Westministenders. Boris grabs his clown suit for Halloween, whilst we wonder if parliament survive until Bonfire Night

[RedToothBrush]

Remember, remember the 5th of November. Gunpower, treason and plot. For I see no reason Why Gunpowder Treason Should ever be forgot.

Here we are 401 years after Guy Fawkes was foiled. The failed attempt to kill the King and destroy parliament celebrates stopping what is now regarded generally as an attempted act of terrorism but to others he was a martyr.

This division would form part of the dynamic between various factions following the death of Elizabeth I which eventually led the civil war as Charles I dismissed Parliament to avoid its scrutiny. A division that lead to Irish and Scottish uprisings. A division that lead to the lost of many of our then colonies to another nation.

You start to wonder just how much has changed within British Society.

The dynamics of the era might be different, but following the referendum vote we have a power vacuum into which our uncertain direction and future is fuelling cries of ‘traitor’, there is widespread loathing of Europeans and their values who apparently ‘threaten our way of life’, many are simply given the label of ‘potential terrorist’ purely for their religion, there is ill feeling throughout Ireland, in Scotland, there is talk of revolt and uprising, our parliamentary democracy seems potentially under threat by the power of the crown and the relative stability of the long reign of Queen Elizabeth must end soon and her heir to the throne is a man named Charles.

Strangely enough, many of the rights being quoted in the a50 case originate from this same period of turbulence in British history, or from the direct consequences of it. It is not a coincidence.

So where are we at? The decision on a50 and what it means for our parliament is due before the end of the month. It is not likely to be the final ruling but it will set the tone and direction for what happens next. Is it likely to win?

In my opinion, whilst the constitutional argument might be strong in principle the challenge has a great deal of merit. Several of these might win out but the most compelling of these is: If a50 is triggered and our government is unable to reach an agreement by the end of two years we will leave the EU and rights will be removed as a direct result which is outside the power of the royal prerogative.

Against this, May herself has set up an atmosphere where the court challenge which is a protected right of the people to challenge the government has been framed as ‘subverting democracy’ which raises questions about how the ruling will be accepted if it goes in favour of the claimant. The anger on display on Question time last night is worrying. The government must make a strong point about respecting the ruling even if they challenge it. And conversely if the challenge looses, they must acknowledge its merits and legitimacy to appeal rather than allowing it to be framed as a blank cheque for their agenda.

It must – once again - be stressed that the challenge is not about thwarting Brexit. It is about making sure that Brexit is done properly and with due diligence.

And you have to seriously wonder if May is using due diligence. Donald Tusk said we might get into a situation where it is ‘hard brexit’ or ‘no brexit’. This has been interpreted as an EU threat. Personally I think it is nothing of sort. It’s a warning. For our own good.

The much talked about CETA agreement (Candian Free Trade agreement) all but collapsed on Friday due to a single region of Belgium opposing it. It is now in last chance saloon to save the deal. This is the context behind Tusk’s comment. He also warned that CETA might be the EU’s last FTA as result of the difficulties in trying to pass it.

What he meant was the chances are that no agreement will be possible with the approach the British seem to be taking. This means the alternatives will be a chaotic unmanaged exit with no transitional deal or a realisation that we are better off sticking in the EU afterall.

Understanding this is important. May is missing this in her determination to be tough, and is further alienating European leaders. May has made assurances to Nissan, but the reality is she is in no position to make any such promises as the reality is if she stick so tightly to the line on immigration she has no way of keeping them. The EU will give us no ground at all here no matter what anyone says. The harder May is, they harder they will be.

When Cameron tried to do a deal which restricted migration, the brick wall he hit was the fact he could find no evidence to back up the claim that migration was a problem. When he turned to MigrationWatch for help the best they could come up with was newspaper clippings. The UK lie 13th in the EEA for migration. The EU pointed out that all the problems this highlighted where caused by UK level policy rather than EU policy and Cameron was forced to admit that hostility to migration was much more cultural rather than an economic or one over services. As a commentor in the FT sums up: “In other words, lots of middle English people culturally dislike immigrants even though the immigrant didn’t have any negative impact on them.” Notably Thursday’s questiontime came from Hartlepool – a area with hardly any immigration and where 95.6% of the population are white english born. Its also been a week where there has been uproar over 14 refugee children coming to the UK due to their age, gender and lack of cuteness, whilst announcements over no more money for the NHS have been all but totally ignored. It’s a sentiment that is getting increasingly difficult to argue with especially with the overall tone coming from May’s lips and actions.

