Broadly speaking, we now are in such a bad position that most changes do bring potential win/wins.Jdsk wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 9:54amDoes that lead you to any thoughts on future trading arrangements with the EU? Has the "no win" problem gone away?roubaixtuesday wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 9:41amI agree with much of this, but there's also a larger truth.reohn2 wrote: ↑18 May 2023, 9:16am The approach to and handling of Brexit has been a sh*tshow from day one due the complete arrogance of the way successive Tory Brexit ministers,who've been completely out of their depth in the way they've incompetently handled it.
Successive Tory PMs have been no better,they've had no strategy and no idea what they were doing or how to handle the whole Brexit issue that they created,it's been a litany of disaster from start to finish,From May through to Sunak and the couple of lunatics inbetween,although Sunak is trying to backpedal a bit it's all too late more and more damage is being done every day.
Brexit has isolated this country from it's nearest trading neighbours who happen to be the largest trading block in the world,if you put up barrriers to trade which is effectively what the UK has done,business goes elsewhere which is what is happening.
When the likes of Farage are admitting it's failed you know we're well and truly up a brown smelly creek sans paddle.
When the head of the BofE claimed we'll have to get used to being poorer he's right but it's mostly because of the people who fell for snake oil salesmen such as Farage,Johnson,Gove,et al .Believing such people is ruining the country and destroying lives and livelhoods,so I say to those people,at least admit you were wrong.
And if anyone thinks a Tory government can put things right at the next GE look back on the past 13years then ask yourself how much more damage they'll do in the five!
Most negotiations proceed by allowing a "win win" ie both parties emerge stronger.
The inherent problem with Brexit is that there was no win win ever possible; the concept inherently damages both parties, whatever the negotiation.
Compromising and collaborating where you're going to lose regardless is much, much harder.
Accepting "damage limitation" as the objective was impossible.
Thanks
Jonathan
But equally, the uncertainty of future major change is in itself a bad thing.
I predict, and would like, multiple small steps and then a larger reappraisal down the line, but that's at least a decade away.
The Windsor Framework is a good example of how it's likely to go, I think.