In all likelihood, what do you think will happen?

[Holidayshopping]

I have spent months hoping for a PV and then May revoking A50, and I still would like that to happen, but I’m starting to think now that she thinks there are too many people who just want Brexit no matter what!

I THINK that there will be an extension and then still no one will be able to agree on a plan. I can see a General Election being called soon as well-maybe with increased support for a centralist party?!

To be fair, TiP, the Institute of Cancer Research does exist and is a very reputable institution... it's not their fault they got amputated when being carelessly C&Ped in the haste to co-opt them as evidence for why the EMA was terrible (and therefore kicking them out is a Brexit benefit).

Still not sure why, then, the idea of us paying to rejoin the aforementioned terrible EMA was was holding back Great British Medicine is apparently also a Brexit benefit.

What is this Institute of Cancer of which you speak?

Oh yes, I mean The Institute of Cancer Research as per my original post. More haste, less speed.

I see that The Institute of Cancer Research was complaining about EU red tape in 2013 as well;

I talked to one of our researchers at the Clinical Trials and Statistics Unit (ICR-CTSU) here at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, who said that European-wide regulations, in the form of the EU Clinical Trials Directive, have "crushed research".

www.icr.ac.uk/blogs/science-talk-the-icr-blog/page-details/trials-and-tribulations-how-red-tape-is-stifling-development-of-targeted-treatments

Try living in Scotland, Westminster politicians argueing about Brexit, Scottish politicians argueing about an independant Scotland, will we leave on the 29th March dont know, i'm just fed up if it all

lonelyplanetmum

EMA agency staff numbered 908: 645 women, 263 men and yes those 908 potentially losing their jobs came from a range of nationalities

Of course some staff are able to move to Amsterdam but that's still up to 900 families still potentially not working and spending in the UK

The last estimate I saw (Oct/Nov time) was that at least 76% of EMA staff were relocating to the Netherlands, with more deciding every day. Some staff couldn't move because they had short term agency contracts. Amsterdam was chosen after a series of surveys and interviews with staff, and the wishes of 70 or so gay and lesbian staff were taken into account - as they wanted a liberal location similar to London.

Clavinova
So that was the view in 2013, where is the update as we are 5, nearly 6 years further on.

I look forward to the C&Ped link showing that the ICR has, as a consequence of this terrible holding back of Great British Medicine by the terrible EMA, been actively advocating for leaving the EU since [insert year] and has been joyously trumpeting the achievement of their goal since the referendum.

Also, as they're so terrible and stifling Great British Medicine, shouldn't there be outrage at even the idea of us paying to rejoin the EMA?

Red tape arguments are a complete non starter,

If EU red-tape is a myth - why the need to set up this?

ec.europa.eu/info/files/final-report-high-level-group-cutting-red-tape-europe-legacy-and-outlook_en

July 2014 Final Report:

The High Level Group on Administrative Burdens (HLG) was set up in 2007 to advise the European Commission on the implementation of the Action Programme for Reducing Administrative Burdens in the European Union.

It is chaired by Edmund Stoiber, former Prime Minister of Bavaria, and consists of 15 members selected on the basis of their expertise in better regulation and the policy areas covered by the Action Programme.

The HLG’s mandate was prolonged and extended twice in 2010 and 2012 and ends on 31 October 2014.This is its Final Report.

The total administrative burden reduction potential of all recommendations made by the HLG is estimated to exceed EUR
41 billion annually.

FOREWORD BY EDMUND STOIBER

... The instrument to achieve this is the creation of new rules.

This is why it is so important that these rules be designed in the least burdensome way possible for businesses and citizens.

In the past, this was unfortunately not always the case. Instead the political objective of the legislation was predominant whilst any resulting bureaucratic burdens were rarely taken into consideration.

Meanwhile, more and more detailed rules which affect the daily life of citizens have tarnished the image of the EU in the public opinion and resulted in the EU being regarded as a “bureaucratic monster”.