Tusk’s speech was also strong on 1930s references and this is largely the motivation behind strong comments from Hollande and Merkel about a deal being hard to get. They simply won’t stand for rhetoric which they believe sounds as if it has fascist undertones. The message was lost in the British press though. On top of this, even if Hollande goes, Saroksy and Juppe have been lining up to talk about moving Calais’s problems to Kent. Something that is entirely possible if we disregard our international commitments to Dublin.

This is why we need the article 50 ruling so badly. And this is why May is so opposed to it. It actually gives her a way to back down and save face. Failing that parliament must up the ante and pressure May with its full force – and it may cost her dear. And this is why the right wing media who make a profit from peddling lies about migration are so opposed to them as May is such a kindred spirit.

It has got nothing to do with an elite conspiracy to derail Brexit. Many, many remainers with heavy hearts think it must happen to prevent a further lurch to the right. It is not because Brexit must be stopped, but because May’s self destructive vision and approach to Brexit must be stopped and replaced by an approach that at least acknowledges the dangers rather than labelling it as treason or a lack of patriotism to do so. Marmitegate has been our warning; Leadsom has this week has been unable to refute the possibility that food prices will go up 27% something that many working class leave voters who feel left behind just can’t afford. That way lies even greater hardship and division.

Brexit MUST have a transitional deal if it is to work at all, however unpopular this might be and however people are afraid that delays will kill Brexit entirely or be seen as a fudge as this is in the national interest. This needs to start being the approach of all and pushed to the public by Leavers and Remainers alike

Brexit MUST not trigger a50 on a certain date because May made a political promise to her supporters and this happens to suit the EU’s agenda too. It must be when we are ready, when we have a better consensus and when we are prepared. The uncertainty over whether we will achieve a smooth change is as damaging as a delay to investment. Brexit MUST also include tackling xenophobic attitudes and confronting our centuries old ingrained mentality as this brand of ‘British Values’ were the ones that lead us not to our greatest moment, but the one that lead us to perhaps our greatest crisis and threat to our future.

I find a certain irony - and also a creeping fear - that the first article 50 ruling should fall at this time of year. Especially since the British celebration is being forgotten increasingly being replaced in favour of the more American Halloween. I wonder what further frights and horrors await us over the next couple of weeks.

math that article is so upsetting. Goaded by the media, we are returning to the Victorian notion of deserving/undeserving people and, like our forebears, we're happy to extend our judgments to children, as well as adults, and avert our eyes while they suffer.

I think it is very upsetting too. I think a Rubicon has been crossed and choices have been deliberately made to appeal to the lowest instincts in people. It's not just 'post truth' but a 'post common decency' climate that prevails.

It's not just 'post truth' but a 'post common decency' climate that prevails.

I fear you are quite right math

Sadly post common decency describes it well. I'm increasingly appalled at what I'm seeing. The callousness and disregard for values that, I can see now, I've been taking for granted.

I'm gobsmacked at the hubris of Arlene Foster refusing to go to the summit about the practical implications of Brexit on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

Her comment about needing to concentrate instead on the opportunities arising from Brexit means she is sticking her head in the sand one can only assume that she is happy for a hard border to be re-instated, as that is the only way the "opportunities" could be "exploited" legally.

I'm gobsmacked at the hubris of Arlene Foster refusing to go to the summit about the practical implications of Brexit on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

The BBC reported:

Mrs Foster described it as a "grandstanding exercise" and said she had better things to do than be a "lone voice among remoaners"

It's appalling, but I'm not surprised, as it seems typical of many Brexit voters. We've seen it over and over again on these threads: people who supported Brexit, but who have no answers, no sensible contribution to make to dialogue and no willingness to acknowledge the potential cock-up. Instead, they strop off, complaining about 'remoaners'.

^^ the extent that Leavers are going to to avoid discussions on here and IRL is actually terrifying- where's it all going to end?

Agree bear, both here and real life, their behaviour is infantile. I'm so sick of "the people have spoken", "remoaners", "got our country back", "scrounging/job stealing foreigners", and their ignorance and unwillingness to open their eyes...

Listed companies being urged to account for Brexit in their finances, plus news that 46% of banks are already unlikely to be able to meet the International Financial Reporting Standards (which they devised) in time for 2018. And that's before any additional work for Brexit - whatever that may be.

Now I am sure there will be howls of outrage from the Brexiteers - especially as this is a Euro suggestion. But if the rest of the world thinks it's a good idea (and if I were going to invest in a UK company, I'd damn well want to know what my exposure was) then they may just have to suck it up.

Of course, companies that deliberately misrepresent the costs of Brexit - maybe understate them - would subsequently be at risk of being sued.

Looks like an interesting dynamic. The politics to minimise or dismiss Brexit. But the business to act responsibly - or face the consequences.

www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/02/brexit_esma_urges_companies_to_disclose_potential_brexit_impact/

Mrs Foster described it as a "grandstanding exercise" and said she had better things to do than be a "lone voice among remoaners"

Isn't it the job of the First Minister to be uniting her country? That's an appalling comment.

It's not just 'post truth' but a 'post common decency' climate that prevails

My 10 year old ds is currently studying WW2 and I feel ashamed to be a citizen of a country that has so clearly failed to learn anything from what happened in Germany to enable the rise of Nazism.

Where's it going to end? Someone in yesterday's Guardian talked about how German universities were probably the leading universities pre WW1, and that it's taken them 3 generations to regain that status. Yes, 3 generations, about 75-80 years, not 3 decades. So I think we will damage many institutions and it will take that long to recover.

I do wish that those MPs who had voted Remain would start speaking out. Seems as though they were nearly all the the Boris Johnson mould - do whatever is best for them.

and I feel ashamed to be a citizen of a country that has so clearly failed to learn anything from what happened in Germany to enable the rise of Nazism.

Yes, but I am prepared to protest now. I don't want my grandchildren saying, "why didn't you do anything to stop it?" I don't care about the jibes from the Leavers. I will begin to listen to them when they begin to come up with coherent arguments, which so far they have singularly failed to do.

I believe all decent thinking MPs and journalists and academics and business leaders and union leaders and anyone with a voice (mumsnet writers!!) has a responsibility to keep speaking out loud and clear and challenging every example of the bile and hate that is causing us to go down this path of reviling the weak and vulnerable and turning our backs on the possibility of being part of a better world.

Me too peregrina
I'm not sure what I can do singularly but I'm not going to back down and suddenly accept that this behaviour is anything other than horrid.

Regarding you friend, my celtic looks have had me shouted at in the street for being a benefit scrounger/tourist. Its highly laughable when its the people outside the Jobseekers office doing it, the one I'm walking past and they're waiting to go in . I've dyed my hair now and have noticed that's damped the comments down, not that I did it to stop the comments but it feels awful to think that someone somewhere may feel they have to.

I will begin to listen to them when they begin to come up with coherent arguments, which so far they have singularly failed to do.

The problem is, they're not interested in saying anything so there's nothing to listen to. Both on here and IRL it's like a closed network where they are all happy in their own fantasy world and quite literally don't want to mention the word Brexit.

It's pretty tough to protest against that.

Yes, but I am prepared to protest now. I don't want my grandchildren saying, "why didn't you do anything to stop it?"

Me too, now is the time for every dissenting voice to speak out.
I have 4 dc 10 and under, it feels like a battle for their futures is underway.

Much to talk about this morning...

First up a50 news. People's challenge ruling speculated to be tomorrow. Will know sometime after 2.30pm today if that is the case.

A couple of significant points in here.

Mark Elliott ‏@ProfMarkElliott
Fascinating by @JoshuaRozenberg on A50 case. Notes speculation that Govt might not appeal if it loses in High Court

From Joshua Rozenberg's Facebook.

JUDGES TO RULE ON BREXIT TOMORROW?
The High Court may deliver its judgment on the article 50 Brexit challenge as early as tomorrow, Thursday.

That date has been mentioned to me by a number of sources but, because arrangements have to be made for a hearing, it will not be confirmed until 24 hours in advance.

