Anyway,I’ve a friend currently in the US. These might interest some, but others probably not. Taken live obv, not hol pics, as she’s there in Philadelphia for a week long conference. Rocky’s steps, Al Capone’s home for a bit. I forgot to add the show house.
I would prefer to eat food produced to higher standards, and would not choose to lower these standards. The thought of eating hormone fed beef does excite me in any way, neither does consuming insect fragments, rat hairs, maggots, or fly eggs. Anyone that would choose this would surely be mad? This would seem to be yet another benefit of Brexit.
I can’t see anybody rolling about on the floor critically ill in those pics. I think it would be hypocritical for any of the 3.5million UK holidaymakers that go to the USA and eat the very same thing that they want banning in the U.K. That doesn’t include buisness trips or the millions of trips by other EU citizens.
I can’t see anybody rolling about on the floor critically ill in those pics. I think it would be hypocritical for any of the 3.5million UK holidaymakers that go to the USA and eat the very same thing that they want banning in the U.K. That doesn’t include buisness trips or the millions of trips by other EU citizens.
Here are some more photos.
Workers denied toilet breaks and use bare hands at US chlorinated chicken factory
I can’t see what all the fuss is about regarding chlorinated chicken and GM crops. The chemicals etc put in our foods already are far worse.
The point is that a comprehensive free trade deal with the US will mean food that is categorically produced to a lower standard, make alignment with the EU impossible, and may mean internal borders for the UK.
Border checks between Scotland, England and Wales could be required because of varying food standards after Brexit, academics have warned. Issues such as chlorinated chicken and genetically-modified (GM) crops in post-Brexit trade negotiations could create wider differences between the nations' food safety standards and require border checks between countries, University of Sussex academics have said.
No, I’m not kidding. With the cost of healthcare in the US, if there was a problem with their food processes and end product, I think it would have been banned in their own country. Or, due to the cost again for healthcare, folk would swerve certain products. There’s been plenty of cases of bad food practices in this country, hence food inspectors, and businesses being closed down. Chlorine washes are used in the Euro Zone as it is. Travelers to other countries eat street food? There’s little in the way of controls or hygiene standards in lots of places. Plenty of folk get food poisoning in this country and the Euro Zone. Sometimes there’s not much different between high, medium or low standards. Unless somebody pushes it, mostly for there own gain. There’s far worst places to eat than in the USA. Folk from here don’t go on their hols to the USA and eat anything? Those that played poker in Las Vegas avoided food? Which country had the most cases of mad cow disease? There’s more protein in a maggot than in a packet of crisps. Food additives are far worse for the human body than anything coming from the USA.
Chlorine-washed chicken Q&A: food safety expert explains why US poultry is banned in the EU Washing chickens in chlorine isn't actually deemed dangerous – it's what comes with it that's the problem
Chlorine isn’t toxic at the levels used in the washing process and doesn’t itself cause cancer. But studies have shown that the treatment can cause carcinogens such as semicarbazide and trihalomethanes to form in the poultry meat if the concentration of chlorine is high enough. The US Food Safety and Inspection Service does set limits to prevent this but there is always a risk they could be violated.
Brexit: Boris Johnson suggests goods checks from Northern Ireland to Britain will not be enforced Prime minister sparks fury by saying Northern Ireland has a ‘great’ Brexit deal because it will keep access to the EU single market
Boris Johnson has been accused of planning to renege on the terms of his own Brexit deal, after telling Northern Irish businesses that he will not enforce checks arising from the proposed customs border in the Irish Sea.
His remarks directly contradicted both Northern Ireland secretary Julian Smith and Brexit secretary Steve Barclay, who said last month that businesses in the province would need to fill out export declaration forms when sending goods to the mainland. Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer accused the prime minister of “making it up as he goes along”. “This is a prime minister who either doesn’t know the details of a deal that he has negotiated or isn’t being straight about it, or probably both,” said Sir Keir.
Labour peer Stewart Wood said Mr Johnson was ripping up the terms of his own Brexit deal.
In a clip posted by Manufacturing Northern Ireland, the prime minister said: “Northern Ireland has got a great deal. You keep free movement. You keep access to the single market but you also have, as it says in the deal, unfettered access to GB.
