Has anyone perceived a single Brexit benefit yet?

[ardcarp]

OK so this is old stuff and I'm sure it's been argued to death elsewhere on the Forum.

However, a couple of weeks ago on Any Questions, someone asked the panel to name a single benefit that had arisen from leaving the EU.
NO-ONE, not even the Tory panel-member, could answer the question.

Week by week we hear of more problems; traffic jams at ports, ridiculous amounts of bureaucracy and paper work, higher costs of imports, fishermen (ha-ha) finding it impossible to export to the EU (their biggest customers), food sourcing in Northern Ireland, restrictions on travel and time spent abroad, reciprocal health arrangements, work permits needed for musicians.....I could go on.

But may I repeat the question? Please will any Forumista who has discovered or perceived any TANGIBLE benefit from leaving the EU list it here?

(NB Vague thoughts about 'Taking back control' don't count as tangible in my book)

[eighthobstruction]

....well, you got the chance to use the word tangible twice in 5 minutes ....before Brexit I'd be lucky to use it twice in a year....

[teamsaint]

I wonder if anybody noticed any tangible benefit in the first 25 days of the Blair administration?

Handing control of interest rates to the BoE and introducing student loans DON’T count.( yes I know, student loans weren’t in the first 25 days, point made for effect ).

Yes, yes, I know, whataboutery, irrelevant, deviation, hesitation, and so on......

[french frank]

It really, really does depend on your point of view: this could be good news, it could be terrible news, but it seems to have been another effect. Thinking of NI rather than Scotland:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/union-in-crisis-as-poll-reveals-voters-want-referendum-on-scottish-independence-and-united-ireland-wwzpdlg7b

No doubt a contentious issue to follow up, particularly as for most of us it isn't our problem.

[Cockney Sparrow]

Unless someone can set puns running, this might be a very short thread. There might not be many tangible Brexit benefits.

Sovereignty and border control might generate a warm glow for some - for myself, I need to pay for alcoholic spirits or gas/coal/logs.

[oddoneout]

I wonder if anybody noticed any tangible benefit in the first 25 days of the Blair administration?

Handing control of interest rates to the BoE and introducing student loans DON’T count.( yes I know, student loans weren’t in the first 25 days, point made for effect ).

Yes, yes, I know, whataboutery, irrelevant, deviation, hesitation, and so on......

Might have done if there'd been an 11 month run-up to it as there was for the Brexit cliff jump?
I don't subscribe(and never have) to the Brexit benefit myth, but it has to be said that if those involved had bothered to do some of their homework, instead of playing Party politics since 2016, the unfolding calamity would I think have been mitigated somewhat - if only in respect of getting at least some of the necessary IT and extra personnel in place and functioning.

[teamsaint]

Might have done if there'd been an 11 month run-up to it as there was for the Brexit cliff jump?
I don't subscribe(and never have) to the Brexit benefit myth, but it has to be said that if those involved had bothered to do some of their homework, instead of playing Party politics since 2016, the unfolding calamity would I think have been mitigated somewhat - if only in respect of getting at least some of the necessary IT and extra personnel in place and functioning.

Labour could presumably have prepared for actually winning the election, though no doubt after 18 years in the wilderness such things were just a folk memory.

And yes, mitigation of what even the most reasonable, smartest brexiter must have known would be significant short term disruption, could have been so much better.

Edit: it would seem that better supply of the Astra Zeneca vaccine to the UK has been helped by being out of the EU, ( in tye sense that the EU contract has been heavily cut) but who knows how that will play out medium term? Not the sort of thing to point score over.

[teamsaint]

It really, really does depend on your point of view: this could be good news, it could be terrible news, but it seems to have been another effect. Thinking of NI rather than Scotland:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/union-in-crisis-as-poll-reveals-voters-want-referendum-on-scottish-independence-and-united-ireland-wwzpdlg7b

No doubt a contentious issue to follow up, particularly as for most of us it isn't our problem.

Does that poll show the opinion of English people on Scottish independence and Irish unification, FF?

[french frank]

Does that polls show the opinion of English people on Scottish independence and Irish unification, FF?

On Scottish independence:
Pleased 17%
Not bothered 28%
Upset 46%

On Irish reunification:
Pleased 20%
Not bothered 37%
Upset 31%

[jayne lee wilson]

Labour could presumably have prepared for actually winning the election, though no doubt after 18 years in the wilderness such things were just a folk memory.

And yes, mitigation of what even the most reasonable, smartest brexiter must have known would be significant short term disruption, could have been so much better.

Edit: it would seem that better supply of the Astra Zeneca vaccine to the UK has been helped by being out of the EU, ( in tye sense that the EU contract has been heavily cut) but who knows how that will play out medium term? Not the sort of thing to point score over.

