staff

on the impact of the Internal Market 138

The remainers paint the leavers as liars, thieves and vagabonds.  Consider just a few points below and then ponder over the insistence that we must be part of the Single Market.

From the beginning (a fairy tale this is not). Early 70s until 2015 there are just 37 FTA agreements that the EU have negotiated with small countries, in some cases collections of countries. This brings the total to 55 as of 2017. The total GDP of these countries is just $7.7trn.

In 2011 A report was produced by the Department for Business, Innovation and skills (BIS). This report was seized upon, misinterpreted forming astonishing results which have proved to be untrue. The Minister of state took the now fabricated version of this report and informed Parliament. He claimed that: ‘

• EU countries trade twice as much with each other as they would do in the absence of the Single Market programme’.

Under the freedom of information act the report was eventually published. Upon examination, it was shown that this claim was a lie. 

• Sir Edward Jonathan Davey MP FRSA is a British Liberal Democrat politician. He has been the Member of Parliament for Kingston and Surbiton since the 2017 general election, having previously been MP for the constituency from 1997 to 2015.

There were no such findings, there was no such research to prove this theory out. In fact the report was based on a report produced in 2007 by three French Academics. This report was taken compiled together with an EU report which was an attempt to find failings with the single market, to prove a case for more integration and central control.

With the upcoming release of the document the Minister perhaps sensing a discomfort added further reports, produced after his claims. In a vain hope to recover his now tattered image these reports were: 

1. An internal report the department had published, but this showed no reliable evidence on the benefits of the Single Market.
2. A Review of the Balance of Competence between the UK and the EU, which was conducted by the Foreign Office. Inclusive of claims by the bastion of impartiality the CBI, TheCityUK and various trade federations and businesses. They each claimed that UK exporters have benefited by ceding responsibility for trade negotiations to the EC.

No report cited any evidence which supported the Minister's claim, clearly he misled the house.

To come to the 55 trade agreements now in place with various small countries and collections of countries. In total a GDP of$7.7trn.  Michael Burrage of Civitas compares here with those negotiated by Chile, Korea, Singapore and Switzerland, four independent countries which have none of the ‘heft’ or ‘clout’ or ‘negotiating leverage’ which the CBI and many businesses consider essential in trade negotiations. 

The conclusions are:

• By contrast the aggregate GDP of all the countries with which Chile had agreements in force is $58.3tn, Korea’s totalled $40.8tn, Singapore’s $38.7tn and Switzerland’s $39.8tn. However, the agreements of these four countries include their agreements with the EU, which has a GDP of $16.7tn.

• About 90 per cent of the agreements of these four smaller, independent countries include services, whereas only 68 per cent of the EC’s trade agreements do so.

• The EC has therefore opened services markets of just $4.8tn to UK exporters, whereas the Swiss have opened markets of $35tn, the Singaporeans of $37.2tn, the Koreans of $40tn and Chileans of $55.4tn. However, we do not know if the EC agreements secured better terms than these independent countries, since the scope of these agreements has never been compared in detail.

• Analysis of the growth of UK exports of goods before and after EC agreements have come into force, for at least five years, shows that in most cases (10 out of 15) the post-agreement growth of UK exports has fallen. The five countries where the post-agreement growth of UK exports rose were Turkey, Chile, Lebanon, Papua New Guinea and Fiji. These therefore are the clear success stories of 42 years of EC negotiation on the UK’s behalf. Their total GDP in 2015 was $1.1tn, which is significantly less than the $1.5tn GDP of Australia with which the EC has yet to negotiate an agreement.

• By contrast most of Switzerland’s agreements (11 out of 15), most of Singapore’s (eight out of 12) and most of Korea’s (four out of five) have been followed by an increase in the rate of growth of their exports to the partner countries. Most Chilean agreements (13 out of 18) have been followed by a decline in the growth of their exports, though they differ from the British in that most of their pre-agreement rates of growth to these 13 countries were unsustainably high.