Three senior judges headed by the lord chief justice will read out a summary of their reasons and then publish the full judgment online.
The proceedings will not be televised because Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, Sir Terence Etherton and Lord Justice Sales are sitting as a divisional court rather than as the Court of Appeal.

The judges have been asked to decide whether legislation is needed before the government can give notification under article 50 of the Treaty on European Union of its decision to withdraw from the EU.

The government’s view is that it can use its "prerogative" or executive powers and so there is no need for an act of parliament. That was challenged at a hearing last month and the court reserved judgment on 18 October.

Some observers thought that the government did not do as well as it had hoped during the oral argument. As a result, there is speculation that the court may decide that legislation is required.

That would leave the government with a dilemma: should it appeal or should it put a bill before parliament straight away?

An appeal in this case would almost certainly leapfrog the Court of Appeal and go straight to the Supreme Court. Section 12(3A) of the Administration of Justice Act 1969, inserted by the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, allows a judge to order this if:

a point of law of general public importance is involved; and
the proceedings entail a decision relating to a matter of national importance; or

the result of the proceedings is so significant that a hearing by the Supreme Court is justified; or

the judge is satisfied that the benefits of earlier consideration by the Supreme Court outweigh the benefits of consideration by the Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court is standing by to hear an appeal on 7 and 8 December. The justices have agreed that all 11 of them will sit if appeal goes ahead. This avoids any suggestion that a differently constituted court might have decided the case differently.

Normally, the Supreme Court sits in a panel of five to hear substantive appeals. However, seven or even nine judges may sit when the court is considering overturning an earlier decision. Sitting with an odd number of judges avoids the risk of a tie.

Until now, it has been assumed that the government would appeal if it loses in the High Court. But there is increasing speculation in legal circles that the prime minister would not take the risk of being defeated a second time in the Supreme Court.

That court would probably not deliver its ruling before January, leaving Theresa May with relatively little time to get legislation passed before her self-imposed deadline of 31 March.

If she accepts the court’s decision, she could introduce legislation next week.

It’s thought that a bill would be approved by MPs with little difficulty but might run into difficulties when it reaches the House of Lords. Critics of Brexit hope that delays in the Lords would encourage the government to think again.

The more time there is for the bill to go through parliament, the less effective any delaying tactics would be.

Just as Boris Johnson’s policy on cake was “pro having it and pro eating it”, the prime minister might introduce legislation as well as pressing on with an appeal. The case would not be moot until the legislation was passed.

Nobody outside the court has yet seen the judgment and, for now, this is pure speculation. But it won’t be long before we know where we stand.

Sir Paul Jenkins ‏@sirpauljenkins
Agree that if Govt lose they might legislate immediately. Aim for Bill so narrow in scope that amendts on negotiations are out of order.

Meanwhile, as business continues, the people who can't be games are starting to move about in the daylight.

Here's some more techie news ... our glorious Chancellor trying to convince overseas companies - in this case Microsoft - that the futures bright with Brexit.

Of course, HMG can just bribe Microsoft like Nissan to hum along with the mood music. But given that the amount of money this would take would easily dwarf the few pennies that may have been thrown at Nissan, one starts to wonder how long the magic bag of beans will bear fruit ?

Microsoft are a pivotal - possibly the pivotal company at the moment. They charge in dollars, so will increase prices (remember they have already announced a 22% hike) to match any decline in sterling.

This matters because almost all business of any note use Microsoft - obviously Windows and Office - but less obviously MS Servers, which also attract per-seat licences (depending on your agreement). So this is a cost increase across the board. Affecting businesses, local authorities, government departments and academic institutes.

It's like raising the price of fuel (which is already happening elsewhere).

Then, of course, there is the hardware needed to run this stuff - again priced in dollars.

All of a sudden, 4% inflation is starting to look a tad optimistic.

The 'Great' Repeal Act

www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2016/11/01/schona-jolly/henry-viii-clauses/
Blog piece on Henry VIII Clauses

It will be a virtually impossible task, grossly underestimated by the government, to ensure that all of that regulation already extensively debated and scrutinised, is replicated in domestic law, within the two-year negotiation period, with sufficient scrutiny and consideration by Parliament. That makes the use of Henry VIII clauses, which give government ministers the power to amend, repeal or improve legislation without oversight or scrutiny from Parliament, inevitable. It would be the most significant transfer of power to the executive in the modern history of the United Kingdom. Restoring sovereignty to Parliament could not be further from the undemocratic reality of what is being proposed.

capx.co/theresa-mays-great-repeal-bill-is-a-cunning-contradiction/
Theresa May’s Great Repeal Bill is a cunning contradiction

She knew that the language of “Great” and “Repeal” would have resonance for those Eurosceptics who had tabled various bills with similar names some years prior to the 2016 referendum. It also conjured up the great bills of the past.