All of the extensive problems ardcarp lists are happening because we left the single market and the customs union. All of the costs and difficulties are because we have erected barriers to Free Trade and Freedom of Movement. (Including that long-and-still-government-denied border in the Irish Sea). We are not about to re-enter anytime soon.

So how can they possibly be categorised as merely " significant short-term disruption"? What is going to significantly ameliorate that disruption, when, and how?

As for the suggestion that it is too early to tell if there will be tangible benefits, no intelligent, truthful and fair Political Jurisdiction would seek and then bring about any major legislative change, both economic and social, without being aware, and making very clear publicly, what those benefits were to be and when they would arrive - including a clear statement of the potential dangers. All we got was lies and bravado; right up to our serial-liar of a Prime Minister saying, in December, pre-deal, that the UK would prosper under WTO no-deal rules.

The Tory Right were always going to hijack Brexit and run the show for the sake of their own decades-nurtured Political Fantasies. Well, they realised their dream. Here we have it, the reality. The biggest lie was always this very reality. Such a government wouldn't dare admit that even a deal struck would always be worse, potentially much worse, than what we had before. It simply cannot be otherwise on any rational analysis. But just look around...

The "most reasonable, smartest Brexiters" (whoever they were or are...) haven't been making themselves heard for a very long time. How could they get such a public platform, or be politically influential, and what could they possibly say now?

[Bryn]

All of the extensive problems ardcarp lists are happening because we left the single market and the customs union. All of the costs and difficulties are because we have erected barriers to Free Trade and Freedom of Movement. (Including that long-and-still-government-denied border in the Irish Sea). We are not about to re-enter anytime soon.

So how can they possibly be categorised as merely " significant short-term disruption"? What is going to significantly ameliorate that disruption, when, and how?

As for the suggestion that it is too early to tell if there will be tangible benefits, no intelligent, truthful and fair Political Jurisdiction would seek and then bring about any major legislative change, both economic and social, without being aware, and making very clear publicly, what those benefits were to be and when they would arrive - including a clear statement of the potential dangers. All we got was lies and bravado; right up to our serial-liar of a Prime Minister saying, in December, pre-deal, that the UK would prosper under WHO no-deal rules.

The Tory Right were always going to hijack Brexit and run the show for the sake of their own decades-nurtured Political Fantasies. Well, they realised their dream. Here we have it, the reality. The biggest lie was always this very reality. Such a government wouldn't dare admit that even a deal struck would always be worse, potentially much worse, than what we had before. It simply cannot be otherwise on any rational analysis. But just look around...

The "most reasonable, smartest Brexiters" (whoever they were or are...) haven't been making themselves heard for a very long time. How could they get such a public platform, or be politically influential, and what could they possibly say now?

For WHO, read WTO?

[eighthobstruction]

How could they get such a public platform, or be politically influential, and what could they possibly say now?

....and we might say to them "How d'ya like dem apples"

[jayne lee wilson]

For WHO, read WTO?

Of course...thanks, now corrected....

[cloughie]

Where are all these trade deals which have negotiated world wide by Liz Truss - are they great deals or just deals which mean we could do previously through the EU or are there indeed additional benefits we have not been told about. The EU trade deal which we were never told about in detail but assumed that would mean we continued to trade tariff free - another mislead from this government.

[teamsaint]

All of the extensive problems ardcarp lists are happening because we left the single market and the customs union. All of the costs and difficulties are because we have erected barriers to Free Trade and Freedom of Movement. (Including that long-and-still-government-denied border in the Irish Sea). We are not about to re-enter anytime soon.

So how can they possibly be categorised as merely " significant short-term disruption"? What is going to significantly ameliorate that disruption, when, and how?

As for the suggestion that it is too early to tell if there will be tangible benefits, no intelligent, truthful and fair Political Jurisdiction would seek and then bring about any major legislative change, both economic and social, without being aware, and making very clear publicly, what those benefits were to be and when they would arrive - including a clear statement of the potential dangers. All we got was lies and bravado; right up to our serial-liar of a Prime Minister saying, in December, pre-deal, that the UK would prosper under WTO no-deal rules.

The Tory Right were always going to hijack Brexit and run the show for the sake of their own decades-nurtured Political Fantasies. Well, they realised their dream. Here we have it, the reality. The biggest lie was always this very reality. Such a government wouldn't dare admit that even a deal struck would always be worse, potentially much worse, than what we had before. It simply cannot be otherwise on any rational analysis. But just look around...

The "most reasonable, smartest Brexiters" (whoever they were or are...) haven't been making themselves heard for a very long time. How could they get such a public platform, or be politically influential, and what could they possibly say now?

I'm afraid you are quoting me out of context, when I quite clearly put the short term disruption IN context. It wasn't " merely", it wasn't my view, which is what you have made it look like.

Smart, reasonable Brexiters may be thin on the ground, but the Guardian's economic correspondent is one such.I can recognise him as such, even while disagreeing with him.