Westministenders: Brexit Britain = Gridlock Britain ?

[BigChocFrenzy]

We keep getting told the Uk can get a deal like Canada, Turkey or other non-EU countries have, without FOM.
Those deals do not provide the same privileges as EU members:
They have quotas, restrictions and must obey EU regulations

e.g. After CETA, Ron Davidson, head of international trade for the Canadian Meat Council stated:
"We do not have what we would call commercially viable access to the European market".

The deal with Turkey abolished tariffs, but did not give free acess. This is what that means:

www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-6876151821a6

"On a recent Saturday at the Kapikule border crossing, about 30 minutes drive from the Turkish city of Edirne, a line of trucks 4km long stretched along the highway, inching along glacially towards the Bulgarian checkpoints.
"Today is a good day", said Ibrahim Kurtukcu, a 42-year trucker who had been waiting 14 hours.
"Last week the line was 7km long".
The record is 17km. It can take up to 30 hours to get through to the other side."

Of course, UK ports (and French ports) do not have the capacity, facilities, storage space or trained staff to handle customs processing of the vast amount of British exports & imports.

Building this additional capacity - where ? - would take several years and there are no signs that even the planning stage has started.

if Scotland became independent, it would have to apply for EU membership...

I genuinely don't know whether the division is deeper.

I seem to have been fortunate and only ever come across an increasingly engaged electorate who were interested in the issues, went to hustings (often packed out and not everyone could get in) and asked questions.

But there again, I seem to live in a (Glasgow) Yes bubble.

I debated - in a friendly way - with one No voting friend. She voted No specifically because she believes in the EU - despite me saying that the bigger risk was as part of the UK I did extract a promise from her, which she is following through on - and she will be campaigning for (and voting) Yes this time round

Another friend who was a No voter and was distressed by the whole process (as she was with the EU referendum), so we mutually agreed not to talk about it.

The only place I have seen any nastiness is on-line - both ways. On Mumsnet the vitriol was mostly towards Yes voters (mostly in Chat so they've disappeared) with various disparaging comments about "swivel-necked cultists", lack of education, stupidity..... It was interesting to see how the attitude to me changed when I "came out". To be fair, there were one or two "nicer" No voters who expressed confusion that I, an apparently educated and intelligent person, could be comfortable voting Yes.

But what if Scotland voted for Independence before the UK's exit was negotiated? Would Scotland still be an EU member?

Honestly, morally I am totally on the side of Scottish independence but I can't see how Scotland's position is stronger now. The collapse in oil prices since 2014 is surely going to play a part in this. And resistance to the euro. I am very happy to be persuaded otherwise, as I have said before, Scotland has been treated appallingly by WM, especially since June.

But what if Scotland voted for Independence before the UK's exit was negotiated? Would Scotland still be an EU member?
Goodness knows. I doubt TM does.

But what if Scotland voted for Independence before the UK's exit was negotiated? Would Scotland still be an EU member?

The EU can - within it's own constitution - do what the fuck it likes.

If the rEU (i.e less the dead weight of the UK) decides it wants to offer some sort of membership to Scotland, it can. (How the "U"K chooses to deal with this is up to the "U"K, of course).

Personally that's probably not going to happen, as Spain would almost certainly veto it (or risk the chances of Basque independence). But it does demonstrate that an awful lot of post-Brexit decisions are completely outside the UKs ever-contracting sphere of influence.

I wonder how the good people of Hampshire would feel about having a massive nuclear submarine facility on their shoreline ? One presumes that having such a beacon of control would leave them quite chuffed.

I wonder how the good people of Hampshire would feel about having a massive nuclear submarine facility on their shoreline ?

This might have to happen, although I thought a place in Devon was being lined up? (A long way from Westminster, so it wouldn't affect them.)

If only they had written it on a bus ...

The collapse in oil prices since 2014 is surely going to play a part in this.

Matched by the slow decline of Sterling.

My feeling is, depsite being a big fan of Sturgeon, that she'd have done better to hold fire.

I understand why she's calling now - she wants to save Scotland from a disastrous Brexit. But I think a vote in 2018 will produce the same result as last time. The economic effects will still be theoretical at that point.

Once Brexit has happened - even if no-deal is avoided - and leaving the single market & cu kicks in - everyone will feel the economic impact. Then Project Fear will turn real.

At that point - I think Scotland may vote to save itself.

Also gives oil prices a bit of time to recover.

I also wonder how Moray will cope when RAF Lossiemouth closes.

It makes financial sense to have the whole GR4 fleet in Marham, the only reason it was kept partially at Lossie political.
Same with the typhoons & QRA - they were supposed to stay at Leuchars but moved to Lossie instead for political reasons.
Lossie are supposed to be getting Lightning II as well, (political again), but that would be financially cheaper in an English camp.

Wonder how Angus Robertson (SNP) will square the possibility of Moray losing Lossiemouth and Kinloss?
How will Stephen Gethins (SNP) square NE Fife with the loss of Leuchars - which became an army base only to (politically) appease the residents of NE Fife after RAF Leuchars was shut in favour of RAF Lossie??