Most cunningly, it gave the impression of not only action being taken on the Brexit front but also parliamentary involvement in that action.

The Government’s own website identifies 14,000 international treaties that the UK has signed. These may well significantly constrain the UK’s freedom to act and, in particular, its freedom to deregulate.

Brexit is complicated

ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-to-test-uks-constitution-and-institutions-to-the-limit-warn-leading-academics/

Brexit to test UK’s constitution and institutions to the limit warn leading academics

Business and Trade

www.theguardian.com/business/2016/nov/02/wetherspoon-boss-eu-leaders-brexit-talks-tim-martin?CMP=twt_gu
Wetherspoon's boss: we could drop European brands over Brexit bullying

Tim Martin says UK is in a stronger position than people think and could switch away from EU suppliers

The chairman of JD Wetherspoon has fired a warning shot that the pub chain could stop selling drinks brands from other European countries if senior EU leaders maintain a “bullying” approach to Brexit negotiations.

He said: “I don’t think Wetherspoon or British buyers are in a weak position because we can switch from Swedish cider to British cider. So the people put in a weak position are the sellers and I think that is the paradox that has not been illustrated. The UK is in a much more powerful position than most economists would assume.”

Minor point here for a man trying to shit stir. Why can't he just support British business and buy British cider over Swedish cider in the first place? Why is he buying Swedish cider? He's in an excellent position to champion Britain. Why doesn't he? Why does he need Brexit to change his buying patterns? Is it because prices are going up and his profit margins down and he's trying to shift the blame?

Dick.

www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-not-so-anti-business-brexit-uk-british-industry/
Theresa May’s secret business love affair

Fairburn’s public attack on May infuriated Number 10, said one senior Tory source with close connections to Downing Street. “She took a decision to go nuclear,” the source said, before warning the prime minister’s team continues to view Fairbairn’s close connection to George Osborne, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, with suspicion.

Industry insiders privately acknowledge the interview was “intentional and calculated” but insist it was necessary to check what they saw as Number 10’s hostile rhetoric. “It was the kick up the arse they needed,” one well-placed big business lobbyist said on condition of anonymity.

And

But, in practice rather than in rhetoric, May is already showing signs of being even more friendly to business interests than the previous regime.

One of the government’s first acts was to water down Cameron’s childhood obesity strategy, which was opposed by much of the food and drink industry.

May's speech didn't go down well with business and god lord how much paranoia is there over Osborne?! But its doublespeak really.

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
Government letter to Lords Committee confirms that if UK wants to keep access to Canada deal, & 50+ trade deals, EU 27 will have to agree in absence of an agreement with the EU27 about grandfathering the deals with Canada, Korea etc, UK businesses "no longer retain access". Discussing this with trade diplomats, can't see how we keep access to 50+ trade deal at least in interim, without staying in customs union
... anyway, strikes me as relevant piece of leverage in the two year negotiation, and more for the EU27 than for us - also has a WTO impact

WEAYL @WEAYL
@faisalislam Don't the countries involved have a say? e.g. could Korea demand renegotiation of a trade deal that is only with EU27?

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
Potentially yes, so some leverage on both sides of UK-EU negotiation if third parties say - "no UK this is not the same deal"

This is important as it suggests that this was part of the post Brexit strategy and appears to no longer be an option available to us with EU agreement.

Carney

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4d46f636-a075-11e6-aca7-d9d4fe48eef4
Carney wanted to go home after attack on global elite

Mark Carney was incensed by Theresa May’s criticism of the global elite in her Tory conference speech because he saw it as an attack on him personally.

Hammond wanted him to stay longer.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37838086
Carney: This time it’s personal

In 2018, one of Mr Carney's four daughters will be finishing her A-levels, and another will be completing her GCSEs. For his family, this was the perfect moment to return home to Canada and its much lauded education system.