As you see the obfuscation dates way back, clearly indicating considerable vested interests which are not inline with the UK's or its subjects vested interests.

Remainers Talisman Affection For The Single / Union

I’ve tried hard to find any evidence that shows why Nick Clegg, Sir John Major, Tony Blair, Nicola Sturgeon, et al., believe that being in the single market is so important. Indeed, their belief is so strong they are prepared to break the union up. Yet they provide no supporting evidence as to why they believe it!.

Even representatives of our business community race to support our membership, yet they too are incapable of providing data to support their claims. Their only reason is we export a lot to Europe as though this will die after we leave. This is rubbish it would be a serious act of sabotage on the EU part if they stopped selling their cars, cheese, wine etc., into the UK. Only a petulant child would harm themselves in such a way.

Indeed, there is plenty of evidence out there that shows being a member of the single market has been exceedingly negative to the UK. I’ve said before WTO countries exports to the EU have grown significantly more than the UK exports to the EU.

Sure the single market in some areas has been a success, it has united 28 Countries into a single trading block. Margaret Thatcher pushed through the idea of a single market on the basis that it would unite and reduce regulation. If you look at the Cecchini report produced in 1988 it was incredibly optimistic about the single market, Predicting a 6.5% - 7% GDP increase over the first 5years.

Cecchini report - exert from the exec summary 1988 The Commission today revealed the results of a major study which It commissioned to

evaluate scientifically the benefits of the single market. This study which will shortly be published In book form provides the hard evidence, the confirmation of what those who are engaged In building Europe have always known: that the failure to achieve a single market has been costing European Industry dearly In unnecessary costs and lost opportunities; that the completion of the Internal market will provide the economic context for the regeneration of European Industry In both goods and services; and that It will give a permanent boost to the prosperity of the people of Europe. Cecchini report 1988

Even its ardent supporters had to admit it was overly optimistic. In fact all data shows that being a member of both the single market and customs union have provided the UK with a net loss. Yet scraggly politicians and business organizations all espouse sagely that we must continue our membership. My only conclusion they really don’t understand the market at all.

In fact to go one step further:

Roger Bootle has likened their fascination, talisman type reverence to the single market like that of the dying days of the soviet empire.

“Muttering support for the Single Market has become rather like, during the dying years of the Soviet Union, mouthing ritualistic quotes from Marx about the inevitable triumph of Communism - things you just repeat because that’s what you have always done and it’s what everybody else does, without ever questioning their relation to reality”.

I’ve tried hard to find any evidence that shows why Nick Clegg, Sir John Major, Tony Blair, Nicola Sturgeon, et al., believe that being in the single market is so important. Indeed, their belief is so strong they are prepared to break the union up. Yet they provide no supporting evidence as to why they believe it!.

Even representatives of our business community race to support our membership, yet they too are incapable of providing data to support their claims. Their only reason is we export a lot to Europe as though this will die after we leave. This is rubbish it would be a serious act of sabotage on the EU part if they stopped selling their cars, cheese, wine etc., into the UK. Only a petulant child would harm themselves in such a way.

Indeed, there is plenty of evidence out there that shows being a member of the single market has been exceedingly negative to the UK. I’ve said before WTO countries exports to the EU have grown significantly more than the UK exports to the EU.

Sure the single market in some areas has been a success, it has united 28 Countries into a single trading block. Margaret Thatcher pushed through the idea of a single market on the basis that it would unite and reduce regulation. If you look at the Cecchini report produced in 1988 it was incredibly optimistic about the single market, Predicting a 6.5% - 7% GDP increase over the first 5years.

Cecchini report - exert from the exec summary 1988 The Commission today revealed the results of a major study which It commissioned to

evaluate scientifically the benefits of the single market. This study which will shortly be published In book form provides the hard evidence, the confirmation of what those who are engaged In building Europe have always known: that the failure to achieve a single market has been costing European Industry dearly In unnecessary costs and lost opportunities; that the completion of the Internal market will provide the economic context for the regeneration of European Industry In both goods and services; and that It will give a permanent boost to the prosperity of the people of Europe. Cecchini report 1988

Even its ardent supporters had to admit it was overly optimistic. In fact all data shows that being a member of both the single market and customs union have provided the UK with a net loss. Yet scraggly politicians and business organizations all espouse sagely that we must continue our membership. My only conclusion they really don’t understand the market at all.