The economies of Moray & NE Fife are very reliant on the British military presence (Moray more so).

I also wonder how Moray will cope when RAF Lossiemouth closes.

All of the money Scotland will save by not spending a penny on Trident will go a long way. Better healthcare. Better education. Better housing and better transport.

Since Sturgeon is reliant on May to allow a Scottish referendum, it could well be that it takes place after Brexit, Ninon - TM could argue it would be a distraction from her EU negotiations. That's if she allows one at all...

Is it me or are the government starting to admit that The Cake Is A Lie?

This business of we are going to go to WTO is getting stronger. Which no one voted for.

So far everything May has done has started with a whisper that gradually got louder. Part of me wonders if we will even get to the end of two years. I am suspecting there is no real intention of negotiations at all. Instead they are playing brinkmanship and bluff with everyone. Everyone from the car industry to finance saying 'go on then leave the UK if you want'.

Trouble is, its such a high risk strategy. One that's not going to wash nor work.

What's the shelf life on tinned tomatoes? Just trying to work out what's going to be the best month to start stockpiling seeing WTO tomatoes are going to cost the earth. I don't know how people are going to cope with a prolonged courgette shortage.

On a more personal level I'm frustrated. It looks like DH might have a new job. In the UK. For more money, which is good but.... its a reflection of a wider problems and a sign of things to come. In the long run we won't be better off. If we are lucky we might just end up running to stand still. We'll be the exception rather than the rule though.

The effect of Brexit and pushing the Northern Power House, so far is proving that whilst firms have decided to move north to save money, a) there are not enough people of senior enough level in the NW to begin with and b) its happening at the same time as Brexit so there are less EU nationals with the skills too. The net result is its pushing UP wages in his sector as they just can't fill jobs. This is not going to help the pay gap between lower and higher levels and neither is it going to help the UK as there simply are not going to be enough people to fill jobs here.

Also it means more firms will not move north, as it won't save them a great deal after relocation costs, and if they can't get the staff its a pointless exercise. I'm sure that there will be firms which will have no option but to move abroad - meaning the jobs lower down go with the higher skilled ones.

On the surface of this, it sounds good for us if his wages go up.

Its not. I wish it was. Its just a sign that things are starting to happen that are going to cause more problems rather than solve the ones that created this situation.

There will be huge shortages of skills - yet lots of people out of work, lacking skills and the ability to get those skills for a variety of reasons. Plus we have a government that does not want to invest in the future and ensure that the problem does not pass to future generations.

I am fully expecting inflation to start to go through the roof. Interest rates are going to have to shift if we start seeing big shifts in inflation. It will start accelerating as a problem as the year goes on and its only going to get worse.

Anyway at this point, I think the cliff edge is the only option and indeed the government are actively seeking it - wanting to blame it on the EU in the process.

The Conservatives want to ban free speech and are scared to death by the internet and technology but have no strategy to deal with progressive and innovation, yet are trying to promote it, without having the people to do that. Still utterly clueless.

Its looking every bit as bad as the worse case scenario. sigh

Wouldn't Scotland have an Air Force, army or navy?

Smaller than the UK's of course and minus Trident - but it will still need bases.

Devonport was ruled out as a nuclear base because it is too close to a major centre of population Plymouth being sooooo much larger than Glasgow

That should say 2018-19.

Wouldn't Scotland have an Air Force, army or navy?

Does Ireland ?

Sturgeon can not hold indy ref 2. Unless May authorises it.

In theory.

There is another option. I suspect Sturgeon could hold an unofficial one which is not legally binding without May's consent. Its not unheard of to be done. I believe there was such a referendum that took place in Spain last year. It would be costly, and a loss for Sturgeon very damaging for her. Equally though, it could be deeply problematic for May too.

It seems an unlikely possibility at this stage, but I'm not going to say its impossible either.

Iceland's army is....

"There is another option. I suspect Sturgeon could hold an unofficial one which is not legally binding"

Yes, this! Just like the Brexit referendum was advisory and not legally binding...

Wouldn't Scotland have an Air Force, army or navy?
Smaller than the UK's of course and minus Trident - but it will still need bases.

They cost an awful lot of money!

And obviously they don't come fully formed - the personnel need to be trained up etc.

To train a basic level aircraft techie is a year - then all the trade training etc from there...
And trade experience etc too.

Aviation fuel costs vast amounts - hundreds of thousands per sortie.

An example set up could be the current deployment in the Falklands:

"...Militarily Britain spent £75 million in 2010-11..."
https://www.bowgroup.org/policy/fortress-falklands-and-shrinking-defence-budget-where-do-we-go-heree*

So app £75million per year to run the small set up, without factoring in the support & second/third line structures that go into maintaining that.
And obviously not including the initial and ongoing costs of training & kitting out of it all.

Ireland has a navy, with 8 vessels, and I think mostly deals with fishery protection, search and rescue and smuggling.

It also has an air force with 25 or so craft, which seems to mostly deal with the same kind of work.