Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Innovindil]

Just now, leicsmac said:

As has been debated on here before, self interest is a double edged sword. When used well in a competitive fashion, it can result in great advancement and success that can be used to the benefit of all.

 

However, that same instinct also results in a lot of misery for those who lose (it's not a zero sum game, but people view it as such and so it becomes that, belief matters) and it won't help us at all against the REALLY big problems in the future.

I agree. I really do. But at the end of the day, my priorities lay with me being able to get my own home and start raising a family.

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I agree. I really do. But at the end of the day, my priorities lay with me being able to get my own home and start raising a family.

Yep, that evolutionary instinct is a real bugger, isn't it?

[Innovindil]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Yep, that evolutionary instinct is a real bugger, isn't it?

Not me. Blame the missus. 

[Guest MattP]

Delighted Rogers has gone, (Anyone who has read Tim Shipman's book will tell you the same thing, the man seemed to be subservient to the European Union rather than his own country), he's been sulking ever since we voted to leave and now the question is now who replaces him? Is Dan Hannan a possibility? It seems bizarre we have him sat on the sidelines with the knowledge and contacts he has in European politics.

 

He's the extract from the book....it sounds like having a political meeting with a spoilt child (which I can imagine being paid £170,000 inside that body can do to you)

 

Quote

 

We were too beholden to Tom Scholar and Ivan Rogers,’ one Cameron adviser said. ‘They were status quo. They were happy to take “No” for an answer, happy to believe things weren’t possible when they could be possible. I’ve lost count of the number of times Ivan threatened to resign.’ The politicos say Rogers was aggressive in dismissing their arguments, and went over their heads to Cameron: ‘He would send emails that were the stuff of legend, saying why didn’t we know anything? We were just politicos, we didn’t understand.’ Another aide said Rogers’ emails were ‘notorious’.

Rogers also clashed with the special advisers over their desire to include reforms of the European Court of Justice in the renegotiation. ‘Korski had a long-running battle with officials saying that we needed to do something, and he kept getting told that it was impossible to do something,’ a Number 10 source said. A range of proposals were put forward, ranging from new rules on the selection of judges to proposals for the EC] to get out of lower-level decisions. Their advocates believe the plan would have allowed Britain to get a serious review of the court on the agenda. It was rejected by officials over the summer.

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

 

We'll find out over the next 2 years whether Rogers was being unduly pessimistic over the prospects for a good Brexit deal, or whether he was telling the government truths they didn't want to hear.

 

In 2 years, if we leave the EU with control of our borders, great new trade terms with the EU, prospects of new trade deals around the world, a thriving economy and society, and only a small Brexit divorce payment.....Rogers will stand condemned.

 

In 2 years, if we leave the EU either having made major concessions on immigration control or without good trade terms/deals, with a struggling economy, a toxic, strife-riven society and a large Brexit divorce payment....the Brexiteers will stand condemned.

 

Of course, we all know that in reality, if the worst does happen, then the Brexiteers will do what they usually do in the face of difficulties - blame the unreasonable foreigners for pursuing their own interests instead of boosting British interests as perceived by Brexiteers. 

[bovril]

Ivan... sounds a bit Eastern European. I detect an enemy of the people. 

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

We'll find out over the next 2 years whether Rogers was being unduly pessimistic over the prospects for a good Brexit deal, or whether he was telling the government truths they didn't want to hear.

 

In 2 years, if we leave the EU with control of our borders, great new trade terms with the EU, prospects of new trade deals around the world, a thriving economy and society, and only a small Brexit divorce payment.....Rogers will stand condemned.

 

In 2 years, if we leave the EU either having made major concessions on immigration control or without good trade terms/deals, with a struggling economy, a toxic, strife-riven society and a large Brexit divorce payment....the Brexiteers will stand condemned.

 

Of course, we all know that in reality, if the worst does happen, then the Brexiteers will do what they usually do in the face of difficulties - blame the unreasonable foreigners for pursuing their own interests instead of boosting British interests as perceived by Brexiteers. 

Are booming success or booming failure our only 2 options for the next 2 years? 

 

I think it will take a longer time than that to call success or failure tbh. 

[Alf Bentley]

5 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Are booming success or booming failure our only 2 options for the next 2 years? 

 

I think it will take a longer time than that to call success or failure tbh. 

 

I completely agree. I reckon academics and students will be debating the pros and cons of Brexit as a current issue in 10-20 years time.

 

It's just that us Remainers are forever being told that we're unduly pessimistic about the impact of Brexit - likewise Ivan the Diplomat and his "10 years to sign a trade deal". Brexiteers are forever telling us that the UK will perform well without being held back by EU red tape, wasting money paying funds into the EU, being held back from quickly making better trade deals etc. To be fair, the more balanced Brexiteers accept that things might be a bit rough for a few years, but will then be better in the long-term. They'll get the chance to prove (or disprove) their case, now - even if it takes a few years....though I reckon someone else, such as Johnny Foreigner, will be blamed if Brexit isn't as rosy as advertised.

 

In the short-term (1-2 years), I reckon Brexit may leave us a little bit worse off, or may prove disastrous, but I reckon anything truly disastrous will take a couple of years to develop. I can't see Brexit being beneficial in the short-term. In the long-term (the rest of my lifetime) I reckon we'll be worse off, but plenty of other factors may make us forget all about Brexit in 10-20 years time. On the other hand, the future for the EU could also be anywhere between fairly good and utterly disastrous. If the latter, then we may still be better off out of the EU in the long-term (I can see a chance of the EU collapsing within 5-10 years, but probably not much sooner than that). By temperament, I'm genuinely an optimist, despite appearances to the contrary! 

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

I believe Brexit is, and will remain, the greatest thing since sliced bread.  

[Facecloth]

11 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

I believe Brexit is, and will remain, the greatest thing since sliced bread.  

You also believed Jimmy Savile wasn't a kiddy fiddler, so...........

[Spudulike]

How can we ever be absolutely sure whether it was the correct decision to leave the EU ?? To do that you would surely need to run both models (in and out) in parallel and compare. Not possible.

 

Being in the EU has hardly been a bowl of cherries and it probably won't get much better for our life styles being out. Future debate will be spun by economists to suit personal opinion in the same way as we saw in the pre-referendum exchanges.

[Guest MattP]

19 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

We'll find out over the next 2 years whether Rogers was being unduly pessimistic over the prospects for a good Brexit deal, or whether he was telling the government truths they didn't want to hear.

 

In 2 years, if we leave the EU with control of our borders, great new trade terms with the EU, prospects of new trade deals around the world, a thriving economy and society, and only a small Brexit divorce payment.....Rogers will stand condemned.

 

In 2 years, if we leave the EU either having made major concessions on immigration control or without good trade terms/deals, with a struggling economy, a toxic, strife-riven society and a large Brexit divorce payment....the Brexiteers will stand condemned.

 

Of course, we all know that in reality, if the worst does happen, then the Brexiteers will do what they usually do in the face of difficulties - blame the unreasonable foreigners for pursuing their own interests instead of boosting British interests as perceived by Brexiteers. 

 

Why is Rogers condemned if the first part happens and not remain voters, but leave voters condemned if the second part happens and not the government? (Unless by Brexiteers you mean the ones actually doing the negotiations?)

 

In truth I'd imagine what we'll get is somewhere in between, it looks like Theresa May is finally going to make some sort of statement on Brexit ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/04/theresa-may-set-brexit-vision-warn-uk-will-quit-single-market/

 

Pretty obvious and quite sensible really, she could have said these things earlier thinking about it, we want to stay in the single market but we won't at the cost of not being able to control our borders, being selfish it's good politics as well, put the Labour party in a position where if it wants to argue against it it will have to defend open door immigration to it's voters.

 

As an aside, I was be able to read The Guardian last week and even I was surprised at some of the attitudes, I got the impression from a couple of columnists who seemed to think that a punishment beating from the EU would be enough to make us vote remain in a second referendum, I don't think they know anything about the British people at all, I've said this before but we aren't a nation you can force into something, if the EU does decide to close ranks, ignore May like that footage we saw from the summit and then hand out that I could see attitudes hardening towards the EU, one thing we have always done as a people is close ranks and get behind each other when we have a feeling of being bullied (probably even more when it's a woman on the end of it as well), the Government being attacked from all sides could actually go quite well for them.