In fact to go one step further:

Roger Bootle has likened their fascination, talisman type reverence to the single market like that of the dying days of the soviet empire.

“Muttering support for the Single Market has become rather like, during the dying years of the Soviet Union, mouthing ritualistic quotes from Marx about the inevitable triumph of Communism - things you just repeat because that’s what you have always done and it’s what everybody else does, without ever questioning their relation to reality”.

Is this really what we want for our future within the EU? Hell no!

No comment needed!  Comments courtesy of the 

Three Stooges no coincidence

intended here!

Not really!

No comment needed!  Comments courtesy of the 

Three Stooges no coincidence

intended here!

Not really!

The EU Is No Longer Fit For Purpose - Hell, Recalling Ambassadors!?

Go to Hell

Oh, dear we seemed to have rattled the EU Lords and Masters. I suggest they put this deal to bed in a sensible way, before they implode. Italy and France are fractured, France is faced with industrial strife that will ensure they are relegated to the Southern league of countries. As the economies continue to splutter under the regulatory burden then France's ability to mask their non-compliance with regulations, that they produce will become more visible, fractures will deepen. What on earth France to recall its EU ambassador to Italy. 

The EU is not fit for purpose! Mrs May made clear, WTO rules In her Lancaster House speech are better than a ‘bad deal’. This was widely interpreted as meaning that the UK would be prepared to walk away from the negotiations if an agreement can not be reached. We will rely on WTO rules as a framework under which to conduct trade. This was supposed to strengthen the UK’s negotiating hand because it implied that if the EU did not play ball with the UK there was a perfectly acceptable fall-back position. Then came remainers, doom sayer's creating many synonyms: Crashing Out, Cliff Edge, Falling off a cliff, falling into the clutches of WTO etc. This of course suited their narrative. But it's wrong, its pure sensationalism to distort the facts. For a start the UK was a founding member of the WTO and still holds its seat at the table. 

Only Stupid People Call People Stupid

Such sound bites have in fact influenced the outcome, but not in a way the EU expected. On one hand the EU have taken comfort that the powers will prevent a no deal. Therefore, the EU offered the worst deal possible. Probably encourage by Blair in order that the people of Britain will see the folly of their way and overturn the vote. On the other hand, people have seen through this and reacted to being labelled as stupid little Englanders. The EU should of known, when we are backed into a corner we rarely emerge in a way the opposition expects. Has history taught these guys' nothing. 

WTO as a proposition is perfectly acceptable.

However, that didn't stop eminent vested parties expressing their fear of a no deal outcome. In October 2016, the heads of four industrial lobby groups, the CBI, the EEF, the ICC and techUK, published an open letter to the Prime Minister saying: …

“Every credible study that has been conducted has shown that this WTO option would do serious and lasting damage to the UK economy and those of our trading partners. The Government should give certainty to business by immediately ruling this option out under any circumstances”. 

Again project fear. At no time have they identified what these ‘credible studies’ were. It's as though they want to portray the WTO is some sort of monster organization that consumes its members — especially juicy new ones like the UK. As I said before it is our brainchild, and we have our place at the WTO table.

USA trades with the EU under WTO

US - EU trade under WTO

For the monster that it is the EU trades with 111 countries including China (and Hong Kong), India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and the United States they do this perfectly well under WTO. In fact, they do it better, since the formation of the Single Market in 1993, the growth rate of UK exports to these ‘WTO Only’ countries has been four times faster than the growth of UK exports to the EU. Meanwhile, over this same period, the growth rate of exports from the 14 top ‘WTO Only’ countries to the EU has been 27% higher than exports to the EU from the UK. 

