It turns out Brexit will change erm.... nothing much.
Sovereignty:
The sovereignty of Parliament is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution. Whilst Parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU, it has not always felt like that.
So we always had it.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...exit_from_and_partnership_with_the_EU_Web.pdf
Those pesky laws according to Liam Fox:
"In order to minimise disruption to global trade as we leave the EU, over the coming period the government will prepare the necessary draft schedules which replicate as far as possible our current obligations."
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/12/06/very-quietly-liam-fox-admits-the-brexit-lie
So we’ll keep them for the time being. I can’t see us being able to drop many if we want to trade with the EU.
Worker's rights:
UK employment law already goes further than many of the standards set out in EU legislation and this Government will protect and enhance the rights people have at work.
So, they should stay the same. (Fingers crossed).
Sorry, what was the point of Brexit again?
Immigration? Well, just about every minister doesn't want their department adversely affected by a cut in immigration. We might want less EU immigration:
But in future we must ensure we can control the number of people coming to the UK from the EU.
...but that would increase non-EU immigration.
And the author of the main report on immigration has claimed that at worst, it has a miniscule effect on smaller wages. Some reports have found positive overall effects on wages.
EU immigrants are more educated, younger, more likely to be in work and less likely to claim benefits than the UK-born. About 44% have some form of higher education compared with only 23% of the UK-born. About a third of EU immigrants live in London, compared with only 11% of the UK-born.
• Many people are concerned that immigration reduces the pay and job chances of the UK born due to more competition for jobs. But immigrants consume goods and services and this increased demand helps to create more employment opportunities. Immigrants also might have skills that complement UK-born workers. So we need empirical evidence to settle the issue of whether the economic impact of immigration is negative or positive for the UK-born.
• New evidence in this Report shows that the areas of the UK with large increases in EU immigration did not suffer greater falls in the jobs and pay of UK-born workers. The big falls in wages after 2008 are due to the global financial crisis and a weak economic recovery, not to immigration.
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf
So other than people feeling bad about immigration (despite the facts), and wanting sovereignty (despite already having it), what was the point again? Other than incurring that list of costs we'll probably have....
Here is the original list:
The £122bn budget shortfall
Additional funding for the NHS
Maintaining farming subsidies
Maintaining fishing subsidies
Indemnifying manufacturers against negative impacts of Brexit
£2bn a year for science and innovation
Replace EU investment for our poorest regions
Pay our EEA subscriptions
Pay for the department of Brexiting
Pay for the department of International Trade
Pay for bodies to set and enforce rules currently handled by the EU
Further examples:
Invest in waste projects to reduce landfill (eg. waste to energy)
The direct and consequential costs, arising from any changes to the free travel area between the UK and ROI
£800m per annum extra to meet our 0.7% international development commitment, since a portion of our present EU contribution counts towards that goal.
€40-€60bn exit bill to cover pension liabilities, unpaid commitments and loan guarantees.
Many shared resources, such as the European Medicines Agency which is responsible for scientific evaluation, supervision and safety monitoring of medicines for use in the EU; and the European Environment Agency, which provides independent information for policy makers and the public, to name but two... All such agencies, with the cost currently shared across the EU and EEA, will need to be set up from scratch in the UK, if we are to uphold our global regulatory and policy obligations.
European social funding planned would be honoured
Extra help in sports programs
A whole infrastructure of inventory units at uk ports and airport's to handle and check all goods coming to and from the EU because we are not in the customs union. And increased cost to business, with the delays and expense of goods having to go through those checks.
Employing lots more civil servants to manage the above?
Reduced taxation incomes from big business to encourage them to come here, but I suspect that will be offset by cutting benefits and increasing personal taxation or National Insurance.
The economic loss from signing a rushed 'distress' trade deal with the USA.
The reduction in economic productivity, due to being unable to attract talented people from overseas, either through outright controls, unworkable bureaucracy, or simply that they don't see the UK as a desirable place to live.
The recruitment of hundreds of border staff
And...
Helping to fund (presumably) some new court for handling trade disputes with the EU,
And we wonder why a backbencher shouted "suicide" after the vote in Parliament.