Tom Brake, the Liberal Democrat Brexit spokesman, said: “The single market and freedom of movement are a great deal – even Boris Johnson recognises this – so why isn’t he keeping them for the whole of the UK as part of the many benefits of EU membership? “It is clear that the best deal for the UK is the one we have now: in the EU.” Labour MP David Lammy said: “Boris Johnson describes keeping free movement and access to the single market as a ‘great deal’ for Northern Ireland. “His terrible withdrawal deal denies both to the rest of the UK.”
Boris Johnson news – live: Labour cuts Tory poll lead as EU says Brexit can still be stopped at general election
The European Council president Donald Tusk has urged opponents of Brexit not to “give up” suggested the general election gave voters the chance to prevent Britain’s exit from the EU. It comes as a weekly tracker showed Labour had cut the Conservative poll lead, as Jeremy Corbyn’s party unveils plans to end the gender pay gap by 2030. Boris Johnson’s Tories, meanwhile, are promising to cut “overall immigration”. Ahead of today’s 4pm deadline for candidates’ nominations, second Brexit referendum campaigners are urging Labour and Lib Dems to step aside in 90 key seats to avoid a split between among pro-EU voters.
I suspect this is probably to do with what was stated by the EU in the past, saying they should have stepped in to dispel the lies of the Brexiters during the Referendum campaigning. Expect more piping up from the EU during the run up to Dec 12th.
I might try and take a guess at what’s going to happen in the future with all of it, Election, Brexit,( or not) the trouble with the deal making. Who has the longest post on a thread? Markycash?😁
I suspect this is probably to do with what was stated by the EU in the past, saying they should have stepped in to dispel the lies of the Brexiters during the Referendum campaigning. Expect more piping up from the EU during the run up to Dec 12th.
I might try and take a guess at what’s going to happen in the future with all of it, Election, Brexit,( or not) the trouble with the deal making. Who has the longest post on a thread? Markycash?😁
I suspect this is probably to do with what was stated by the EU in the past, saying they should have stepped in to dispel the lies of the Brexiters during the Referendum campaigning. Expect more piping up from the EU during the run up to Dec 12th.
I might try and take a guess at what’s going to happen in the future with all of it, Election, Brexit,( or not) the trouble with the deal making. Who has the longest post on a thread? Markycash?😁
Tesla's sudden back out tells you what Brexit will do to Britain
Boris Johnson chose to give his first big speech of the General Election campaign at an electric car plant. The Tory leader waffled on in his typically bumbling way about a Conservative majority being necessary to end the “Brexit groundhoggery” he helped create while promising to unleash “Britain’s potential”. The along came Elon Musk to drive a Tesla through everything he said. The entrepreneur has settled on Germany as the location for his first European “Gigafactory”, which will build his cars’ batteries. Britain had been in the running, but unlike one or two others, Musk was unequivocal when speaking to Auto Bild, the sister paper to car industry bible Auto Express, about his reasons for driving on by. “Brexit made it too risky,” he said.
There was worse to come. Musk had told the paper that he planned to build an R&D base in the UK in an earlier interview. Those plans have since been shelved. Said Musk: “We are also going to create an engineering and design centre in Berlin.” Of course he is. Only the most blinkered of Brexiteers could fail to see this is a major loss to UK plc.
The new generation of plants will be sited elsewhere in Europe. Some, like Tesla’s, will be in Germany. But there are plenty of other homes on the continent that will welcome them with open arms. Far from unleashing Britain’s potential, Johnson and his Tories are shackling it to a Brexit wall built on their leader’s ego and ambition and dirtied by the poisonous exhaust fumes of his friends and allies’ extremism.
For nine extraordinary minutes, Boris Johnson stood next to his bus and lied and lied and lied without stopping The truth is no less self-evident than it has always been. Which is that Johnson has infected his country with a deadly venereal disease and is now marketing himself as the cure
On many occasions I have likened the House of Commons to one of those terrible youtube videos of a Burmese python that tries to swallow an alligator whole and then explodes. The problem is that Brexit is the tapir. Brexit is the alligator. We should never have swallowed it. British politics is blocked with Boris Johnson’s lies, which are just too big to swallow.