If trading under WTO is so scary then let's just rename it to the ‘American Version’ — because America trades with the EU, including the UK, extremely well. In fact, as umpteen countries do. Suddenly it doesn’t sound so disastrous. Indeed, when you examine the facts about different trading relationships, as collated by the redoubtable Michael Burrage,19 ‘WTO Only’ (Micheal Burrage Senior Research Fellow at Civitas) does not sound unappealing at all. Trading on a ‘WTO Only’ basis rely on the rules of the WTO for their trading arrangements and to settle any disputes. The WTO rules dictate only the maximum tariffs that may be applied. It is perfectly possible for a member country to reduce these tariffs or, indeed, to abolish them altogether. 

It shows that ‘the WTO clutches’ are not at all clutch-like.

Go to Hell

Oh, dear we seemed to have rattled the EU Lords and Masters. I suggest they put this deal to bed in a sensible way, before they implode. Italy and France are fractured, France is faced with industrial strife that will ensure they are relegated to the Southern league of countries. As the economies continue to splutter under the regulatory burden then France's ability to mask their non-compliance with regulations, that they produce will become more visible, fractures will deepen. What on earth France to recall its EU ambassador to Italy. 

The EU is not fit for purpose! Mrs May made clear, WTO rules In her Lancaster House speech are better than a ‘bad deal’. This was widely interpreted as meaning that the UK would be prepared to walk away from the negotiations if an agreement can not be reached. We will rely on WTO rules as a framework under which to conduct trade. This was supposed to strengthen the UK’s negotiating hand because it implied that if the EU did not play ball with the UK there was a perfectly acceptable fall-back position. Then came remainers, doom sayer's creating many synonyms: Crashing Out, Cliff Edge, Falling off a cliff, falling into the clutches of WTO etc. This of course suited their narrative. But it's wrong, its pure sensationalism to distort the facts. For a start the UK was a founding member of the WTO and still holds its seat at the table. 

Only Stupid People Call People Stupid

Such sound bites have in fact influenced the outcome, but not in a way the EU expected. On one hand the EU have taken comfort that the powers will prevent a no deal. Therefore, the EU offered the worst deal possible. Probably encourage by Blair in order that the people of Britain will see the folly of their way and overturn the vote. On the other hand, people have seen through this and reacted to being labelled as stupid little Englanders. The EU should of known, when we are backed into a corner we rarely emerge in a way the opposition expects. Has history taught these guys' nothing. 

WTO as a proposition is perfectly acceptable.

However, that didn't stop eminent vested parties expressing their fear of a no deal outcome. In October 2016, the heads of four industrial lobby groups, the CBI, the EEF, the ICC and techUK, published an open letter to the Prime Minister saying: …

“Every credible study that has been conducted has shown that this WTO option would do serious and lasting damage to the UK economy and those of our trading partners. The Government should give certainty to business by immediately ruling this option out under any circumstances”. 

Again project fear. At no time have they identified what these ‘credible studies’ were. It's as though they want to portray the WTO is some sort of monster organization that consumes its members — especially juicy new ones like the UK. As I said before it is our brainchild, and we have our place at the WTO table.

USA trades with the EU under WTO

US - EU trade under WTO

For the monster that it is the EU trades with 111 countries including China (and Hong Kong), India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore, and the United States they do this perfectly well under WTO. In fact, they do it better, since the formation of the Single Market in 1993, the growth rate of UK exports to these ‘WTO Only’ countries has been four times faster than the growth of UK exports to the EU. Meanwhile, over this same period, the growth rate of exports from the 14 top ‘WTO Only’ countries to the EU has been 27% higher than exports to the EU from the UK. 

