• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Brexit: Now What? Turning it up to 11

Status
Not open for further replies.
You may recall that the triumphant Vote Leave leaders proposed a "Festival of Brexit" to show off the best of what Britain has to offer in a post-Brexit world.

As it turns out, people didn't really care.

It was Jacob Rees-Mogg who christened it a festival of Brexit – a moniker that might well have cursed it from the beginning.

Announced by Theresa May in the aftermath of Britain’s referendum on EU membership, and supposedly inspired by the 1851 Great Exhibition and 1951’s Festival of Britain, the then prime minister heralded a programme of events to be held this year to “showcase what makes our country great today”.

But four years on – and after two re-brandings – the public spending watchdog is to investigate what became known as Unboxed: Creativity in the UK, amid concern that visitor numbers have been less than 1% of early targets.

The National Audit Office (NAO) will examine how the £120m project was managed. About 240,000 visitors are reported to have visited events, in contrast to an early target of 66 million.
Click to expand...
The Guardian: Public spending watchdog to investigate ‘festival of Brexit’
 
The Don said:
FTFY ;)

It beggars belief that captains of industry believed that we could have the unicorns and rainbows Brexit.
Click to expand...

I always second guess myself - I wrote affect at first but then think "oh hold on I always get that wrong".

To paraphrase what was said in the USA "it's hurting the wrong people".
 
Mojo said:
But why couldn’t we have all the privileges of membership without any of the obligations? #projectfear
Click to expand...

I can believe low information voters thinking that kind of Brexit could be possible but not someone with any experience of international business. :confused:

Then again, Brexit has always been something of a political Rorschach test, you see what you want to see; free trade but no free movement; free movement but protectionism and government subsidy; simply a bonfire of regulation.
 
And of course the "speedy vaccine rollout" could have happened in exactly the same way it did whilst we were part of the EU.
 
Darat said:
And of course the "speedy vaccine rollout" could have happened in exactly the same way it did whilst we were part of the EU.
Click to expand...

And was, in fact, a massive gamble that nobody else was willing to take, mainly because AstraZeneca were not giving usable data to the regulators.

Of course the, slight, early advantage wasn't followed up by ensuring enough people got vaccinated to achieve proper herd immunity. When Ireland, for exampe, was sitting on 95% double dosage the UK was barely above 70%.
 
Darat said:
And of course the "speedy vaccine rollout" could have happened in exactly the same way it did whilst we were part of the EU.
Click to expand...
There was nothing special about the UK rollout itself. What allowed the UK get high vaccination rates early on was aggressive tactics wrt vaccine acquisition . Efffectivcaly while everyone else in Europe was waiting for fair and orderly vaccine distribution the UK was grabbing everything it could at the expense of everyone else. I'm not sure this could have happened if the UK was still in the EU.

I said at the time, and I still believe it, that the EU would be foolish to ever use UK made vaccines or vaccines made by UK companies again. I really do hope that EU bans vaccine imports from the UK in favor of domestic production.
 
lomiller said:
There was nothing special about the UK rollout itself. What allowed the UK get high vaccination rates early on was aggressive tactics wrt vaccine acquisition . Efffectivcaly while everyone else in Europe was waiting for fair and orderly vaccine distribution the UK was grabbing everything it could at the expense of everyone else. I'm not sure this could have happened if the UK was still in the EU.

I said at the time, and I still believe it, that the EU would be foolish to ever use UK made vaccines or vaccines made by UK companies again. I really do hope that EU bans vaccine imports from the UK in favor of domestic production.
Click to expand...

There is that too, the UK colluded with AstraZeneca to confiscate the batch of vaccines that had been earmarked for EU usage and already paid for (just awaiting regulatory clearance), simply because BoJo the Clown promised to pay over the market price. I'd love to see the bank accounts of those involved the day after that event.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
There is that too, the UK colluded with AstraZeneca to confiscate the batch of vaccines that had been earmarked for EU usage and already paid for (just awaiting regulatory clearance), simply because BoJo the Clown promised to pay over the market price. I'd love to see the bank accounts of those involved the day after that event.
Click to expand...
The is absolutely false.

The UK negotiated its contract first and partly paid for the development.
 
jimbob said:
Meanwhile my brother pointed out that

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-retained-eu-law-revocation-and-reform-bill-2022

Is causing problems, also in the devolved governments as Westminster took ownership of the EU rules, not the devolved governments.

And there's lots of legislation (thousands of pages) that have not been replaced yet.

This has flown under the radar
Click to expand...
It is going on and creating loads of totally unnecessary work in civil service offices. People are rewriting laws that are perfectly adequate. It is not materially changing their effect or rather is not intended to
It is simply to make them 'British' and make the ridiculous claim that they are our rules and not under Brussels influence.

Fairly sure it was a Rees-Mogg driven idea.
 
Lothian said:
It is going on and creating loads of totally unnecessary work in civil service offices. People are rewriting laws that are perfectly adequate. It is not materially changing their effect or rather is not intended to
It is simply to make them 'British' and make the ridiculous claim that they are our rules and not under Brussels influence.

Fairly sure it was a Rees-Mogg driven idea.
Click to expand...

The trouble is that copy and paste does not work. So rewriting is needed. And the legislation introduces a far too short deadline for the task.

So an indeterminate number of regulations will fall out of law at the end and without an assessment of what the impact would be.

Great for those wanting a low regulation country.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom