Post-Referendum Debrief August 1st

It’s the EU facing economic disaster 

Interesting piece in The Daily Express with Leo McKinstry commenting that according to the predictions of ‘Remainians’ Brexit would herald an economic apocalypse.

He writes ‘Within days of a vote to withdraw, they warned, our country would be engulfed by the storms of financial crisis and commercial meltdown. But more than a month after the referendum this disaster has still failed to materialise.

Far from sinking into recession the British economy is buoyant. Despite all the gloomy talk about the likely damage caused by the referendum the latest figures show that growth in the second quarter to the end of June actually reached 0.6 per cent, up from 0.4 per cent in the first quarter.

The fundamentals are stronger than ever. Employment rates are at a record high, interest rates at a record low. Boom rather than gloom appears to be the prevailing mood of business.’

It reminds me of a piece I wrote for the local press in the East Midlands before the referendum, in which I commented, ‘we’re the world’s fifth largest economy – our currency is a better bet than the Euro, which is a disaster in the making. The Euro is a bankruptcy machine that has brought economic depression and unemployment to most of southern Europe.

When we leave the EU, we will be Europe’s largest export customer, bar none. UK/EU trade is too important to be interrupted – and we buy far more from them that they buy from us, so the trade is even more important to their side.

We’ll still be buying their BMWs and Audis. They’ll still buy our Toyotas and Jaguars. If the European Commission tries to delay a trade agreement, they’ll find the leaders of continental industries kicking their doors down.

The Remain side warns us of job losses when we leave. I worry about the jobs we’re losing today, as a result of EU legislation.’

Article 50 controversy again

Meanwhile, a piece by The Independent  claims The Lords could derail the triggering of Article 50.

Baroness Wheatcroft said she hoped that a pause in introducing Article 50 could lead to a second EU referendum and potentially the public changing its mind.

All very frustrating, let’s get on with Brexit – it is, after all, what the people of this country voted for.

Contrary views on science

There are more publications today claiming Brexit has hit the country’s science investment.

Graeme Reid, the Chairman of the Science and Research Policy at University College London, has said that in the wake of the British public’s decision to exit the European Union, science and research academies there face an uncertain and potentially damaging future, as much of the resources come from sources across the European Union.

I point you back to an earlier debrief when Royal Society President Sir Venki Ramakrishnan said that there was no evidence that British scientists were being by-passed for grant funding as a result of Brexit, nor that it would be more difficult to attract foreign researchers to the UK, insisting that the quality of British research would guarantee its future.

During the campaign, British science, like British academia, was strongly pro-Remain.  Sir Venki says that this was understandable, since scientists, like business people, appreciate stability and may be worried by change. But despite the broad pro-Remain consensus in the scientific community, a number have broken cover to express contrary views.  Prof Nick Donaldson of University College London argues that Brexit will attract more medical research to the UK when we’re free of  restrictive EU regulation.  Sir Venki’s comments add weight to such views.

 

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Post-Referendum Debrief August 1st

  1. Kevan Chippindall-Higgin says:

    I do worry about the idea of a second referendum. This is a classic EU tactic and for as long as Article 50 remains unused, the dangers increase.

    That said, Mrs May seems to be a great deal more sensible than Cameron in what she is doing, but she is still a Remainer and has stamped her authority on the government. I just hope that she does not, to quote Mrs Thatcher, wobble.

    • KennieD says:

      I agree. There is no need whatsoever to delay the implementation of Article 50 any further.
      Notice the spitefull dodgy Dave Cameron already trying to destabilise by suggesting Knighthoods to four of his yes-men who are still in the Cabinet.

    • Dung says:

      I agree about article 50 but I do not agree that May is doing the right thing, she is drifting and procrastinating. May is not saying the things that would allay the fears of those who voted to leave, fears that she would indeed backslide on Brexit.
      We want an end to free movement and that means no European Economic Area or other semi EU arrangements, out means out.
      She wants to talk about helping those at the bottom of society and those who work for a living but that says nothing about our democracy or freedom, it is a smoke screen hiding her lack of action.
      May also wants to use former EU residents as a bargaining chip and that is something that disgusts me.

  2. Shieldsman says:

    This one from the Daily Express on Friday is interesting. Cameron’s ex right-hand man predicts voter SURGE for Ukip if May backslides on Brexit
    DAVID Cameron’s former right hand man has warned new Prime Minister Theresa May she will haemorrhage votes to Ukip at the election if she attempts any backsliding over Brexit.

    And he said key marginal seats would desert her in a flash for Ukip even though the party has secured its main aim in getting Britain out of the European Union.

    Mr Coulson, who was jailed for his part in the News of the World phone hacking scandal, made the comments during a mini-documentary about why his home country Essex voted to leave the EU.
    Saying that Mr Cameron was too “cautious” on the issues of sovereignty and immigration and that generations of Westminster politicians had taken people for “fools” by talking about self-empowerment but failing to deliver it.

    He said: “It’s no surprise that when they then empowered Essex man and woman with a vote on the referendum they gave their view very clearly and with bells on.”
    Not a single one of Essex’s 14 districts voted Remain, with the county on the whole backing Brexit by 62.3 per cent to 57.7 per cent on a turnout of over 70 per cent.
    Essex contains the areas of Castle Point and Thurrock, which were two of the strongest voting Leave boroughs in the whole country.

    ‘Essex Man’ backed Margaret Thatcher and on this occasion Brexit. Once again he is the bellweather, so Mrs May beware of him.

    And Mr Coulson had a warning for new PM Theresa May that Essex, which was a Labour county before switching to the Tories in the 1970s, would defect en masse to Ukip if she reneges on her Brexit promises.
    Describing the county as a barometer for the national mood, he said: “Woe betide Theresa May and her new government if they begin to backslide on Brexit and fail to hand back the control the Leave campaign promised.
    “Because then, just as Essex quickly moved from Labour to Tory in the late 70s, it could switch again.
    “And it’s Ukip who are waiting in the wings.

    “If the new Government fails to deliver more control and fails to solve the Rubik’s cube like problem of how to deliver lower immigration, this county may have more to say.”

  3. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    The same message underlies a wide variety of current news items: Government science is a tool of fear mongering to control the public.

  4. David says:

    And the somewhat “gobby” Wiil Straw gets a gong. Seriously he does browbeat and shout down in all the interviews Ive seen of this person.

  5. David says:

    So what does this baroness gain from eu membership, support, is it an eu pension, or what?
    Why does she think we will change mind, anyone suggesting that only increases my resolve to leave on a democratic vote. Some say there were lies in the campaign, they should look into all the lies told by heath & wilson in the 70,s

    • Jane Davies says:

      Baroness? Who are you talking about?

      • Jane Davies says:

        OK….I’m up to speed….this woman clearly has nothing but contempt for the “common people” who need to be told the error of their ways by voting for democracy.

  6. Richard111 says:

    I saw a report this morning on ITV ticker tape that China has instructed the UK government to start the Hinckly project !!! Just WHO is in charge of the UK ???

  7. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    Selfishness, self-centeredness in both leaders and in opponents of worldwide social movements is the root of cause of human suffering.

    Today, I am pleased to report that unselfish cooperation among a few vocal opponents of the AGW fable promise a reconnection of society to reality at the London Conference on Climate Change on 8-9 Sept 2016, A NEW DAWNING OF PEACE & TRUTH ON EARTH!

    https://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/london-conference-volume.pdf

  8. alexr64 says:

    Great output as always.
    The big question right now seems to be ‘who will lead UKIP?’ It sounds as if there’s a ridiculous and far too public spat going on between factions. Can’t all this be settled swiftly and professionally?

    • catweazle666 says:

      The first thing UKIP needs to do is get shot of that Progressive “Conservative” Fifth Columnist Carswell.

  9. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    See also The Clexit Campaign and this statement by Viv Forbes, Founding Secretary of “Clexit”.

  10. ukiplocal says:

    We expect scientists to have an enquiring and sceptical attitude, otherwise they will not challenge theories and investigate the edges of knowledge. How disappointing so many of them are content to hold views formed by habit rather than study of the data and how odd they should be so wary of change.

    The scientific method is all about change and challenging formerly settled (but wrong) concepts.

  11. Anyoldiron says:

    There seems to be only one WAY the people of this Country may taste FREEDOM again. What is happening at the moment is a deep betrayal of all those that gave THEIR lives for our freedom to Govern ourselves-the first betrayal was when the people were told, “That there would be no loss of essential Sovereignty” if they voted to remain in the then EEC all those years ago-many believed that Prime Minister then, and look what happened. The people have voted to LEAVE the present European Union-and look again at us now. We pay our taxes that contribute towards those we elect in the House of Commons. We do not elect those in the House of Lords yet that House presently holds 760 and the people contribute towards them plus expenses of course. WHY, when all in both Houses still obey foreigners, and are still implimenting such as the EU’s TEN-TEN and “The EU aims to replace at least 80% of electricity meters with smart meters by 2020 wherever it is cost-effective to do so”. And so it goes on. WHY?

  12. rtj1211 says:

    Having worked in science professionally, there is no doubt that, in the short term, clarifications needs to be made concerning access of UK scientists to the Framework Programme funding streams from the EU. The assumption has to be that the UK will be excluded post Brexit and there must be a doubt that grants longer than 3 years will be awarded to UK scientists from now on.

    Much like ‘realigning UK business toward higher growth areas’, science should be realigned in similar ways. Firstly, it would seem fairly obvious to assign funds saved from EU membership toward appropriate research streams, in ways yet to be determined. Secondly, it would be worth building research alliances with other places, notably India, China, Japan, Australasia. Thirdly, it may be worth exploring how, if at all, the US and UK science interests can be aligned.

    There is of course a longer-term possibility that if the EU breaks up, that European nation states might agree to cobble together some centralised grant funding streams to allow pan-european projects to take place as appropriate. Not for the sake of it, but if there are cogent reasons for so doing.

    One thing you must understand about many scientists is that they can be very OCD and hence very fearful of uncertainty and change. The best basic scientists are the absolute opposite, but obsession with technical details tends to make very good practical scientists, although they may not always be the best ones at having initial ideas……

    Addressing their concerns honestly and making a commitment to UK science is the way to alleviate their worries……

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s