 

BTW While all this has been going on, isn't it commendable for Jeremy Corbyn to keep a dignified silence on the whole issue despite the chaos? He must be a really nice man.

 

[Steven]

UK services sector grows at fastest pace for more than a year

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/05/uk-services-sector-grows-fastest-pace

[leicsmac]

Having to pay 835 quid to get a thousand dollars when this time last year it would likely have been around 700.

 

Thanks Brexit!

[Guest MattP]

35 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Having to pay 835 quid to get a thousand dollars when this time last year it would likely have been around 700.

 

Thanks Brexit!

If your predictions about Trump come to fruition that last thing you need to worry about is a bit of money

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, MattP said:

If your predictions about Trump come to fruition that last thing you need to worry about is a bit of money

Ha, very true!

 

(Well, being a white straight guy it's likely only to be the environment stuff that will really hit me, but I would say that's enough.)

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

 

Why is Rogers condemned if the first part happens and not remain voters, but leave voters condemned if the second part happens and not the government? (Unless by Brexiteers you mean the ones actually doing the negotiations?)

 

As an aside, I was be able to read The Guardian last week and even I was surprised at some of the attitudes, I got the impression from a couple of columnists who seemed to think that a punishment beating from the EU would be enough to make us vote remain in a second referendum, I don't think they know anything about the British people at all, I've said this before but we aren't a nation you can force into something, if the EU does decide to close ranks, ignore May like that footage we saw from the summit and then hand out that I could see attitudes hardening towards the EU, one thing we have always done as a people is close ranks and get behind each other when we have a feeling of being bullied (probably even more when it's a woman on the end of it as well), the Government being attacked from all sides could actually go quite well for them.

 

Fair question, that first one. Rogers has expressed open pessimism about UK preparedness and future trade deals, so he'll be proven wrong if Brexit is a success. By "Brexiteers", I was referring to Brexit politicians (rather than voters or negotiators).

As voters, we can only hold our hands up and admit that we voted the wrong way if that is our conclusion. Politicians hold more responsibility - and it is the Brexit politicians who have the power to implement their programme and the responsibility for the outcome.

 

The Remain camp cannot now be proven right or wrong because we'll never know how things would have gone if we'd stayed in the EU. OK, that's slightly disingenuous of me. In 10-20 years time, if the UK is either doing much better or much worse than comparable countries, that will be a pretty good indication....but the judgment will mainly be about Brexit: was it a success or a failure? The Brexiteers won, so it is they who will succeed or fail.

 

Of course, it's quite possible that Brexit will have a very negative impact over 2-3 years, but a very good impact over 10-20 years (or even a shorter timespan if the EU implodes).

 

I reckon the fairest measuring stick for Brexit will be to see how the British economy and society progresses over the next 10-20 years, compared to broadly comparable EU countries (Germany, France, Italy). Perhaps we should arrange to meet up again on FoxesTalk in 2030 for a review, if we're still alive. 

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Ha, very true!

 

(Well, being a white straight guy it's likely only to be the environment stuff that will really hit me, but I would say that's enough.)

Possibly, although there is also a fair bit of anti white racism knocking about as well after the Trump vote, check the news today. White guy with special needs kidknapped and tortured whilst they streamed it live shouting things like "**** Trump" and "**** White People" - The police have said it's to early to see if race was a factor but it doesn't look good. (Apologies it's from The Mail, I tried to find a link from the Guardian but nothing there)

 

It wouldn't surprise me if a more militant black nationalist movement emerged over the USA over the next few years that would be happy to target their opponents in the same way the KKK would, let's hope not, you can see similar hallmarks in the way BLM conduct themselves at times.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4089510/Four-people-arrested-footage-young-man-beaten-tortured-streamed-live-Facebook.html

 

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Fair question, that first one. Rogers has expressed open pessimism about UK preparedness and future trade deals, so he'll be proven wrong if Brexit is a success. By "Brexiteers", I was referring to Brexit politicians (rather than voters or negotiators).

As voters, we can only hold our hands up and admit that we voted the wrong way if that is our conclusion. Politicians hold more responsibility - and it is the Brexit politicians who have the power to implement their programme and the responsibility for the outcome.