Europe-wide opinion polls regularly indicate that a quarter of respondents perceive the EU as first and foremost a bureaucracy.

^Indeed, the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, pointed out in his State of the Union Speech 2013 that 74
percent of Europeans subscribe to the view that the EU is producing too much red tape.^

President Barroso has initiated a fundamental change which unfortunately the public has not yet been made sufficiently aware
of.

With the launch of the Action Programme on Reducing Administrative Burdens on 24 January 2007, the Commission has for the first time started to systematically cut red tape.

This report was published less than 2 years before the EU Referendum vote.

1tisILeClerc

Clavinova
So that was the view in 2013, where is the update as we are 5, nearly 6 years further on.

A few pages back - Dec 2018.

From The Guardian - “Emmanuel Macron has said France will block a Brexit delay unless there is a “new choice” by Britain, as Spain’s prime minister said that merely postponing the no-deal deadline would not be “reasonable or desirable”.

You are being disingenuous Clavinova, or maybe you are just ignorant.

Medicines and clinical trials regulations have been developed over the past several decades in response to catastrophic patient safety incidents. The harmonisation of regulations between EU countries and establishment of mutual recognition agreements between the EU and other countries (including Switzerland) resulted in a degree of duplication and inefficiency. This was identified and reported in your 2013 reference, and has been addressed. By the EU.

www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/research-development/clinical-trials/clinical-trial-regulation

I don’t see how the EU making improvements is an argument for leaving the EU.

Ironically, the MHRA will now have to replicate all the functions of the EMA and begin the long and costly exercise of establishing an MRA with the EU, and will have far more red tape to deal with.

That’s aside from the costs associated with dealing with shortages, and the fact that any trade deal with the USA will see costs increasing dramatically.

EU regulations say that if a disease does not occur in children, drug companies can opt out of testing the drug on them, even though it might help with other cancers. That... needed to change surely must be a misrepresentation? I just don’t understand what the quoted person if getting at, and no source material is cited so I can’t check. Chemotherapy cannot ethically be tested in healthy volunteers, much less in children.

You are being disingenuous Clavinova, or maybe you are just ignorant.

Agreed- there's no clarity from Clavinova who seems very happy to try and minimise the 900 jobs lost from the EMA in the U.K. due to Brexit -but completely ignores my main point. Why minimise severe job losses when the government's own report estimates the following:

1. On a No Deal - a minimum of 2,800,000 jobs will be lost.
2.On a comprehensive free trade agreement a minimum of 1,750,000 jobs lost.
3.On a single market softer Brexit a minimum of 700,000 jobs lost.

This is the real point and I have not yet come across a Leaver who will address why this is justified.

WiseUpJanetWeiss
You are being disingenuous Clavinova, or maybe you are just ignorant.

The former - obviously .

Of course EU red-tape is just a myth (as per my link above) and nothing to do with why Boris Johnson, James Dyson et al wanted to leave the EU.

lonelyplanetmum - I think you just read the headlines.

Some cancer treatment may be delayed if there is a No-Deal Brexit

https://www.hsj.co.uk/policy-and-regulation/some-cancer-treatment-may-be-delayed-post-brexit/7024457.article

NHS trusts will have “no choice but to prioritise” which patients receive cancer treatment if a no-deal Brexit delays the import of radioactive isotopes, the Royal College of Radiologists has warned.

With just 28 working days to go before the UK may leave the EU without a deal, the RCR told HSJ it has not yet seen “any finite logistical detail” of the increased air freight capacity needed to guarantee delivery of short-life isotopes.

The college said it has also not seen the “detail of the customs paperwork” that would allow the materials, which cannot be stockpiled as they decay too quickly, to gain fast-track entry into the UK.

The college said it is meeting with the Department of Health and Social Care again this month to ask “officials for more concrete information on these issues”.

Medical isotopes are used in nuclear medicine either to treat cancer by killing diseased cells,
or to diagnose diseases by injecting a radioactive tracer into the body that allows scanner images to be taken of tissue and organs.

