Pessimism among UK companies jumps due to Brexit and trade war fears, research shows
The number of UK chief executives who expect global economic growth to decline in the next year has tripled over the past 12 months, while almost three quarters of UK firms are expecting to be damaged due to Brexit, new data has revealed.
Cross-Channel freight trade 'could drop by 87%' under 'no-deal' Brexit
Cross-Channel freight trade could drop by between 75% and 87% for six months in the event of a "no-deal" Brexit, according to a Border Force document obtained by Sky News. The estimate comes as part of an internal assumption for no-deal contingency plans. A slide from an internal government presentation marked "Official-Sensitive" and titled "Freight Traffic Contingency Assumptions" is a recent internal assessment much of which was omitted from public no-deal documentation. It reads: "The reasonable worst case flow through the Short Straits is reduced to between 13% and 25% of current capacity for a period of between 3-6 months." This is a reference to traffic from Dover-Calais and in the Channel Tunnel.
No-deal Brexit would cost Northern Ireland economy £5bn by 2034
Northern Ireland’s economy could be dented by almost £5bn every year by 2034 if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said on Tuesday. The figure, contained in a new analysis of government figures conducted by the CBI’s Northern Ireland branch, suggests that Northern Ireland could be one of the areas of the UK most affected by a no-deal Brexit.
The Government may be forced into ruling out a no deal Brexit, and extending Article 50, during the next week. If this happens it would put Lord Snooty, and the Brexiteers in a very weak position. They would surely be tempted to accept The PMs deal, as maybe the only way to avoid No Brexit.
However we do seen to be moving ever closer to either a General Election or a second referendum.
The Government may be forced into ruling out a no deal Brexit, and extending Article 50, during the next week. If this happens it would put Lord Snooty, and the Brexiteers in a very weak position. They would surely be tempted to accept The PMs deal, as maybe the only way to avoid No Brexit.
However we do seen to be moving ever closer to either a General Election or a second referendum.
This will present a number of difficulties.
In the case of a General Election what would the two main parties stand on, as far as Brexit is concerned.
You would think that The Tories, would continue to support the current plan. She would attempt to sell it to the electorate. I can imagine Lord Snooty and his mates in The ERG suffering cardiac arrests if they were forced to support The PMs deal. I don't see that the Tories would take up an alternative position. If this was the case The ERG might as well support her deal now.
What Would Labour stand on. They have a bigger choice. They could revoke Brexit, which would be a position supported by a huge majority of their members, a majority of their voters, and a large number of their MPs. They could honour the first referendum, and stand on their Brexit plan, which most people know is a fantasy. Alternatively they could support a second referendum.
It would be interesting.
On the other hand a second referendum would seem to be more straightforward. It may be more attractive to both main parties.
Although there is a difficulty in the choice of question. If it was a choice of Mays deal or remain, Lord Snooty and his mob would probably see it as unfair. If you added a third choice of no deal to make them happy, this would be difficult if it had already been ruled out by Parliament, it would surely hand victory to the remain side, by splitting the leave vote.
I think that the referendum is a more straightforward solution as no further time would be required to implement the result.
Whereas a Labour victory in an election, or a Tory victory with a new leader, would mean that negotiations would probably start from scratch.
Brexit is a mess – what would Yes Minister’s Sir Humphrey do?
“So I would discreetly phone Michel Barnier. He is French, and the Tories resent that we have never got our way with the French since the Battle of Waterloo. The chief of the defence staff once told me that we don’t have an independent nuclear deterrent because of the Russians – we have it because the French have one.
““I would ask Barnier to do two things:
1. Make it clear that the UK’s departure from the EU would also involve our being excluded from the Uefa League and Cup; 2. Clarify that we would also be excluded from the Eurovision song contest.
“These exclusions would greatly enhance the prospects of the French winning both in future. “Then I would telephone President Macron and ask him to make a speech saying that De Gaulle had been right all along: the British are not to be trusted and should not have been admitted to Europe; that the French have been planning for years for us to depart and are delighted that they and the Germans will now be free to run things the way they want. “With luck, this would so provoke the people that they would rise en masse and demand another referendum to stop the French from once more getting the better of us.”
