>Side Bars<
The Top Bar >PAGES<
Guest Post by: John Mills: Brexit: The Way Forward …

Posted by:
Greg Lance – Watkins

eMail Address:

Blog About The Main Web Site:

The Main Web Site:



Brexit: The Way Forward

Perhaps the ‘no deal’ scenario may not be as bad as advertised. Whilst the outcome of Brexit negotiations may seem unclear, whatever the future holds is unlikely to be much more difficult for British businesses to handle than the problems companies usually face every day, writes John Mills.

In June 2016 – much to the surprise of many people who had got dangerously out of touch with what was going on in much of the country – the UK electorate voted by a small but decisive majority to leave the EU.

The main reason for the Leave result was widespread discontent with the way the country had been run, particularly since the 2008 financial crash. More than half the UK population had seen their living standards stagnating or reduced over the previous ten years while those responsible for the crash had got away almost entirely scot-free. People felt that they had lost control of their lives, with the EU seen as a symbol of unaccountable bureaucracy. Immigration was certainly a factor, but polling evidence showed that “taking back control”, for which having some say on who was allowed to come and work in the UK was an important component, and a bigger factor. 

What did those who voted Leave think was going to happen when their side won the referendum? Up to that point, surprisingly little detailed work had been done by anyone on what the consequences might be – either by the government, the civil service, academia or the organisations which campaigned for a Leave vote. The outline of what a Leave vote meant in practice, however, was clear – and had been reflected in numerous statements made by both sides running up to the referendum. The UK would leave the EU’s Single Market and Customs Union and would seek a comprehensive free-trade deal with the EU on a similar basis to the one which had just been concluded between the EU and Canada.  

This was very much the thrust of successive speeches made by the Prime Minister, Theresa May. If negotiations along these lines had gone ahead, they might have provided an outcome which both pleased the Leave camp and one with which Remainers could live. Trade with the EU would have become slightly more complicated but not much. Co-operation on all the main issues from terrorism to climate change, on which it obviously makes sense for the UK to work together with our near neighbours – and vice versa – could have continued. The UK, as a major net contributor to the EU budget and with a huge balance of payments deficit with the EU 27, was in quite a strong negotiating position. But this does not now look like the case being the way that events are going to unfold. Why not? What went wrong?


Essentially, three things have blown the negotiations off course. One was an early decision to put discussions of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, citizenship and money ahead of trade, which bogged down negotiations on ground favourable to the EU 27. The second was the general election in 2017, which was intended to increase the Conservative majority in the House of Commons, but which in fact achieved the opposite, leaving no majority in Parliament for a clean break with the EU. The third was the behaviour of many members of the House of Commons and particularly in the Lords who were against Leave in principle and who believed they had the right to use legislative amendments effectively to reverse the rest of the EU referendum.

The result is that, as time is running out, we are now drifting towards a series of potential outcomes to the Brexit negotiations, all of which have major disadvantages. The only way to negotiate any kind of reasonable deal involves being prepared to walk away from a really poor offer, but the unwillingness of a majority of MPs – let alone members of the House of Lords – to contemplate a clean break with the EU means that this option does not, at least at the moment, exist. Furthermore, even if there was a change of heart so that it did, it is no longer clear that there would be time to implement all the changes in customs facilities, which would make this option operationally viable. In these circumstances, all the negotiating cards fall into the hand of the EU 27.

In consequence, the deal which is likely to come before Parliament in the autumn of 2018 will probably be a very tough one from the UK’s point of view. It is likely that we will be offered continuing membership of both the Single Market and the Customs Union, but on the basis that very little changes from what we have now, except that going ahead we will have no say in the way in which the EU develops because we will no longer be a voting member. We will continue paying large net sums into the EU budget, with no border control, subject to the European Court of Justice, still in the Common Agricultural and Common Fisheries Policies, and unable to strike our own trade deals outside the EU. This is a substantially worse position than we would have been in if the EU referendum had gone the other way and we had stayed in the Union.  


Will Parliament accept such a deal? Possibly, especially if MPs feel by then that they have no alternative which isn’t worse, and especially if this arrangement is described as “temporary”, even though it might be very difficult to move away from it once it has become established as the norm. 
It is, however, also possible that Parliament will not accept what the EU 27 offer – and what happens then becomes much more difficult to call. The recent proceedings surrounding Parliament having a “meaningful vote” mean that Parliament will have a substantial say in what then occurs although the government, if it survives, will be in final charge. What might happen then?