 

The Remain camp cannot now be proven right or wrong because we'll never know how things would have gone if we'd stayed in the EU. OK, that's slightly disingenuous of me. In 10-20 years time, if the UK is either doing much better or much worse than comparable countries, that will be a pretty good indication....but the judgment will mainly be about Brexit: was it a success or a failure? The Brexiteers won, so it is they who will succeed or fail.

 

Of course, it's quite possible that Brexit will have a very negative impact over 2-3 years, but a very good impact over 10-20 years (or even a shorter timespan if the EU implodes).

 

I reckon the fairest measuring stick for Brexit will be to see how the British economy and society progresses over the next 10-20 years, compared to broadly comparable EU countries (Germany, France, Italy). Perhaps we should arrange to meet up again on FoxesTalk in 2030 for a review, if we're still alive. 

With regards to the first part the more I think about it the more I believe maybe Brexit should have been done at a election rather than a referendum, it would have made the decision far clearer for leave in terms of constituencies ( 401 were pro leave according to the best research that has been done ) - http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/728805/If-MPs-voted-on-Brexit-the-same-as-their-constituents-Article-50-WOULD-be-triggered and we would now have a house that actually represents the people, rather than one where barely 25% of MP's believe what 52% of the people voted for.

 

A government full of Brexit ministers would have to take full responsibility for what happens, we (officially at least) now have a Prime Minister who was a remainer, a Chancellor who was a remainer, a cabinet that is majority remain and a civil service with the job of implementing it where you can barely seem to find a person who voted to leave. I think responsibility is a big part of politics and Gove, Johnson, Farage, Patel, Stuart etc should probably be the ones now taking responsibility for this decision, can you imagine how absurd it would be if Boris and Gove were in charge of implementing the reforms of a remain vote?

 

It's hard to put any timescale on it isn't it? 10 years is probably fair, although I wouldn't make the whole basis of economics the definitive part of whether we judge that as a success or not either, I'm sure we've now passed the "It's the economy stupid" passage of politics, culture and nationhood are now very important to a lot of things, I hope I'm wrong but I feel terrorism and security will be absolutely huge as well over the coming decades as we face up to a European based insurgency.

 

Although it's going to be tedious, both sides will be jumping on any good or bad news over that period to try and prove themselves right won't they? I don't want to have to put up with that for ten years, the best thing that could happen is it falls apart.

[Barky]

Nobody who isn't part of the elected government should be anywhere near making decisions on brexit. The fact that there aren't many high ranking tories in favour of brexit speaks for itself of course. 

[Barky]

Nobody who isn't part of the elected government should be anywhere near making decisions on brexit. The fact that there aren't many high ranking tories in favour of brexit speaks for itself of course. Even the ones that did support it didn't really. They just said they did for their own gain.

[Alf Bentley]

28 minutes ago, MattP said:

A government full of Brexit ministers would have to take full responsibility for what happens, we (officially at least) now have a Prime Minister who was a remainer, a Chancellor who was a remainer, a cabinet that is majority remain and a civil service with the job of implementing it where you can barely seem to find a person who voted to leave. I think responsibility is a big part of politics and Gove, Johnson, Farage, Patel, Stuart etc should probably be the ones now taking responsibility for this decision, can you imagine how absurd it would be if Boris and Gove were in charge of implementing the reforms of a remain vote?

 

It's hard to put any timescale on it isn't it? 10 years is probably fair, although I wouldn't make the whole basis of economics the definitive part of whether we judge that as a success or not either, I'm sure we've now passed the "It's the economy stupid" passage of politics, culture and nationhood are now very important to a lot of things, I hope I'm wrong but I feel terrorism and security will be absolutely huge as well over the coming decades as we face up to a European based insurgency.

 

Although it's going to be tedious, both sides will be jumping on any good or bad news over that period to try and prove themselves right won't they? I don't want to have to put up with that for ten years, the best thing that could happen is it falls apart.

