Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
Sovereignty is a long term project and requires competent government that understands economics and business.
In terms of your question, I take the word "practical" to exclude "sovereignty". So, as yet, no "practical" benefits have occurred. As I've always said, sovereignty has been the driver for me on the basis that business, with (sadly missing) government help, would sort out our progress.
The one thing you Remainers dodge is the sovereignty question: Do you want to be part of a single European state with rules made in Brussels? Remember, we, the British, may look like them, but we don't think like them. Big difference and hence Brexit.
|
Honestly ? Considering the ineptitude of the recent Tory governments and the lack of future premise from any of the political parties, why not ?
Didn’t we also have a veto ? That could be used in rules and regulations ?
---------- Post added at 13:36 ---------- Previous post was at 13:35 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Smaller than the EU, but not smaller than Canada. The UK economy is in fact substantially larger than Canada’s. As several of us have repeatedly stated, Brexit always was about regaining sovereign control so as to create opportunities, as well as political accountability for the way those opportunities are pursued.
Failure of trade negotiations with Canada is a political failure of the UK government, not a failure of Brexit. But thanks to Brexit, the present government can be held entirely responsible for that failure at the ballot box. No shuffling of EU commissioners, no rearranging of unwieldy rainbow coalitions in Strasbourg.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ry-gdp-levels/ |
I guess the question I want to ask is, what signs or evidence is there that any future government will be able to perform better in trade negotiations?