Northern Ireland
www.irishnews.com/news/2016/11/02/news/hundreds-left-homeless-due-to-paramilitary-intimidation-765838/
Intimidation by paramilitaries leaves more than 400 people homeless in year

Almost 20 years after the Good Friday Agreement, loyalist and republican paramilitaries continue to threaten people from their homes.

Figures show that in 2015/16, 433 people presented themselves to the Housing Executive as homeless because of paramilitary threat.

Of those, 325 cases were accepted by the housing body as being sufficiently serious enough to require permanent relocation.

The Commonwealth
www.thesun.co.uk/news/2097078/india-is-threatening-to-withdraw-commonwealth-funding-over-baroness-scotlands-spending/
India is threatening to withdraw funding for the Commonwealth over blazing row about spendaholic chief Baroness Scotland’s spending habits

Strange article in The Sun which talks of the possible demise of the Commonwealth.

Germany and Nissan
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-02/brexit-bulletin-the-view-from-berlin?utm_content=brexit&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-facebook-brexit
Merkel’s government is relaxed about the assurances Britain gave to Nissan.

Brexit decisions
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-has-decided-to-opt-into-eu-crime-fighting-measures-risking-anger-of-brexit-tory-mps-a7391666.html
Theresa May has decided to opt into EU crime-fighting measures, risking anger of Brexit Tory MPs
Exclusive: Britain will agree to the automatic sharing of DNA samples, fingerprints and vehicle registration data, after months of uncertainty

This is the first major decision on the relationship between the EU-UK since Brexit. It interesting...

Environment
www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/02/high-court-rules-uk-government-plans-to-tackle-air-pollution-are-illegal?CMP=twt_gu
High court rules UK government plans to tackle air pollution are illegal

Court rules for second time in 18 months that the government is not doing enough to combat the national air pollution crisis

Worth noting; possible implications for Heathrow.

and finally

US election
www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/us/politics/black-turnout-falls-in-early-voting-boding-ill-for-hillary-clinton.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0]]
Black Turnout Falls in Early Voting, Boding Ill for Hillary Clinton

In North Carolina, where a federal appeals court accused Republicans of an “almost surgical” assault on black turnout and Republican-run election boards curtailed early-voting sites, black turnout is down 16 percent.

White turnout, however, is up 15 percent. Democrats are planning an aggressive final push, including a visit by President Obama to the state on Wednesday.

US election. Its not the polls that concern me. Its observations like this one. There have been a couple. I do not think they favour Clinton.

I am unconvinced by bookies paying out early as a sign of the result (that's a publicity stunt which they can write off if it does go tits up).

There are too many of these little signs for me to be happy. I wrote them off in the EU ref, despite being aware of them.

The result is going to be much closer than people think imho.

www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/world/americas/brexit-donald-trump-whites.html
Behind 2016’s Turmoil, a Crisis of White Identity

I used to look after the software licences for my department when I was at work. The costs involved can be colossal.

A domestic user may be able to manage with open source software, like LibreOffice instead of Word - a commercial firm of any size can't risk this - they need something of industry standard.

I'm not sure that my nerves can take the wait for the A50 ruling plus the US election result in one week.

Thanks for all the links, Red. From the sound of it, the courts ruling in favour of a parliamentary route to A50 will be very much a case of "be careful what you wish for" as the resulting bill could be so narrow in scope.

A domestic user may be able to manage with open source software, like LibreOffice instead of Word - a commercial firm of any size can't risk this - they need something of industry standard.

Never going to happen. If it were, it would have. Believe me, I have spent 20 years (since contributing to the Linux kernel) trying to encourage top brass to use less costly options. But - in the same way "nobody was ever fired for buying IBM" - nobody was ever fired for selecting Microsoft.

There are practical degree courses in MS licensing - it really is the epitome of arcane. But currently there has to be an element of parity due to the nature of MS-EU deals. Of course once the UK is out of the EU, we will get our own MS deal - at whatever figure MS want.

And if we do want to use Brexit to switch away from Windows (never going to happen) we'd need a massive skills boost in alternatives - primarily Linux. And guess where the greatest pool of resource for that is ? Yup. Outside the EU in India, Pakistan, and the far East.