 

I forgot to reply to your earlier comment about the British public closing ranks against the EU. If the EU is unreasonably hostile, such a response to EU politicians would be justified. But I'm concerned that the British public might close ranks against the EU even if all it is doing is protecting its interests as the UK will be doing - having been told by Brexiteers that we can expect a great deal. I'm also concerned that this closing of ranks against EU politicians might spill over into hostility towards foreigners in the UK. 

 

Unless there's a dramatic change in European politics in the next 1-2 years (e.g. the election of Le Pen), it seems clear to me that it will be in the interests of the main EU states and of the EU as a whole, to cut a tough Brexit deal with the UK. Purely in terms of their national politics, the likes of Merkel, Fillon (if elected), the Dutch and the Italians won't want to give succour to rising nationalist / anti-establishment forces in their own countries. If they allowed the UK a good Brexit deal, they would do just that as the likes of the Front National and AfD would be emboldened to demand similar deals. Likewise, EU-wide, a generous Brexit deal would make life much harder for the EU is it tries to maintain unity and the ability to deal with the crises on the continent. I'm not suggesting that there'll be no compromise - I'm sure there will be compromise, in the interests of both sides. But it seems to be of existential importance to the EU27 and to its main nations that the UK should be seen by the European public NOT to have benefited from Brexit....that's pure self-interest, which they're as entitled to pursue as the UK is. Particularly if it is under pressure for not negotiating a better deal and for economic problems, I can imagine the UK Govt (& media) blaming the EU for the lack of a good deal. That could easily generate xenophobia among Brits bitter that their lives aren't as good as they'd been led to expect - including hostility towards foreigners in this country. I seriously hope that I'm wrong about that, but it's a justifiable fear.

 

How a senior civil servant voted shouldn't matter. It's a non-political career job serving the state/people as instructed by whichever government is in power. Any senior civil servant will have had to serve different governments, implementing a range of policies, some of which they disagreed with. To reach the top, they'll have had to have done a good job - and not been politically partisan or foot-draggers. If there's such mistrust between Brexit Tories and Remain Tories, maybe the party should split and call an election. The Brexit Tories could name themselves the Brexit Nationalist Party (though, the abbreviation could be a problem ). 

 

I agree that it's not all about the economy, but the state of the economy tends to affect other things - particularly personal contentment and social harmony/strife, but even attitudes to nation and culture. Yep, plenty of other crap to anticipate, including years of terrorism, plus the minor issue of climate change.

 

Your last comment is a bit despairing and nihilistic, but maybe you meant it tongue in cheek? Life is still good despite all its irritations. 

 

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Possibly, although there is also a fair bit of anti white racism knocking about as well after the Trump vote, check the news today. White guy with special needs kidknapped and tortured whilst they streamed it live shouting things like "**** Trump" and "**** White People" - The police have said it's to early to see if race was a factor but it doesn't look good. (Apologies it's from The Mail, I tried to find a link from the Guardian but nothing there)

 

It wouldn't surprise me if a more militant black nationalist movement emerged over the USA over the next few years that would be happy to target their opponents in the same way the KKK would, let's hope not, you can see similar hallmarks in the way BLM conduct themselves at times.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4089510/Four-people-arrested-footage-young-man-beaten-tortured-streamed-live-Facebook.html

 

With regards to the first part the more I think about it the more I believe maybe Brexit should have been done at a election rather than a referendum, it would have made the decision far clearer for leave in terms of constituencies ( 401 were pro leave according to the best research that has been done ) - http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/728805/If-MPs-voted-on-Brexit-the-same-as-their-constituents-Article-50-WOULD-be-triggered and we would now have a house that actually represents the people, rather than one where barely 25% of MP's believe what 52% of the people voted for.

 

A government full of Brexit ministers would have to take full responsibility for what happens, we (officially at least) now have a Prime Minister who was a remainer, a Chancellor who was a remainer, a cabinet that is majority remain and a civil service with the job of implementing it where you can barely seem to find a person who voted to leave. I think responsibility is a big part of politics and Gove, Johnson, Farage, Patel, Stuart etc should probably be the ones now taking responsibility for this decision, can you imagine how absurd it would be if Boris and Gove were in charge of implementing the reforms of a remain vote?