In the case of a no-deal Brexit, expected delays at UK ports would make delivery of these materials by land or sea unviable because of their short shelf-life.

Government promises on being able to import essential medicines - and fruit, veg & other fresh food -

depend on Failing Grayling not making any other cockups

in the most complicated act that any UK govt has attempted post-WW2: Brexit

The same Grayling whose 12 cockups in government have so far cost the taxpayer 2.5 billion quid 🤦🏻‍♀️

If I depended on essential meds, I certainly wouldn't be happy with my health in his hands.
I wonder if his ferry services now have all the ships he thinks; if his air services have planes

In the referendum campaign, noone mentioned that the government would have to organise emergency ferry & air services, to keep up our supplies of meds and fresh food.

Brexit will increase red tape costs for business, e.g.

The government impact report "Implications for Business and Trade of a No Deal Exit on 29 March 2019"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/781768/ImplicationsforBusinessandTradeofaNoDealExiton29March2019.pdf

HMRC has estimated that the administrative burden on businesses from customs declarations alone,
on current (2016) UK-EU trade in goods could be around £13bn p.a.

Of course EU red-tape is just a myth (as per my link above) and nothing to do with why Boris Johnson, James Dyson et al wanted to leave the EU.

No one pretends that it doesn't have red tape. All large organisations have red tape of some sort, it would be anarchy to try to function without it.

As to why Johnson backed Leave - he thought it was the best chance to ditch Cameron and become PM, when he thought the Remain camp would win. His face when Leave won said it all, and his subsequent behaviour of running away instead of putting up for PM confirmed it. He's still hoping for a second go, but may have left it too late. If he suspects that the mood in the country has changed, he will change sides. Boris No 1 appears to be his motto.

Dyson:£££££

Why if the EU is so bad did Rees-Mogg want to move part of his financial empire to Dublin? Why is deadwood Redwood advising people to invest in France and Germany and not the UK? Why did Nigel Lawson apply for a cart de sejour in France? Very, very strange indeed when they hate the EU so very much. Hypocrites to a man.

I think you just read the headlines.

Have you read the government's impact assessments in full Clav.

If so ( or even if not) you could be the first Leaver on here who will address why any job losses are justified.

You have attempted to minimise severe job losses when the government's own report estimates the following:

1. On a No Deal - a minimum of 2,800,000 jobs will be lost.
2.On a comprehensive free trade agreement a minimum of 1,750,000 jobs lost.
3.On a single market softer Brexit a minimum of 700,000 jobs lost.

That is extracted from the govt report but I've read the EU exit analysis that has been made publicly available in full -much of the detail was initially suppressed of course. Also read the KPMG one. I'm of the view the above figures are conservatively estimated- funny that.

So hopefully some Leave supporter will be honourable enough to explain why any job losses are ok - and why the cost of job losses wasn't on the Leave advertising campaign vehicle.

Ivan Rogers:

www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/04/theresa-may-did-not-understand-eu-when-she-triggered-brexit

“The UK and EU know there is no chance of no-deal Brexitit_ being the long-term end state,*
as the UK would quickly come back to the negotiating table,”

he said. “There is not a world where we are going to end up with no deal.”
....
He also said there was no chance that the UK would be able to disentangle itself from the EU even if Brexit goes ahead.

“These fantasies of release and liberation – they are fantasies.
We are going to be negotiating on everything from aviation to farming for evermore with our biggest neighbour.
We cannot live in glorious isolation.

Talk to the Swiss and to the Norwegians – they live in a permanent state of negotiation with the EU.”

"EU red-tape is just a myth (as per my link above) and nothing to do with why Boris Johnson, James Dyson et al wanted to leave the EU."

Ahahahahaah

Demonstrating you know nothing.

Dyson wanted to leave the EU out of petulance due to a regulation ruling made against Dyson, which he a has subsequently appealed and won. However he will still be using EU red tape for anything he exports there from his bases in Malaysia ( which has trade agreements) and Singapore ( FTA). Funnily enough he also backed joining the Euro which is usually used by you zealots of leave to discredit any organisation that reports the negatives of Brexit, but you happily forget that now that he confirms your bias.