And so, along comes Boris Johnson, telling us all to just swallow down a bit harder and we’ll get there, except that the only possible outcome at this stage is agonising death. “This government is determined to reduce our emissions, to tackle climate change, to make the cars and the vehicles that will allow a green revolution to take place,” he said, standing in front of a giant diesel-powered coach, which he is about to drive around the country for four weeks, in an election that he says he doesn’t want but also tried three times to call (another lie).
We would learn, for the hundredth time, about “the oven-ready deal, the deal that’s ready to go.”
This is the deal that liberates us only to start negotiating a free-trade deal, which he says he can negotiate in six months, which is either true or a blatant lie.
And if you’re trying to decide which, then do consider that a former Tory cabinet minister, David Gauke, is standing as an Independent candidate in his constituency for no greater reason than to make abundantly clear that Boris Johnson is lying.
Boris Johnson is deluded if he thinks he can ‘get Brexit done’ in a hurry Even if the Tories gain a majority, the UK faces a long wait for a trade deal with the EU to be negotiated
Get Brexit done.” The phrase certainly has a powerful ring to it. More than that, it fulfils two obvious electoral purposes. It avoids political discussion of what “doing Brexit” might actually involve. And, more practically, it provides a phrase that can be memorised and repeated ad nauseum on rainy doorsteps and in online advertisements. After three years of Brexit debate, as the UK has tried and failed to leave the European Union, why wouldn’t it strike a chord? What, then, is the problem? The simple answer is that it’s profoundly misleading. Let’s assume – and it’s quite an assumption – that things go smoothly for the government. Boris Johnson’s electoral gamble pays off. He comes back on 13 December at the head of a majority government. At that point, he may still struggle to “bang Brexit through” by Christmas because parliament resumes sitting only on 17 December, and then there is the small matter of swearing in 650 MPs, and a Queen’s speech and subsequent debate. However, with a majority, he should be able to pass his withdrawal agreement bill in order that the UK finally leaves the European Union on 31 January.
Never before has a state negotiated a (less than) free trade deal distancing itself from a major trading partner
So far, so simple. Yet Brexit will at this point be far from “done”. Exit will represent the end of stage one, the point at which the United Kingdom ceases to be a member state of the European Union. It then goes into an 11-month holding pattern known as transition, which expires on 31 December 2020. And now for some semantics. This government and its predecessor have insisted on using the phrase “implementation period” to describe transition and that is the wording which appears in the bill. The reference to implementation is, to say the least, profoundly misleading. Why? Because we have absolutely nothing to implement. Instead, this period will be used for trying to sort out the future relationship between the UK and the EU.
Researchers at the Institute for Government have provided a good guide as to how long these negotiations typically take (about four years). To summarise, when you look at recent free-trade agreements signed by the European Union, it becomes clear that an 11-month transition period is simply too short to allow for negotiation. It is true that the time it takes to negotiate a deal will hinge on what kind of deal the parties want. Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, has accepted that a “basic free-trade deal” could possibly be negotiated by the end of next year. Yet this raises numerous questions. For one thing, a basic deal on tariffs would risk falling foul of EU member states worried about the danger of Britain having tariff-free access to the EU market but able to cut standards, including workers’ rights. For another, the government has repeatedly claimed it is seeking a “best-in-class” trade deal. One can only wonder what kind of class it has in mind. And the UK has a major interest in a much broader trade deal, covering services and internal security matters, such as access to EU databases, which have proved essential for combatting international crime. All of this points to the UK wanting a much more substantial and wider-ranging trade deal than the basic model. And this will take time – maybe years.
This brings us back to the reality that 11 months of transition will simply not be enough. Which means asking for an extension. The withdrawal agreement allows for this: it provides that the joint committee of UK and EU representatives “may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period for up to one or two years”.
Johnson has said that he will not ask for an extension to the transition period, and so many fear a new cliff edge or no-deal Brexit on 1 January 2021, as the UK leaves the transition period without a (comprehensive) trade deal. The prime minister laughs this off. The UK, he argues, is in a unique situation: it starts from a position of alignment with EU rules. But this is a red herring. Never before has a state negotiated a (less than) free-trade deal distancing itself from a major trading partner. And the EU will wish to scrutinise very carefully what dealignment actually means in practice. Clause by clause, chapter by chapter, the negotiations will be painstaking and time consuming. The divorce will be achieved, but the new relationship will be in limbo.
And let’s think about that new deal. Unlike during the article 50 period, each of the EU’s member states will be intimately involved, and, assuming the deal sought is an ambitious one, it is conceivable each will enjoy a veto. Expect, then, each national capital to come up with its own list of desiderata that it wants included in any future deal. And add to the fact that, because this is a deal intended to make trade harder rather than easier, we will be dealing solely with losses. In a normal trade negotiation, there are “wins” with which to offset concessions. Not so here. So ratification might be expected to be particularly tough.
So the choice is relatively clear. Either a lengthy, and potentially rancourous, process that will belie the idea of “getting Brexit done”. Or a short, sharp negotiation ending with a short, thin agreement that raises the prospect of years of adjustment as the UK economy adapts to a far looser relationship with its largest and nearest trading partner. No one should think it’s going to be all over anytime soon.
• Anand Menon is director of the UK in a Changing Europe and professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King’s College London. Catherine Barnard is a senior fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe and professor of EU law at Cambridge University
Comments
These might interest some, but others probably not.
Taken live obv, not hol pics, as she’s there in Philadelphia for a week long conference.
Rocky’s steps, Al Capone’s home for a bit.
I forgot to add the show house.
The thought of eating hormone fed beef does excite me in any way, neither does consuming insect fragments, rat hairs, maggots, or fly eggs.
Anyone that would choose this would surely be mad?
This would seem to be yet another benefit of Brexit.
I think it would be hypocritical for any of the 3.5million UK holidaymakers that go to the USA and eat the very same thing that they want banning in the U.K.
That doesn’t include buisness trips or the millions of trips by other EU citizens.
The Truth About Chlorinated Chicken | Trailer
Workers denied toilet breaks and use bare hands at US chlorinated chicken factory
Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/03/workers-denied-toilet-breaks-and-use-bare-hands-at-us-chlorinated-chicken-factory-9776223/?ito=cbshare
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/
Splitting hairs.
Border checks between Scotland, England and Wales could be required because of varying food standards after Brexit, academics have warned.
Issues such as chlorinated chicken and genetically-modified (GM) crops in post-Brexit trade negotiations could create wider differences between the nations' food safety standards and require border checks between countries, University of Sussex academics have said.
Chlorine-washed chicken Q&A: food safety expert explains why US poultry is banned in the EU
Washing chickens in chlorine isn't actually deemed dangerous – it's what comes with it that's the problem
Chlorine isn’t toxic at the levels used in the washing process and doesn’t itself cause cancer. But studies have shown that the treatment can cause carcinogens such as semicarbazide and trihalomethanes to form in the poultry meat if the concentration of chlorine is high enough. The US Food Safety and Inspection Service does set limits to prevent this but there is always a risk they could be violated.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/chlorinewashed-chicken-qa-food-safety-expert-explains-why-us-poultry-is-banned-in-the-eu-a7875131.html
Prime minister sparks fury by saying Northern Ireland has a ‘great’ Brexit deal because it will keep access to the EU single market
Boris Johnson has been accused of planning to renege on the terms of his own Brexit deal, after telling Northern Irish businesses that he will not enforce checks arising from the proposed customs border in the Irish Sea.
His remarks directly contradicted both Northern Ireland secretary Julian Smith and Brexit secretary Steve Barclay, who said last month that businesses in the province would need to fill out export declaration forms when sending goods to the mainland.
Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer accused the prime minister of “making it up as he goes along”.
“This is a prime minister who either doesn’t know the details of a deal that he has negotiated or isn’t being straight about it, or probably both,” said Sir Keir.
Labour peer Stewart Wood said Mr Johnson was ripping up the terms of his own Brexit deal.
In a clip posted by Manufacturing Northern Ireland, the prime minister said: “Northern Ireland has got a great deal. You keep free movement. You keep access to the single market but you also have, as it says in the deal, unfettered access to GB.
Tom Brake, the Liberal Democrat Brexit spokesman, said: “The single market and freedom of movement are a great deal – even Boris Johnson recognises this – so why isn’t he keeping them for the whole of the UK as part of the many benefits of EU membership?
“It is clear that the best deal for the UK is the one we have now: in the EU.”
Labour MP David Lammy said: “Boris Johnson describes keeping free movement and access to the single market as a ‘great deal’ for Northern Ireland.
“His terrible withdrawal deal denies both to the rest of the UK.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-news-latest-northern-ireland-britain-goods-checks-a9195776.html
The European Council president Donald Tusk has urged opponents of Brexit not to “give up” suggested the general election gave voters the chance to prevent Britain’s exit from the EU.
It comes as a weekly tracker showed Labour had cut the Conservative poll lead, as Jeremy Corbyn’s party unveils plans to end the gender pay gap by 2030. Boris Johnson’s Tories, meanwhile, are promising to cut “overall immigration”.
Ahead of today’s 4pm deadline for candidates’ nominations, second Brexit referendum campaigners are urging Labour and Lib Dems to step aside in 90 key seats to avoid a split between among pro-EU voters.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-news-live-brexit-general-election-updates-today-candidates-deadline-a9202446.html
Expect more piping up from the EU during the run up to Dec 12th.
I might try and take a guess at what’s going to happen in the future with all of it, Election, Brexit,( or not) the trouble with the deal making.
Who has the longest post on a thread? Markycash?😁
Boris Johnson chose to give his first big speech of the General Election campaign at an electric car plant. The Tory leader waffled on in his typically bumbling way about a Conservative majority being necessary to end the “Brexit groundhoggery” he helped create while promising to unleash “Britain’s potential”.
The along came Elon Musk to drive a Tesla through everything he said.
The entrepreneur has settled on Germany as the location for his first European “Gigafactory”, which will build his cars’ batteries. Britain had been in the running, but unlike one or two others, Musk was unequivocal when speaking to Auto Bild, the sister paper to car industry bible Auto Express, about his reasons for driving on by.
“Brexit made it too risky,” he said.
There was worse to come. Musk had told the paper that he planned to build an R&D base in the UK in an earlier interview. Those plans have since been shelved.
Said Musk: “We are also going to create an engineering and design centre in Berlin.”
Of course he is.
Only the most blinkered of Brexiteers could fail to see this is a major loss to UK plc.
The new generation of plants will be sited elsewhere in Europe. Some, like Tesla’s, will be in Germany. But there are plenty of other homes on the continent that will welcome them with open arms.
Far from unleashing Britain’s potential, Johnson and his Tories are shackling it to a Brexit wall built on their leader’s ego and ambition and dirtied by the poisonous exhaust fumes of his friends and allies’ extremism.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/britain-wall-itself-off-biggest-142405831.html
The truth is no less self-evident than it has always been. Which is that Johnson has infected his country with a deadly venereal disease and is now marketing himself as the cure
On many occasions I have likened the House of Commons to one of those terrible youtube videos of a Burmese python that tries to swallow an alligator whole and then explodes. The problem is that Brexit is the tapir. Brexit is the alligator. We should never have swallowed it. British politics is blocked with Boris Johnson’s lies, which are just too big to swallow.
And so, along comes Boris Johnson, telling us all to just swallow down a bit harder and we’ll get there, except that the only possible outcome at this stage is agonising death.
“This government is determined to reduce our emissions, to tackle climate change, to make the cars and the vehicles that will allow a green revolution to take place,” he said, standing in front of a giant diesel-powered coach, which he is about to drive around the country for four weeks, in an election that he says he doesn’t want but also tried three times to call (another lie).
We would learn, for the hundredth time, about “the oven-ready deal, the deal that’s ready to go.”
This is the deal that liberates us only to start negotiating a free-trade deal, which he says he can negotiate in six months, which is either true or a blatant lie.
And if you’re trying to decide which, then do consider that a former Tory cabinet minister, David Gauke, is standing as an Independent candidate in his constituency for no greater reason than to make abundantly clear that Boris Johnson is lying.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-brexit-bus-election-vote-leave-campaign-jeremy-corbyn-a9204591.html
Even if the Tories gain a majority, the UK faces a long wait for a trade deal with the EU to be negotiated
Get Brexit done.” The phrase certainly has a powerful ring to it. More than that, it fulfils two obvious electoral purposes. It avoids political discussion of what “doing Brexit” might actually involve. And, more practically, it provides a phrase that can be memorised and repeated ad nauseum on rainy doorsteps and in online advertisements. After three years of Brexit debate, as the UK has tried and failed to leave the European Union, why wouldn’t it strike a chord?
What, then, is the problem? The simple answer is that it’s profoundly misleading. Let’s assume – and it’s quite an assumption – that things go smoothly for the government. Boris Johnson’s electoral gamble pays off. He comes back on 13 December at the head of a majority government. At that point, he may still struggle to “bang Brexit through” by Christmas because parliament resumes sitting only on 17 December, and then there is the small matter of swearing in 650 MPs, and a Queen’s speech and subsequent debate. However, with a majority, he should be able to pass his withdrawal agreement bill in order that the UK finally leaves the European Union on 31 January.
Never before has a state negotiated a (less than) free trade deal distancing itself from a major trading partner
So far, so simple. Yet Brexit will at this point be far from “done”. Exit will represent the end of stage one, the point at which the United Kingdom ceases to be a member state of the European Union. It then goes into an 11-month holding pattern known as transition, which expires on 31 December 2020.
And now for some semantics. This government and its predecessor have insisted on using the phrase “implementation period” to describe transition and that is the wording which appears in the bill. The reference to implementation is, to say the least, profoundly misleading. Why? Because we have absolutely nothing to implement. Instead, this period will be used for trying to sort out the future relationship between the UK and the EU.
Researchers at the Institute for Government have provided a good guide as to how long these negotiations typically take (about four years). To summarise, when you look at recent free-trade agreements signed by the European Union, it becomes clear that an 11-month transition period is simply too short to allow for negotiation.
It is true that the time it takes to negotiate a deal will hinge on what kind of deal the parties want. Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, has accepted that a “basic free-trade deal” could possibly be negotiated by the end of next year. Yet this raises numerous questions. For one thing, a basic deal on tariffs would risk falling foul of EU member states worried about the danger of Britain having tariff-free access to the EU market but able to cut standards, including workers’ rights. For another, the government has repeatedly claimed it is seeking a “best-in-class” trade deal. One can only wonder what kind of class it has in mind.
And the UK has a major interest in a much broader trade deal, covering services and internal security matters, such as access to EU databases, which have proved essential for combatting international crime. All of this points to the UK wanting a much more substantial and wider-ranging trade deal than the basic model. And this will take time – maybe years.
This brings us back to the reality that 11 months of transition will simply not be enough. Which means asking for an extension. The withdrawal agreement allows for this: it provides that the joint committee of UK and EU representatives “may, before 1 July 2020, adopt a single decision extending the transition period for up to one or two years”.
Johnson has said that he will not ask for an extension to the transition period, and so many fear a new cliff edge or no-deal Brexit on 1 January 2021, as the UK leaves the transition period without a (comprehensive) trade deal. The prime minister laughs this off. The UK, he argues, is in a unique situation: it starts from a position of alignment with EU rules.
But this is a red herring. Never before has a state negotiated a (less than) free-trade deal distancing itself from a major trading partner. And the EU will wish to scrutinise very carefully what dealignment actually means in practice. Clause by clause, chapter by chapter, the negotiations will be painstaking and time consuming. The divorce will be achieved, but the new relationship will be in limbo.
And let’s think about that new deal. Unlike during the article 50 period, each of the EU’s member states will be intimately involved, and, assuming the deal sought is an ambitious one, it is conceivable each will enjoy a veto. Expect, then, each national capital to come up with its own list of desiderata that it wants included in any future deal. And add to the fact that, because this is a deal intended to make trade harder rather than easier, we will be dealing solely with losses. In a normal trade negotiation, there are “wins” with which to offset concessions. Not so here. So ratification might be expected to be particularly tough.
So the choice is relatively clear. Either a lengthy, and potentially rancourous, process that will belie the idea of “getting Brexit done”. Or a short, sharp negotiation ending with a short, thin agreement that raises the prospect of years of adjustment as the UK economy adapts to a far looser relationship with its largest and nearest trading partner. No one should think it’s going to be all over anytime soon.
• Anand Menon is director of the UK in a Changing Europe and professor of European politics and foreign affairs at King’s College London. Catherine Barnard is a senior fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe and professor of EU law at Cambridge University
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/boris-johnson-get-brexit-done-tories-majority-eu