 

It's hard to put any timescale on it isn't it? 10 years is probably fair, although I wouldn't make the whole basis of economics the definitive part of whether we judge that as a success or not either, I'm sure we've now passed the "It's the economy stupid" passage of politics, culture and nationhood are now very important to a lot of things, I hope I'm wrong but I feel terrorism and security will be absolutely huge as well over the coming decades as we face up to a European based insurgency.

 

Although it's going to be tedious, both sides will be jumping on any good or bad news over that period to try and prove themselves right won't they? I don't want to have to put up with that for ten years, the best thing that could happen is it falls apart.

I was thinking more about what a government could do to me and others legislatively rather than a single nutter/group of nutters out in the street, but yes - things are becoming more polarised, there is a lot of "choose a side" going on and that's not a good thing. (Remember also that for the longest time the KKK acted with total government protection and even encouragement, no movement based on another race before or since has had nearly as much establishment backing.)

 

Regarding nationhood becoming more of a factor, that may well be true too but I find that kind of dividing line being generated between countries scary as hell.

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I forgot to reply to your earlier comment about the British public closing ranks against the EU. If the EU is unreasonably hostile, such a response to EU politicians would be justified. But I'm concerned that the British public might close ranks against the EU even if all it is doing is protecting its interests as the UK will be doing - having been told by Brexiteers that we can expect a great deal. I'm also concerned that this closing of ranks against EU politicians might spill over into hostility towards foreigners in the UK. 

 

Unless there's a dramatic change in European politics in the next 1-2 years (e.g. the election of Le Pen), it seems clear to me that it will be in the interests of the main EU states and of the EU as a whole, to cut a tough Brexit deal with the UK. Purely in terms of their national politics, the likes of Merkel, Fillon (if elected), the Dutch and the Italians won't want to give succour to rising nationalist / anti-establishment forces in their own countries. If they allowed the UK a good Brexit deal, they would do just that as the likes of the Front National and AfD would be emboldened to demand similar deals. Likewise, EU-wide, a generous Brexit deal would make life much harder for the EU is it tries to maintain unity and the ability to deal with the crises on the continent. I'm not suggesting that there'll be no compromise - I'm sure there will be compromise, in the interests of both sides. But it seems to be of existential importance to the EU27 and to its main nations that the UK should be seen by the European public NOT to have benefited from Brexit....that's pure self-interest, which they're as entitled to pursue as the UK is. Particularly if it is under pressure for not negotiating a better deal and for economic problems, I can imagine the UK Govt (& media) blaming the EU for the lack of a good deal. That could easily generate xenophobia among Brits bitter that their lives aren't as good as they'd been led to expect - including hostility towards foreigners in this country. I seriously hope that I'm wrong about that, but it's a justifiable fear.

 

How a senior civil servant voted shouldn't matter. It's a non-political career job serving the state/people as instructed by whichever government is in power. Any senior civil servant will have had to serve different governments, implementing a range of policies, some of which they disagreed with. To reach the top, they'll have had to have done a good job - and not been politically partisan or foot-draggers. If there's such mistrust between Brexit Tories and Remain Tories, maybe the party should split and call an election. The Brexit Tories could name themselves the Brexit Nationalist Party (though, the abbreviation could be a problem ). 

 

I agree that it's not all about the economy, but the state of the economy tends to affect other things - particularly personal contentment and social harmony/strife, but even attitudes to nation and culture. Yep, plenty of other crap to anticipate, including years of terrorism, plus the minor issue of climate change.

 

Your last comment is a bit despairing and nihilistic, but maybe you meant it tongue in cheek? Life is still good despite all its irritations. 

 

Which, along with global pollution and deforestation, is possibly the most important global issue of our time, yet various governments seem intent on ignoring it in favour of economic issues now.

 

An economy doesn't mean jack when there's no longer a society behind it.

[Sharpe's Fox]

Not doing well with party leaders are we?

 

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21713837-after-six-months-what-new-prime-minister-stands-still-unclearperhaps-even

[GazzinderFox]

Top economist says the profession is 'in crisis' after getting the post brexit vote economy predictions totally wrong. This is after utterly missing the financial crisis. 

 

Can somebody remind me, when Boris Johnson's economy predictions are more accurate than this lot, what are these 'experts' for again?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38525924