The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has also tabled his party’s own amendment, calling for the government to put in place a process for finding a parliamentary majority for possible Brexit options – including Corbyn’s own policy which proposes the UK remain in a post-Brexit customs union with the EU, and a “public vote”. The shadow business secretary, Rebecca Long-Bailey, said the amendment did not “in any way” mean the party backed a second referendum. “If it was passed, the amendment, and it went to a vote on the specific issues, then that would be a decision for the party to take at the time,” she said.
However, Chuka Umunna, a prominent supporter of a People's Vote called for a firmer stance. He tweeted: "There is always a flurry of excitement when the frontbench acknowledges the obvious - that a People's Vote may be the only way forward (it is) - but that is not the position adopted by those running the show. Supporting "options" is not a credible or sustainable policy."
I Like this guy ..well worth watching the vid through . Can we invite him onto the thread ? Particularly liked his comments about voting for something without attempting to discover all of the facts and the general arrogance and disdain from the remainers , which is in a large part responsible for the result of the referendum .
He is clearly and smugly putting forward one side of the argument.
How clever is it to vote to leave, when not knowing, and still not knowing what that would actually mean.
Remain voters knew exactly what they were voting for, as it was the status quo.
The leave vote has meant a number of different things in the last 2 years, and it is still unclear what it will actually mean for all us.
I have heard nothing in the last 2 years to convince me to change my mind.
Most experts maintain that every form of Brexit will have an adverse effect on our economy.
There are many different forms of Brexit, and one form of remaining.
Had just a couple of different of the different brexits been included on the ballot paper, remain would have won hands down.
So a choice of Canada, Norway, or remain, and remain would have won.
Having watched Brexit The Uncivil War. I think Leave won mainly because they had a better campaign.
The Campaign slogan was originally "Take Control". Changing this to "Take Back Control" was absolute genius. Adding the word back clearly inferred that The EU had taken control from us and we wanted it back. I don't believe that this was in anyway true. Yet the slogan will have inspired many people to vote leave.
We have one sided views in many respects. So when you see a fisherman interviewed on the telly, they will always moan about foreign fisherman fishing in our waters. They never seem to mention our fisherman fishing in EU waters. Or the fact that they sell the majority of their fish to the EU. The last fishing row was about our fishermen fishing in French waters at a time when French fishermen weren't allowed to. Nor the fact that we wouldnt have any cod left now if it was up to us, and The EU hadn't intervened.
However clever this man is I still think he made the wrong choice, whatever that choice ends up being.
Whether it ends up being Mays deal, Canada, Norway, or no deal.
He probably isn't in favour of all of them, but still doesn't know which one he will get.
He is clearly and smugly putting forward one side of the argument.
How clever is it to vote to leave, when not knowing, and still not knowing what that would actually mean.
Remain voters knew exactly what they were voting for, as it was the status quo.
The leave vote has meant a number of different things in the last 2 years, and it is still unclear what it will actually mean for all us.
I have heard nothing in the last 2 years to convince me to change my mind.
Most experts maintain that every form of Brexit will have an adverse effect on our economy.
There are many different forms of Brexit, and one form of remaining.
Had just a couple of different of the different brexits been included on the ballot paper, remain would have won hands down.
So a choice of Canada, Norway, or remain, and remain would have won.
Having watched Brexit The Uncivil War. I think Leave won mainly because they had a better campaign.
The Campaign slogan was originally "Take Control". Changing this to "Take Back Control" was absolute genius. Adding the word back clearly inferred that The EU had taken control from us and we wanted it back. I don't believe that this was in anyway true. Yet the slogan will have inspired many people to vote leave.
We have one sided views in many respects. So when you see a fisherman interviewed on the telly, they will always moan about foreign fisherman fishing in our waters. They never seem to mention our fisherman fishing in EU waters. Or the fact that they sell the majority of their fish to the EU. The last fishing row was about our fishermen fishing in French waters at a time when French fishermen weren't allowed to. Nor the fact that we wouldnt have any cod left now if it was up to us, and The EU hadn't intervened.
However clever this man is I still think he made the wrong choice, whatever that choice ends up being.
Whether it ends up being Mays deal, Canada, Norway, or no deal.
He probably isn't in favour of all of them, but still doesn't know which one he will get.
Fortunately no Brexit is still possible.
Bolded bits in order : To be fair , you've been doing that from the start .
If you have the choice of 2 options to shape the future of the country , do you not think it would be a good idea to explore both options ...how many remainers did ?
Predictions are what they are , and generally applicable for a short frame time .
Speculation from a biased point of view with no foundation.
The referendum wasn't won or lost on a single campaign slogan.
He is clearly and smugly putting forward one side of the argument.
How clever is it to vote to leave, when not knowing, and still not knowing what that would actually mean.
Remain voters knew exactly what they were voting for, as it was the status quo.
The leave vote has meant a number of different things in the last 2 years, and it is still unclear what it will actually mean for all us.
I have heard nothing in the last 2 years to convince me to change my mind.
Most experts maintain that every form of Brexit will have an adverse effect on our economy.
There are many different forms of Brexit, and one form of remaining.
Had just a couple of different of the different brexits been included on the ballot paper, remain would have won hands down.
So a choice of Canada, Norway, or remain, and remain would have won.
Having watched Brexit The Uncivil War. I think Leave won mainly because they had a better campaign.
The Campaign slogan was originally "Take Control". Changing this to "Take Back Control" was absolute genius. Adding the word back clearly inferred that The EU had taken control from us and we wanted it back. I don't believe that this was in anyway true. Yet the slogan will have inspired many people to vote leave.
We have one sided views in many respects. So when you see a fisherman interviewed on the telly, they will always moan about foreign fisherman fishing in our waters. They never seem to mention our fisherman fishing in EU waters. Or the fact that they sell the majority of their fish to the EU. The last fishing row was about our fishermen fishing in French waters at a time when French fishermen weren't allowed to. Nor the fact that we wouldnt have any cod left now if it was up to us, and The EU hadn't intervened.
However clever this man is I still think he made the wrong choice, whatever that choice ends up being.
Whether it ends up being Mays deal, Canada, Norway, or no deal.
He probably isn't in favour of all of them, but still doesn't know which one he will get.
Fortunately no Brexit is still possible.
Bolded bits in order : To be fair , you've been doing that from the start .
I wouldn't dispute that.
Having watched the video again. I think that the he had 2 goals, firstly to attempt to show that he is not stupid, and secondly to do exactly what he was accusing the remain supporters of doing, which was to try and make the other side look stupid. Immediately after the referendum there were some surveys published, pointing to the fact that less educated were more likely to have voted to leave, while the more educated people were likely to have voted remain. If these surveys are true, then they are what they are. There is no point in claiming to be the one clever man that voted to leave, as I am certain there were plenty of others. There were other surveys differentiating between young and old etc. etc. I don't go off on one because I am old, nor because I am uneducated. The surveys were presumably based on fact. You cant argue with facts, even though in this case the facts are irrelevant, as everyone is entitled to vote, whether you are young, old, clever or not. I have not seen criticism of leave voters in the media for them being thick, or any other personalised criticism full stop. I thought he presented his speech in a very arrogant way, another thing he was accusing the other side of.
You seem to have completely changed your tune as you started off presenting all the reasons why you thought it was not possible for you to vote.
If you have the choice of 2 options to shape the future of the country , do you not think it would be a good idea to explore both options ...how many remainers did ?
To be fair you didn't explore any of them, you just didn't vote. I voted on what I thought would be better for the country. I think anyone not wishing to explore options, is short sighted. Nothing I have seen since has changed my mind. On the contrary all I have seen has confirmed my view.
Predictions are what they are , and generally applicable for a short frame time .
Not sure if you read very much, but Lord Snooty the chief Brexiteer said it might be ok, within 50 years. The Governments own figures say every form of Brexit affects the economy in an adverse way. No deal being by far the worst option. Many experts agree. The EU have said today that no deal means a hard border in Ireland. Sky News uncovered a report about losing up to 87% of freight trade for 6 months. They haven't commented on beyond 6 months, maybe it gets a little better, maybe not, but 6 months should be long enough to put plenty of firms out of business, and lose many jobs. The SNP have had a no deal report done which shows them losing 80,000 jobs in Scotland. I could go on and on.
Speculation from a biased point of view with no foundation.
It seems quite obvious to me that as remain got 48% of the vote. Then the 52% that voted to leave would be split between the other options. It would be impossible to think that one of the options would have got more than 48%. Therefore remain would have won.
The referendum wasn't won or lost on a single campaign slogan.
Have you seen the programme?
I have said that the campaign was better, rather than the slogan won it.
No one knows which one we will get if any .
That is my point, the arrogant man in the video, claims to be clever and knew what he was voting for. Yet we still don't know what that is, so how could he possibly have known in 2016.
Many leave voters are dead against no deal, others favour it. So for instance if we get no deal, many leave voters will be unhappy. If we got a Norway, Lord Snooty and his mob will have heart attacks. Therefore, how is it possible for any leave voter to say that they knew what they were voting for?
No brexit will not happen.
It is still very possible, Mystic Meg.
I have watched a number of programmes lately where members of the public have been interviewed regarding which way they voted in the referendum.
Excluding a small number of exceptions many of them seem to find it difficult tp iterate why they voted to leave. Other than to repeat, parrot fashion, phrases they obviously heard during the referendum campaign.
Those that have cited taking back control of our laws, then struggle when asked which EU law they want cancelled first. This seems to happen a lot.
I can honestly say that I don't think that EU membership has ever affected me in an adverse way. I have benefitted from the membership while living and working in EU countries, as well as making life easier on holidays. I only realised the good that EU membership has done for us when I started watching the "what has the EU ever done for us" videos.
Nope same tune as i started with ...I clearly said at the time of the referendum I couldn't make up my mind and it would be stupid to vote on something that you were unsure on.
I also never said I didnt explore either option , again just that I couldn't make up my mind .
Nope same tune as i started with ...I clearly said at the time of the referendum I couldn't make up my mind and it would be stupid to vote on something that you were unsure on.
I also never said I didnt explore either option , again just that I couldn't make up my mind .
What you clearly said was that you were unsure veracity of the information that was being dispensed by the leave campaign, and therefore could not make a decision, and decided not to vote.
The information available since has proved that the leave campaign left a lot to be desired In the above post you said"If you have the choice of 2 options to shape the future of the country , do you not think it would be a good idea to explore both options ...how many remainers did ?" I cant speak for other remainers obviously. However I did investigate both sides of the argument, came down on one side, and voted.
How many people that didn't vote failed to look into either option?
Should we end up in a no deal catastrophe, at least I know that I did my best to avoid it.
If a second referendum is not going to happen, what is?
If there was one which way would you vote?
Or do you think an extra 30 months is not long enough to decide?
I assume you didn't watch The Uncivil War?
Do you really think that any leaver can say that they knew what they were voting for?
What do you think they were voting for?
What do you think the benefits of leaving are?
Have you seen a single Brexit forecast from a reliable source that shows an improvement in the economy?
When you say you couldn't make up your mind, was that because you didn't know anything about The EU, weren't aware of the repercussions of leaving, or just confused?
You can hardly criticise remainers for not looking into both options, if you didn't?
Do you really think the guy on the video did a good job of selling the benefits of leaving?
If not, do you think that it may be because there aren't many, if any tangible benefits?
Do you think that taking back control of our money, laws, and borders, will affect your life in any tangible way?
Comments
The number of UK chief executives who expect global economic growth to decline in the next year has tripled over the past 12 months, while almost three quarters of UK firms are expecting to be damaged due to Brexit, new data has revealed.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/pessimism-among-uk-companies-jumps-174338617.html
Cross-Channel freight trade could drop by between 75% and 87% for six months in the event of a "no-deal" Brexit, according to a Border Force document obtained by Sky News.
The estimate comes as part of an internal assumption for no-deal contingency plans.
A slide from an internal government presentation marked "Official-Sensitive" and titled "Freight Traffic Contingency Assumptions" is a recent internal assessment much of which was omitted from public no-deal documentation.
It reads: "The reasonable worst case flow through the Short Straits is reduced to between 13% and 25% of current capacity for a period of between 3-6 months."
This is a reference to traffic from Dover-Calais and in the Channel Tunnel.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/cross-channel-freight-trade-could-193300798.html
Northern Ireland’s economy could be dented by almost £5bn every year by 2034 if the UK leaves the European Union without a deal, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said on Tuesday.
The figure, contained in a new analysis of government figures conducted by the CBI’s Northern Ireland branch, suggests that Northern Ireland could be one of the areas of the UK most affected by a no-deal Brexit.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/no-deal-brexit-cost-northern-ireland-economy-5bn-2034-092339453.html
If this happens it would put Lord Snooty, and the Brexiteers in a very weak position. They would surely be tempted to accept The PMs deal, as maybe the only way to avoid No Brexit.
However we do seen to be moving ever closer to either a General Election or a second referendum.
In the case of a General Election what would the two main parties stand on, as far as Brexit is concerned.
You would think that The Tories, would continue to support the current plan. She would attempt to sell it to the electorate. I can imagine Lord Snooty and his mates in The ERG suffering cardiac arrests if they were forced to support The PMs deal. I don't see that the Tories would take up an alternative position.
If this was the case The ERG might as well support her deal now.
What Would Labour stand on. They have a bigger choice. They could revoke Brexit, which would be a position supported by a huge majority of their members, a majority of their voters, and a large number of their MPs. They could honour the first referendum, and stand on their Brexit plan, which most people know is a fantasy. Alternatively they could support a second referendum.
It would be interesting.
On the other hand a second referendum would seem to be more straightforward. It may be more attractive to both main parties.
Although there is a difficulty in the choice of question. If it was a choice of Mays deal or remain, Lord Snooty and his mob would probably see it as unfair. If you added a third choice of no deal to make them happy, this would be difficult if it had already been ruled out by Parliament, it would surely hand victory to the remain side, by splitting the leave vote.
I think that the referendum is a more straightforward solution as no further time would be required to implement the result.
Whereas a Labour victory in an election, or a Tory victory with a new leader, would mean that negotiations would probably start from scratch.
“So I would discreetly phone Michel Barnier. He is French, and the Tories resent that we have never got our way with the French since the Battle of Waterloo. The chief of the defence staff once told me that we don’t have an independent nuclear deterrent because of the Russians – we have it because the French have one.
““I would ask Barnier to do two things:
1. Make it clear that the UK’s departure from the EU would also involve our being excluded from the Uefa League and Cup;
2. Clarify that we would also be excluded from the Eurovision song contest.
“These exclusions would greatly enhance the prospects of the French winning both in future.
“Then I would telephone President Macron and ask him to make a speech saying that De Gaulle had been right all along: the British are not to be trusted and should not have been admitted to Europe; that the French have been planning for years for us to depart and are delighted that they and the Germans will now be free to run things the way they want.
“With luck, this would so provoke the people that they would rise en masse and demand another referendum to stop the French from once more getting the better of us.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/brexit-is-a-mess-–-what-would-yes-minister’s-sir-humphrey-do/ar-BBSA07E?ocid=spartandhp
The Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has also tabled his party’s own amendment, calling for the government to put in place a process for finding a parliamentary majority for possible Brexit options – including Corbyn’s own policy which proposes the UK remain in a post-Brexit customs union with the EU, and a “public vote”.
The shadow business secretary, Rebecca Long-Bailey, said the amendment did not “in any way” mean the party backed a second referendum. “If it was passed, the amendment, and it went to a vote on the specific issues, then that would be a decision for the party to take at the time,” she said.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/brexit-secretary-eu-may-not-agree-to-extend-article-50/ar-BBSzGkQ?ocid=spartandhp
He tweeted: "There is always a flurry of excitement when the frontbench acknowledges the obvious - that a People's Vote may be the only way forward (it is) - but that is not the position adopted by those running the show. Supporting "options" is not a credible or sustainable policy."
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/brexit-news-latest-jeremy-corbyn-backs-plans-to-force-second-eu-referendum/ar-BBSzxb0
Particularly liked his comments about voting for something without attempting to discover all of the facts and the general arrogance and disdain from the remainers , which is in a large part responsible for the result of the referendum .
