At the BREXIT crossroads

A week since my last Brexit post, and I had better do a catch up.

Working backwards, today, some 13 months after the referendum, Amber Rudd sets in place a report on the implications across the economy of restricting EU immigration. One might point out this is a little late for such a thing, and maybe this stuff should have been found out BEFORE the referendum. The report is due to be published sometime in autumn 2018, just as the real panic Brexit will create is reaching its peak. Meanwhile, Immigration Minister Brandon Lewis also today said that free movement would end in March 2019, and a new immigration system would be in place by then. No hurry then.

It is estimated that some 500,000 EU workers find employment here, the question is whether those people could be replaced by Brits, that many Brits won't have the qualifications, or want to pick fruit, clean the elderly's backsides or be hospital porters. And so on, then what is to do? If those jobs are unfilled, who will look after the infirm and elderly; their families? And what about the tax and NI contributions that won't be then paid, who will pay the triple lock pensions for those elderly Brexiteers? Those Brits who would no longer be able to work abroad, pay yet more tax? Probably. And then there's the incentives for companies to carry on working here; cutting corporation taxes, meaning the shortfall will have to come from somewhere.

But this week will be remembered for one thing: chlorine-washed chicken.

Not really because it's chicken, but that it is washed with a chlorine wash, when the EU rather goes for something different. The US uses the wash to kill any pathogens from the food chain, whilst the EU uses best practice through the food chain meaning such washing is not needed. And such washing is not allowed.

It is not the washing that is the problem, like any complex issue, it is best to pick on one small part and see what might happen, and that is where chlorine washed chicken comes in. The thing the EU and it's members are worried about is divergence in standards. The day Britain leaves the EU, our standards and those with the EU will be 100% aligned, but as time goes on, these will diverge, which is why the EU will insist on traceability of goods entering the EU/Customs Union, to ensure that all is within EU standards. The upshot could be that Britain would have to chose whether to primarily trade with the EU or the US, not both. Such checks have implications on the one land border between the EU, that between Eire and Northern Ireland. If a soft border is desired here, then it is less likely that a deal with the US could be struck.

But then this is where the Brexiteers get themselves all tied up in knots: we are told that a no deal with the EU would be better than a bad deal. Or that a no deal with the US would be worse than a bad deal. Why? And then there is relying on 45 tweeting his foreign policy. All his policy in fact. None of this is guaranteed, and considering in the same tweet he bemoaned the EU were protectionist, meaning a deal with Britain would favour the US? Probably.

A no deal with the EU would mean that British farm goods could be subject to up to 32% tariffs and the traceability checks. On perishable good this would be a disaster. And then if a deal with the US was done, this would mean cheap mean imports coming in, and against that, British farmers with out a common agricultural policy to protect them, could not hope to compete. A possible collapse of the farming industry would not just be bad for farmers, but for the environment too, as it is the farmers that manage the land, grazing means habitats for rare plants and animals are maintained. Without them, all would revert to scrub and then become woodland.

There is no sign of any agreement between Britain and the EU on the initial issues; rights of Britons in the EU, EU nationals in Britain and the Irish border. If no perceived movement is made in the opinion of the EU, then any further talks on anything else will not be allowed. And all the while the clock is ticking. Ticking ever louder.

The labour party is a confused as ever, not helped by their leader. He is befuddled that a country can not be a member of the EU and still be in the Customs Union and/or Single Market. Just like Norway. He said in an interview that a country couldn't, which must have came as a surprise to, er, Norway. That many people voted Labour in the hope of change, when, in reality, Corbyn has given no indication he is any better than luke warm towards the EU, in fact could be considered Eurosceptic. Who will speak up for the 48% and the other third of the country that did not vote and the young who could not vote? Probably, only reality.

Talking of reality, the Sun ran a front page story this week that the EU would stop Britons getting free healthcare in the EU whilst on holiday, and stating it was being cruel. And yet Brexiteers were told this would happen, and the only people to blame were those who push Britain to leave the Eu, trumpeting nothing but upsides.

I won't give up pointing out how stupid they are were and still are, but on the other hand, it is going to be fun seeing them twisting the facts to suit their story. In the end the whole effigy will come crashing down, just wait to see who will be crushed and who will escape from the wreckage. For the country, we will be impoverished, reduced in status and chasing any deals we can get, giving up more to larger potential partners, giving away far more control than we ever did as members of the EU.

Just so you know, I told you so,