Robert Jenrick has tweeted a list of measures for growth, now compiled into a glossy PDF brochure. What’s interesting about these measures is that they mainly remove artificial inhibitors on growth. Britain’s stagnation is wholly self-inflicted (with a little help from the EU. We’d be a lot better off even even half of them were implemented, but the left would fight to the death to stop any one of them being implemented.
For me mitigation planning has a very obvious place to go-if the EU nations try to impose huge penalties, enact a determined pivot to completely alternative supply chains and trade connections via free trade with the US and Far East/Japan. You’d need to plan a public database of alternative suppliers and go through major areas where the EU tariffs would hit hard. We can and should determine what necessary goods we can obtain elsewhere, and what products we sell can be sold elsewhere. The EU is effectively a hostile power that demands unjust and unfair arrangements and controls over us, and we should act accordingly to shift our focus elsewhere.
The EU is hostile, but countries within the EU are now more inclined to the British public’s view that the EU is not beneficial to their country.
Planning ahead and diplomacy are of prime importance.
Then there’s the British media.
A handicap to re negotiating or walking away from a bad deal.
I don’t know how that particular problem can be resolved, though perhaps publishing the ownership and funding to them might undercut there message a little.
So be frightened of the EU. They can impoverish us.
The same debates that won the Brexit vote still apply.
We buy more from the EU than they buy from the UK. They have more to lose if they want to be awkward.
However the same problem occurs over the perfidy of the British establishment undermining UK negotiations.
The difference now is more countries in the EU accept the reasons that were put forward by the UK (UKIP) to leave it.
Whilst there might be some solidarity within the EU over the UKs decision to rip up previous agreements, the circumstances have changed.
The overall sentiment (outside the EUs leadership) is ‘We want to be in the same place as the UK, reducing ties with the EU’.
Certainly politicians in France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Hungary will be more inclined to support a UK position if also seen as a matter of self interest.
For me mitigation planning has a very obvious place to go-if the EU nations try to impose huge penalties, enact a determined pivot to completely alternative supply chains and trade connections via free trade with the US and Far East/Japan. You’d need to plan a public database of alternative suppliers and go through major areas where the EU tariffs would hit hard. We can and should determine what necessary goods we can obtain elsewhere, and what products we sell can be sold elsewhere. The EU is effectively a hostile power that demands unjust and unfair arrangements and controls over us, and we should act accordingly to shift our focus elsewhere.
The EU is hostile, but countries within the EU are now more inclined to the British public’s view that the EU is not beneficial to their country.
Planning ahead and diplomacy are of prime importance.
Then there’s the British media.
A handicap to re negotiating or walking away from a bad deal.
I don’t know how that particular problem can be resolved, though perhaps publishing the ownership and funding to them might undercut there message a little.
So be frightened of the EU. They can impoverish us.
The same debates that won the Brexit vote still apply.
We buy more from the EU than they buy from the UK. They have more to lose if they want to be awkward.
However the same problem occurs over the perfidy of the British establishment undermining UK negotiations.
The difference now is more countries in the EU accept the reasons that were put forward by the UK (UKIP) to leave it.
Whilst there might be some solidarity within the EU over the UKs decision to rip up previous agreements, the circumstances have changed.
The overall sentiment (outside the EUs leadership) is ‘We want to be in the same place as the UK, reducing ties with the EU’.
Certainly politicians in France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Hungary will be more inclined to support a UK position if also seen as a matter of self interest.
Is the cup half empty or half full?
Maybe designed to shoot Burnham’s fox if he tries to rejoin? The EU might not be so keen if they thought that this was waiting for them after 2029.
Has being in the EU ever been beneficial to the population as a whole or just to a few politicians ?