How clever is it to vote to leave, when not knowing, and still not knowing what that would actually mean.
Remain voters knew exactly what they were voting for, as it was the status quo.
The leave vote has meant a number of different things in the last 2 years, and it is still unclear what it will actually mean for all us.
I have heard nothing in the last 2 years to convince me to change my mind.
Most experts maintain that every form of Brexit will have an adverse effect on our economy.
There are many different forms of Brexit, and one form of remaining.
Had just a couple of different of the different brexits been included on the ballot paper, remain would have won hands down.
So a choice of Canada, Norway, or remain, and remain would have won.
Having watched Brexit The Uncivil War. I think Leave won mainly because they had a better campaign.
The Campaign slogan was originally "Take Control". Changing this to "Take Back Control" was absolute genius. Adding the word back clearly inferred that The EU had taken control from us and we wanted it back. I don't believe that this was in anyway true. Yet the slogan will have inspired many people to vote leave.
We have one sided views in many respects. So when you see a fisherman interviewed on the telly, they will always moan about foreign fisherman fishing in our waters. They never seem to mention our fisherman fishing in EU waters. Or the fact that they sell the majority of their fish to the EU. The last fishing row was about our fishermen fishing in French waters at a time when French fishermen weren't allowed to. Nor the fact that we wouldnt have any cod left now if it was up to us, and The EU hadn't intervened.
However clever this man is I still think he made the wrong choice, whatever that choice ends up being.
Whether it ends up being Mays deal, Canada, Norway, or no deal.
He probably isn't in favour of all of them, but still doesn't know which one he will get.
Fortunately no Brexit is still possible.
To be fair , you've been doing that from the start .
If you have the choice of 2 options to shape the future of the country , do you not think it would be a good idea to explore both options ...how many remainers did ?
Predictions are what they are , and generally applicable for a short frame time .
Speculation from a biased point of view with no foundation.
The referendum wasn't won or lost on a single campaign slogan.
No one knows which one we will get if any .
No brexit will not happen.
I have watched a number of programmes lately where members of the public have been interviewed regarding which way they voted in the referendum.
Excluding a small number of exceptions many of them seem to find it difficult tp iterate why they voted to leave. Other than to repeat, parrot fashion, phrases they obviously heard during the referendum campaign.
Those that have cited taking back control of our laws, then struggle when asked which EU law they want cancelled first. This seems to happen a lot.
I can honestly say that I don't think that EU membership has ever affected me in an adverse way. I have benefitted from the membership while living and working in EU countries, as well as making life easier on holidays. I only realised the good that EU membership has done for us when I started watching the "what has the EU ever done for us" videos.
Nope same tune as i started with ...I clearly said at the time of the referendum I couldn't make up my mind and it would be stupid to vote on something that you were unsure on.
I also never said I didnt explore either option , again just that I couldn't make up my mind .
Any cynics here? 😏
The information available since has proved that the leave campaign left a lot to be desired
In the above post you said"If you have the choice of 2 options to shape the future of the country , do you not think it would be a good idea to explore both options ...how many remainers did ?"
I cant speak for other remainers obviously. However I did investigate both sides of the argument, came down on one side, and voted.
How many people that didn't vote failed to look into either option?
Should we end up in a no deal catastrophe, at least I know that I did my best to avoid it.
If a second referendum is not going to happen, what is?
If there was one which way would you vote?
Or do you think an extra 30 months is not long enough to decide?
I assume you didn't watch The Uncivil War?
Do you really think that any leaver can say that they knew what they were voting for?
What do you think they were voting for?
What do you think the benefits of leaving are?
Have you seen a single Brexit forecast from a reliable source that shows an improvement in the economy?
When you say you couldn't make up your mind, was that because you didn't know anything about The EU, weren't aware of the repercussions of leaving, or just confused?
You can hardly criticise remainers for not looking into both options, if you didn't?
Do you really think the guy on the video did a good job of selling the benefits of leaving?
If not, do you think that it may be because there aren't many, if any tangible benefits?
Do you think that taking back control of our money, laws, and borders, will affect your life in any tangible way?
What about sovereignty?
What else was there about leaving?