If trading under WTO is so scary then let's just rename it to the ‘American Version’ — because America trades with the EU, including the UK, extremely well. In fact, as umpteen countries do. Suddenly it doesn’t sound so disastrous. Indeed, when you examine the facts about different trading relationships, as collated by the redoubtable Michael Burrage,19 ‘WTO Only’ (Micheal Burrage Senior Research Fellow at Civitas) does not sound unappealing at all. Trading on a ‘WTO Only’ basis rely on the rules of the WTO for their trading arrangements and to settle any disputes. The WTO rules dictate only the maximum tariffs that may be applied. It is perfectly possible for a member country to reduce these tariffs or, indeed, to abolish them altogether. 

It shows that ‘the WTO clutches’ are not at all clutch-like.

We are where the remainers intended us to be!

Brexit The Remainer Reality 

We are not for a second at all! Understand the vote was done. 

The result was agreed. Honour your pledge. Leave you now must! 

We are not Ireland we're not Denmark we're bigger than that. 

Maastricht was bullied through the house. It was the beginning of the cloud. 

Again a referendum... no way William Hague. 

We disagree a 2nd referendum, it's dumb! 

The voting down of May's deal you say is a calamity. 

Calamity was the vote at all.. Deal was wrong it should not have gone. 

Campaign will be corrosive, prolong for what. 

Result the same, no deal the aim. Move on avoid the shame.... leave! 

Do it again! A plebiscite! Parties are doomed, populism is now in full bloom.  

Tsunami for sure will sweep our shores! Not since 1834 have we rocked the core. 

Robert Peel his legacy swept aside as the Sourby's and Grieves connive!  

Again a referendum... no way William Hague. 

We disagree a 2nd referendum, it's dumb! 

The voting down of May's deal you say is a calamity. 

Calamity was the vote at all.. Deal was wrong it should not have gone. 

Labour oh labour so keen to appear squeaky clean. They have muddied the floor for us all. 

Vision denied strategy connived. Opportunism prioritised. Voters are denied. 

Dissent paralysed. A past shows all from the USSR. Question the characters the wrath will appear. 

Power is their mantra... how they don't care! 

Again a referendum... no way William Hague. 

We disagree a 2nd referendum, it's dumb! 

The voting down of May's deal you say is a calamity. 

Calamity was the vote at all.. Deal was wrong it should not have gone. 

Damage is done by all of the incumbent. 

Populism will appear across the entire sphere. 

The parties have done this, they should be proud! 

We are where the remainers intended us to be! 

Brexit The Remainer Reality 

We are not for a second at all! Understand the vote was done. 

The result was agreed. Honour your pledge. Leave you now must! 

We are not Ireland we're not Denmark we're bigger than that. 

Maastricht was bullied through the house. It was the beginning of the cloud. 

Again a referendum... no way William Hague. 

We disagree a 2nd referendum, it's dumb! 

The voting down of May's deal you say is a calamity. 

Calamity was the vote at all.. Deal was wrong it should not have gone. 

Campaign will be corrosive, prolong for what. 

Result the same, no deal the aim. Move on avoid the shame.... leave! 

Do it again! A plebiscite! Parties are doomed, populism is now in full bloom.  

Tsunami for sure will sweep our shores! Not since 1834 have we rocked the core. 

Robert Peel his legacy swept aside as the Sourby's and Grieves connive!  

Again a referendum... no way William Hague. 

We disagree a 2nd referendum, it's dumb! 

The voting down of May's deal you say is a calamity. 

Calamity was the vote at all.. Deal was wrong it should not have gone. 

Labour oh labour so keen to appear squeaky clean. They have muddied the floor for us all. 

Vision denied strategy connived. Opportunism prioritised. Voters are denied. 

Dissent paralysed. A past shows all from the USSR. Question the characters the wrath will appear. 

Power is their mantra... how they don't care! 

Again a referendum... no way William Hague. 

We disagree a 2nd referendum, it's dumb! 

The voting down of May's deal you say is a calamity. 

Calamity was the vote at all.. Deal was wrong it should not have gone. 

Damage is done by all of the incumbent. 

Populism will appear across the entire sphere. 

The parties have done this, they should be proud! 

We are where the remainers intended us to be!