It demonstrates that your invocation of Dyson is nothing more than a flawed appeal to authority, again Clav your critical thinking is rubbish.

BorisBogtrotter
Ahahahahaah
Demonstrating you know nothing.
It demonstrates that your invocation of Dyson is nothing more than a flawed appeal to authority, again Clav your critical thinking is rubbish.
usually used by you zealots of leave

Oh dear - you are getting a bit over-excited Boris.
I'm hardly a zealot of leave - I almost voted remain on the day!

I know all about Dyson's court appeal thank you very much (I have an LLB by the way - a long time ago mind you). I obviously read about it at the time in the newspapers - and I reminded myself only last night when I googled, "Dyson EU red-tape."

I've already posted the following link several times, although I did my own quick research re Singapore's free trade agreement with China even before Reuters updated their article);

Why did Dyson pick Singapore to build its electric car?

www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-dyson-singapore-explainer-idUSKCN1MY1EU

(This version of the story is an official correction to change last section to reflect clarification by Singapore’s trade ministry that electric cars are covered under its free trade deal with China)

By contrast, sales in China are forecast to almost reach 700,000 vehicles this year, more than double the combined sales from the United States and Europe.

But with one of the world’s busiest ports on its doorstep, Dyson can roll a car off the production line in Singapore and within the hour it can be on its way to China or other sizable electric vehicle markets like South Korea or Japan.

Meanwhile, Singapore does have an extensive free trade agreement with China, which lists various car types and car parts in its tariff-reduction schedule.

Singapore’s Ministry of Trade and Industry said electric vehicles were covered under this arrangement with China

When did the EU sign a free trade agreement with China?
Oh wait - they haven't.

Have any Leavers popped in to justify the losses of the following jobs from the govt's conservative figures.

1. On a No Deal - a minimum of 2,800,000 jobs will be lost.
2.On a comprehensive free trade agreement a minimum of 1,750,000 jobs lost.
3.On a single market softer Brexit a minimum of 700,000 jobs lost.

[. ..@@@ tumbleweeds swirling and twirling in the breeze ]

lonelyplanetmum

1. On a No Deal - a minimum of 2,800,000 jobs will be lost.
2. On a comprehensive free trade agreement a minimum of 1,750,000 jobs lost.
3. On a single market softer Brexit a minimum of 700,000 jobs lost.

Have you read the government's impact assessments in full Clav.

I'm not sure if I've seen the government's report with the figures you've listed above - can you provide a link?

No rush - I'm out for most of the day.

Why would anyone want a FTA with despotic, murderous regime such as the Chinese? Look what they've done to Tibet or the 1 million they ve imprisoned in "re-education camps" and President who cannot ever be removed, even by his own party.

Its bad enough we have to trade with them and look what has happened when we embraced chinese technology.... we get Huawei spying on us, with several major economies blocking their equipment.

Putin is a rank amateur compared to Xi Jinping

As for Dyson, at the time of the referendum, he would have had a very good idea he was moving to Singapore, yet kept that quiet in his pro brexit adverts.
Using BJ to bolster your argument? you must be struggling lol!

Every single function previously done by the EU will now have to be replicated by the UK, less EU red tape, replaced by UK red tape.

Sept 2018
Singapore and China to upgrade FTA as Trump tariffs escalate

asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade-war/Singapore-and-China-to-upgrade-FTA-as-Trump-tariffs-escalate

Nov 2018
China upgrades free trade agreement with Singapore

chinaeconomicreview.com/china-upgrades-free-trade-agreement-with-singapore/

The revisions largely affect ease of doing trade by skimming down red tape on shipment origins and customs procedures

Going out now anyway.

"The revisions largely affect ease of doing trade by skimming down red tape on shipment origins and customs procedures"

There are very few red tape customs procedures for UK producers exporting to the EU.

Indicating yet again that you don't know what you are talking about.