It is likely that the position will further polarise. If the deal on offer from the EU27 has been rejected, a possible outcome would be a choice between a clean Brexit or the UK trying to re-join the EU. The clean Brexit option would entail the UK coming out of the Single Market and the Customs Union, and trading with the EU on WTO terms, perhaps with a free-trade agreement in place. If the UK was to consider re-joining the EU, a second referendum would almost certainly be required, especially as by the time this happened the UK would probably have left the EU. Any new referendum therefore would not be on whether the UK should stay in the EU but whether we should apply to re-join – quite possibly with an additional obligation to join the euro and on more onerous financial terms than we have now, if we were to lose our rebate. Even if the EU27 wanted us back at all. In these circumstances, it is far from clear that the referendum result would be any different from the last one. If Leave won again, there would be little alternative other than a WTO-term Brexit. 

It is the starkness of these two choices which makes it likely that the eventual outcome will be some kind of fudge; a deal that leaves trade between the UK and the EU continuing to operate on much the same terms as it does now, nominally outside the EU but effectively still bound to it. Will this be a stable position? Probably not but “temporary” arrangements have a habit of lasting a long time. Norway voted not to join the EEC as it then was in 1972. Forty-six years later it is still in the European Economic Area, which is essentially the type of relationship in which the UK might find itself for a long time ahead. 

So, faced with all this uncertainly, what should businesses do? My advice is that they should hold their nerves and assume – with a large amount to justify this view – that in the end, Brexit will not make a huge difference to their trading prospects. Neither a fudge, nor re-joining the EU, nor trading with the EU on WTO terms would make that much difference in trading terms to what happens at present, even though there is a possibility that a reversion to WTO terms may happen very late with inadequate preparations. If this does occur, however, sterling is likely to fall sharply, giving the economy the same boost as happened after the 2016 referendum result. Whatever the Brexit negotiations outcome, therefore, the prospects for most UK business looks fairly stable from an EU trading standpoint. 

Indeed, other non-Brexit-related risks are likely to turn out to pose a much greater threat. Our future economic and business prospects depend hugely on both the internal economic policies pursued by the UK government and what happens externally, not least on the stability of the EU itself – and particularly the eurozone. Businesses are used to dealing with uncertainty. The outcome of the Brexit negotiations may be unclear but whatever the future holds it is unlikely to be much more difficult for UK businesses to manage than problems about the future which businesses face every day.  

Oli Scarff /


First published Summer Issue 2018


Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 44 (0)1594 – 528 337
Calls from ‘Number Withheld’ phones Are Blocked

All unanswered messages are recorded.
Leave your name & a UK land line number & I will return your call.

‘e’Mail Address:


With an avg. 1.2M voters per MEP & Britain with 16% of EU GDP and 13% of the EU’s population yet  having only 8% (if united) say, whilst holding less than 3% of the various offices within the EU Do note The EUropean Parliament has no ability to make policy and has a Commission of unelected bureaucrats, thus clearly the EU is not even a pretence of being a democracy despite its protestations!
Do note that many senior apparatchicks and even elected politicians speak openly of the ‘Post Democratic era’ with no sense of shame or irony and in complete contempt of the so called electorate – yet The EU & many of its vassal States/Regions are all too willing to slaughter people in Sovereign States, to impose The EU’s chosen brand of democracy on them!

Now as President Junker announced in his ‘State of the union’ speech 2017 the aim is to create an EU military force and centralise ever more of the decision making and control!

The imposition of a Government and policies upon its vassal regions such as the peoples of Greece shows just how far from being a democracy the EU is.

Just follow the recent EU display of so called ‘Democracy’:
France and the Netherlands voted against the proposed EU constitution in 2005, only to have those votes ignored.
Ireland voted against ratifying the Lisbon treaty in 2008, but then later under pressure & threats had to change its mind.
Greece for me was the final straw. It became clear in 2015 that it didn’t matter which way the Greek people voted. The birthplace of democracy had become its tomb. That was enough. I was going to vote to leave the EU when the chance came.

No political party of any significance in Britain took active steps to achieve a Referendum – the task was eventually taken by an Indipendent West Midlands MEP Nikki Sinclaire who personally launched and funded the gathering of a petition of 225,000 signatures delivered to Parliament via Downing Street, thus forcing a debate in the House of Commons on an IN/OUT Referendum, which led to David Cameron’s first consequential rebellion.

It was due to winning that debate, officially opposed by every party including Ukip that David Cameron was forced to include a promise of an IN/OUT Referendum in the Tory Manifesto at the next General Election. The rest is history & despite no Parliamentary Party backing the OUT vote & Government spending Millions of Pounds of public money leafletting & promoting ‘Project Fear’ to try to persuade the British people to Remain just as they had at the first Referendum in 1975 – This time their lies and threats were not heeded and in the largest vote in British history Britain voted by a clear majority to Leave.

Nikki Sinclaire’s OUT result left Cameron & his co conspirator Osborne with no option but to resign, sadly some of the other traitors have remained to try to hinder progress to BreXit, aided by their corrupt allies in the EU and \eu funding and bribes!

