Westminsterenders: The Ersatz ImitationThread

[OlennasWimple]

I am no RedToothBrush, so I'm not going to try to emulate her exception OP style.

Here, though, in the interests of carrying on our conversations about WTF is going on with Brexit and the weird political world we find ourselves in right now, is a sort of continuation thread

(Hurry back Red, we need you!)

Wow!

Lord Kerr, who devised the Article 50 process, said it was originally intended for a 'dictator in a huff' and he never thought the UK would use it.

newscdn.newsrep.net/h5/nrshare.html?id=0426CE991010100001_uk&r=3&lan=en_GB&pid=14&app_lan&mcc=234&declared_lan=en_GB&pubaccount=ocms_0&referrer=200620&showall=1

And his negative feelings about Brexit are reported in the Express without apparent anti-EU bias

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/politics/830006/Brexit-Article-50-author-Lord-Kerr-open-letter-remainers-theresa-may-pause-rethink/amp

Hester the shame of it , dictator in a huff

Back from my holiday now - took a whole day to catch up with the last thread.

If we cancel Brexit we destroy ourselves; if we go ahead we destroy the country"

A no brainer for the Tory party, surely? Since when did they care about the good of the country? To be fair, there are individual Tories who do have a conscience, particularly at the local level, but this cannot be said for the current crew in Government.

Yes Peregrina I'm sure you're right. The thing is, surely, if they 'destroy the country', they'll lose the next election as a result. So a lose-lose situation, surely?

Ah, but only if they get the blame.
Remember, Tories are usually Teflon.

As long as the Tories remain in govt, I expect the EU will be blamed for not destroying the EU omelette to somehow extract the UK's intact unicorn egg

If Labour squeak into power before or just after Brexit, then I expect as well that Labour will be blamed for the next 20 years for making a mess of Brexit, probably for not thumping the EU sufficiently hard to produce that unicorn egg

Pete North and David Allen Green are having a bit of a contretemps on Twitter. PN is very difficult to like - he won't care about that, of course. What is is expertise? Or rather, why does he Tweet as though everyone else is too stupid for him?

A year too late, the government has decided to commission a study into what the actual impact of EU migration might be . The Pollyanna bit of me hoped that this might be a way of rolling back on Brexit now the mood appears to be changing - rather than sheer inability to have thought of doing this before triggering A50 - but the fact that it's not due to report back until autumn 2018 means (a) it's probably too late to u-turn (b) it will definitely be too late to have any useful influence on the UK's position in the negotiations.

Thanks for the new thread, Oleanna.

"it's not due to report back until autumn 2018 means"

Why do they need over a year to do this study? There are lots of academics working on this topic. They could write this is 3 months... I think it's just more smoke and mirrors.

Re. the timing of the report on EU migration... I think they will need something at the 11th hour to try to persuade the anti-immigration part of the populace that it is in fact a Good Thing.

I'm convinced that they are under considerable pressure from business, agriculture and the health and care sectors to drop the "tens of thousands" target.

Whether EU citizens can be tempted to work here if they have short-term gastarbeiter status, can't bring family members in and suspect their neighbours resent or even hate them, is another matter entirely.

Indeed. Not to mention loss of ECHR and ECJ protection.

Placemat aristocracy

Food Safety and animal welfare EU / US

EU standards demand that animals are raised in "clean" environments.
So animals have better health and also lower occurence of foodborne disease, bacteria such as salmonella, campo that could affect consumers.

Quite different regulatory philosophy to the US:
The EU bans what may be risky, whereas the US has lower minimum standards, banning only what is proven dangerous - and not even then with sufficient lobbyists.

US mass market chickens require antimicrobial cleaning, to compensate for the higher level of disease in animals kept lifelong under poorer conditions

The EU banned chlorinated chicken processing in the 1990s because the much-higher doses of chlorine created trihalomethans (THMs), which are cancer-causing byproducts that also increase risk of damage to heart, lung, kidney, liverand central nervous system

The hormones give to beef cattle in the USA are a collection of naturally occurring and synthetically produced hormones.
There are some studies that suggest a link between these hormones and disruption of normal hormone function in humans, especially developing children, potentially increasing the risk of problems such as reproductive abnormalities.

US farmers inject cattle with hormones that begin to break down tendons and muscle into the US consumer's prefered "nice tender steak you can cut with a fork"

• this is quite some time before the animals are stunned and slaughtered

I wonder if those who object to stunned halal meat on animal welfare grounds would also wish to avoid hormone-injected US meat
Or is it ok because the farmers belong to the Anglosphere, which many Brexiters don't regard as forrin ?

Just caught the news about the report and have been swearing lots. 'People are saying it should have been commissionned immediately after the vote'. No, it should have been commissioned before the referendum so that Farage et al weren't allowed to continually peddle lies and thinly veiled racism. Bastards the lot of them.

Indeed. Not to mention loss of ECHR and ECJ protection.

So far the EU has been sang-froid about Brexit, but I suspect this issue might become a tinderbox ...

What I meant to say is that the data already exist, and there is already tons of research showing the benefits of immigration (particularly EU migration), and the impact on the UK's economy. So it seems very strange to "commission" this report now, with delivery a year from now, when you can easily assemble this report straight away. So there must be another reason for this, which I suspect is that public opinion will have to be prepared for a reversal of the lower immigration promise, and this has to happen at some point in autum 2018. But not before, or people might turn against Brexit altogether. Or is that too cynical?

No, it should have been commissioned before the referendum so that Farage et al weren't allowed to continually peddle lies and thinly veiled racism. Bastards the lot of them

I'm pretty sure the leave campaign would have still peddled lies regardless

Sadly true when, experts and all that.

Think the commission report is all part of LH remainer conspiracy theory. Report shows benefits of immigration, add to financial upheaval and transport chaos and BREXIT reversed.
(retires back under tin foil hat into darkened room).

Again, as has been discussed here before, Liam Fox's "advance talks" increases the risk of "TTIP on steroids".

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/chlorine-washed-chicken-liam-fox-trade-deal-us-ttip-deregulation-a7860706.html?cmpid=facebook-post

The risk to the NHS made me think about the devolution settlements. Health is devolved - and we have (and have always had) a separate NHS in Scotland (albeit one which normally works seamlessly with the NHS in England). What would the impact of a TTIP on steroids type deal have on devolved matters, given that I doubt that the Scottish Government (or even Parliament) - or the other devolved administrations - will be allowed any input or veto on such a deal?

Think the commission report is all part of LH remainer conspiracy theory. Report shows benefits of immigration, add to financial upheaval and transport chaos and BREXIT reversed.

No, I think it's part of the shambolic lack of planning for Brexit. This could have been started as soon as May took over last year, and well before A50 was triggered. What I envisage happening now, is us paying to have access to things which matter to the Government, like the European Arrest warrant, Euratom, Open skies agreements, the relocated medicines agency etc, all costing far more than we spend at present, plus immigration continuing, but with immigrants having fewer rights, and us losing out as we lose EU benefits. The Tory higher echelons toadying to the Americans will mean that we lose the better part of the NHS as we know it, and current food standards. In short, a lose-lose situation, but hey, we won't be in the EU.

I agree with you, missmoon, about the motives behind commissioning this report now.

I'm so fucking angry. Every time I think I can't get angrier about Brexit, some new shite happens.

What I envisage happening now, is us paying to have access to things which matter to the Government, like the European Arrest warrant, Euratom, Open skies agreements, the relocated medicines agency etc,

Not only paying, but having to accept the ECJs rulings.

There is no way on Gods Green Earth the EU will allow the UK to extradite EU citizens without that protection.

I think MissMoon must be right...it must be to prepare for a reversal of the absurd immigration target...

Outrageous that looking at the actual impact of EU migration has taken so long.There are plenty of other studies that could be built on quite quickly. How long a consultation takes depends on how many people are allocated to it surely? This should have been done before calling the referendum. Now it's over one year later, and after Article 50 has been triggered.Absurd.

There was an LSE detailed study linked to on one of these threads ( that showed across the country as a whole, migration boosts the economy and jobs) but at least get some of the ground work from these researchers...

Why to report in autumn 2018- why? It will be too little too late.It must be to substantiate some stance that is already planned for then.

I admit I am cynical anyway, but under Labour governments consultations seemed generally a bit laborious, but steady and detailed.

I had previously noticed and puzzled that under Tory led governments consultation length and content varies enormously. I concede that some things take longer than others, but there definitely seems a political agenda behind timings of consultations.When it's something they are determined to do regardless of experts, the consultation periods are absurdly short.For example:

E.g. Short consultation- The limited taking away of some unfair dismissal and maternity rights from those who opted for employee shareholder status.This something all experts advised against. It involved masses of red tape and hassle. The gov forced the legislation through. It was a complete failure, no employers or employees bothered with it. The 2012 consultation period was 21 days!

Contrast something that isn't a political priority, or causes internal party problems or affects elections,then the consultations drag on interminably...

E.g. Endless consultation- Caste discrimination was supposed to be added to the forms of race discrimination in the Equality Act as early as 2013.The coalition gov promised to this in Summer 2015.The reviews, excuses, promises, consultations dragged on and on. Eventually a consultation started four years later in March 2017 , then as a result of the election, a result was postponed until September 2017. Four years!

So what's the significance of Autumn 2018 for this one?

It could easily be done by allocating enough researchers to it by this Christmas.....