There will be little or no change in Britain’s economic position, if we leave the EU, using a better negotiated, customised & updated version of the ‘Norway Model’ as a stepping stone to becoming a full member of the Eropean Economic Area, where all will benefit, as we secure trade relations with the EU’s vassal regions, with an EFTA style status and can trade and negotiate independently on the global stage, as members of The Commonwealth and the Anglosphere.

This is of course dependent on a modicum of intelligence on the part of Britain’s politicians and negotiators but it also requires the integrity of Parliament to uphod democracy and the integrity of EU politicuians & apparchicks to act ethically and without their normal vindictive mallice.

I believe Leaving the EU will be turned into something of a rough ride by the ignorant and the corrupt but I have no doubt that in the long run Leaving the EU will prove conclusively to be in the best interests of Britain and our true allies. I also believe that Britain leaving the EU will prove to be the catalyst to great changes within the EU and hopefully its democratisation as without great changes it is indubitably doomed.

Do not overlook the fact that politicians have plotted and schemmed since the 1950s and we have actually been vassals of the EU, when it was still using the aesopian linguistics and calling itself The Common Market in the early 1970s, a name the bureaucrats arbitrarily changed to EUropean Union in the early 1990s as they worked towards their long term goals of an ever closer centrally controlled Political and economic Union with its own anthem, currency, flag and rigid central control by its self appointed bureacrats towards a new Empirate –

It will take many years to rectify the mess our political class got us into and we have no other peacefull means by which to extricate ourselves than to depend on that self same self styled elite, who all too often forget they work for us!

One huge benefit of BreXit will be that we can negotiate with bodies like the WTO, UN, WHO, IMF, CODEX and the like, directly, in our own interest and that of our partners around the world, in both the Commonwealth and the Anglosphere at large; rather than having negotiations and terms imposed by unelected EU bureacrats and their interpretation of the rules handed down, as if they were some great achievement of the EU’s!
The greatest change and benefit will be political, as we improve our democracy and self determination, with the ability to deselect and elect our own Government, with an improved Westminster structure, see >Harrogate Agenda<.
How we go about the process of disentangling our future wellbeing from the EU is laid out in extensive, well researched and immensely tedious detail see >FleXcit< or for a brief video summary CLICK HERE


>Side Bars<
The Top Bar >PAGES<Also:

You will find me on both Skype & Twitter but I do not utilise the attrociously regulated FaceBook nor similar social media.

Skype: GregL-W

You are encouraged to contact me with information or to effect a correction on any of my postings – BUT I only respond to individuals providing a verifiable name, address and land line telephone.
  1. I NEVER post anonymously on the internet
  2. ALL MY BLOGS & WEB SITES are clearly sourced to me
  3. I DO NOT use an obfuscated eMail address to hide behind
  4. I DO NOT use or bother reading FaceBook
  5. I DO have a Voice Mail Message System
  6. I ONLY GUARANTEE to answer identifiable eMails
  7. I ONLY GUARANTEE to phone back identifiable UK Land Line Messages
  8. I DO NOT accept phone calls from witheld numbers
  9. I REGRET due to BT in this area I have a rubbish Broadband connection
  10. I AM opposed to British membership of The EU
  11. I AM opposed to Welsh, Scottish or English Independence within an interdependent UK
  13. I DO NOT believe the IPCC Climate Propaganda re Anthropogenic Global Warming
  14. I AM strongly opposed to the subsidy or use of failed technologies eg. WIND TURBINES
  15. I AM IN FAVOUR of rapid research & development of NEW NUCLEAR, Thorium & Psi/Si technologies
  16. I see no evidence to trust POLITICIANS at any level or of any persuasion
  17. I DO NOT believe in GODS singular or plural, Bronze Age or Modern
  18. I VALUE the NHS as a HEALTH SERVICE NOT a Lifestyle support
  19. I BELIEVE in a DEATH PENALTY for serial or GBH rape.
  20. I BELIEVE in a DEATH PENALTY for serial, terrorist, mass or for pleasure murder.
  21. I BELIEVE in a DEATH PENALTY for serial gross child abuse including sexual.
  22. I DO NOT trust or believe in armed police
  23. I DO NOT believe in prolonging human life beyond reasonable expectation of sentient participatory intellectual existence
  24. I BELIEVE in EUTHENASIA under clearly defined & legal terms
  25. I DO TRY to make every effort to NOT infringe copyrights in any commercial way & make all consequential corrections of fact brought to my attention by an identifiable individual

Please Be Sure To
.Follow Greg_LW on Twitter.

Re-TWEET my Tweets

& Publicise My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide



Posted by:
Greg Lance – Watkins

eMail Address:

Blog About The Main Web Site:

The Main Web Site: