I have none and honestly, can’t be bothered to search for any - if indeed any “proof” exists. I was just stating my opinion :)
Feels dont overcome facts when it comes to decades of regulatory, customs and economic integration funnily enough.
Also, the Millenium Bug analogy has already been debunked.
Totally fair. I am firmly Remain but I have no idea if there will be chaos in the streets.
I do believe Brexit would reduce the UK’s GDP and standard of living for the foreseeable future however. But its just a belief.
What is a fact is I would have my rights as an EU citizen stripped from me, which is why I am so pro Remain and will support any party that wants to stop or (if the worst happens) undo Brexit and get us to re join the EU. I want my rights back.
The linked article is poor. It uses the term fact-checked but it’s all just opinion. With the Millenium Bug the variables were too many and the scope too vast to give a concrete determination even after the fact. Some countries did little to no Millennium Bug planning (obviously not wise) but instead fixed problems as they arose and suffered no major incidents (as far as I know). So there is also argument that it cost a lot of money needlessly - but I think that’s fine. The worst was planned for and consequently averted.
I liken Brexit to the Millennium Bug because:
a) there was advanced notice and planning
b) safety critical systems were prioritized
c) at the time there was a similar level of fear and panic in the press
The difficulty with Brexit is that there is obvious bias involved. If you’re pro Remain you’re going to talk up the terrible things that will happen because it promotes your political stance. This makes it even harder to determine the actual reality.
I base my (obviously unqualified, purely bystander) opinion on the following:
a) planning (as outlined above)
b) the UK existed just fine before the EU
c) all of the problems are bureaucratic or logistical and hence solvable
d) it’s beneficial to both sides to facilitate trade (in goods, services, intelligence etc)
e) the immense pressure that will be on the government and the EU to solve major problems quickly if any do arise
Will there be economic impact? Highly likely.
Will the sky fall in? No
I guess we’ll find out in March.
Also totally fair :)
Out of curiosity could you give some examples of the type of rights you mean?
EDIT: I don’t mean a list of all the EU citizen rights - I just mean the ones that are important to you.
For example the right to live and work in any EU country? That’s a pretty big deal.
Yes, freedom of movement. I do think that is a wonderful thing but to me as an individual it’s not important. I can understand the Brexiteer argument that it’s the price you pay for stricter control of EU immigration and greater control over UK law, trade agreements etc
I can also understand that’s a good reason to be pro Remain if you’re considering moving to/and or working in the EU as a UK national.
No there hasn’t been sufficient planning, time, resources or investment. I linked proof above. The links to the national agencies like NAO readiness reports, and the endless quotes and reports from organisations, regulators, professionals, associations, bodies and experts in this thread you refuse to read or believe.
We expended billions of pounds and millions of manhours on the millenium bug, that’s why it wasn’t a disaster.
Freedom of movement and the right of residency. Thats really the primary one I care about. For my line of work having the right to go work and live in the EU is a huge deal.
This is simply wrong. As someone who worked through the Millenium Bug:
- we knew for years it was coming
- it was a very clearly defined problem of limited scope
- it was entirely within our own power as a business to remedy
None of those attributes applies to a no-deal Brexit.
I worked through the Millennium Bug too, on affected systems ;)
I understand and agree with your points though. The comparison between the Millennium Bug and Brexit is a pretty poor one I admit. I still maintain there are some similarities though which is why it came to mind.
The level of fear and uncertainty espoused by the press (as the main one). That it was a solvable problem and plans/resources were put in place to mitigate it. That due to the sheer scale it was neigh on impossible to determine the overall outcome before hand.
EDIT: For what it’s worth - here’s the official info.
Brexit is a bureaucratic problem - it has bureaucratic solutions.
The solutions all require convincing other countries to help the UK, and other countries might not be so generous. So it’s a “bureaucratic problem” in the same sense that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a “bureaucratic problem”. Cause they just need to, you know, come to an agreement.
Except they haven’t, that’s the whole point. There may be bureaucratic solutions, but there isn’t the time to implement them. We have an entire goods economy built around just-in-time logistics and absolutely no way to maintain just-in-time logistics in a no-deal scenario, for years to come until we’ve upgraded our infrastructue and rebuilt supply chains. The government refused to start planning until well after the Article 50 notification and most of the procurement relating to the planning has only just started now (see the ferry scandal, for instance). There’s a whole load of shit the government assumed the EU would cooperate with outside of the WA to avoid a worst case scenario that it in fact is not cooperating on, for a variety of reasons. For instance, little things like contract continuity. It just came out the other day that British Airways’ parent company is going to have to restructure to be able to continuing flying in Europe because the EU doesn’t buy it’s arguments that it’s sufficiently domestically owned. It’s not the press raising these concerns, it’s little things like car manufacturers, supermarkets, trade associations, the National Audit Office, the Bank of England and House of Commons Select Committees.
Fun fact. Apparently the company that set up the boiler in our apartment (Madrid, Spain) uses an UK based insurer for the boiler insurance.
Or should I said used.
Starting January, they moved to a Germany based insurer. And this is not a small company. I wonder how common this is.
Extremely. All UK insurance contracts with EU counterparties have to be moved to EU27 entities. Now, in most cases that will be an EU27 subsidiary of a UK/global company, rather than a completely different entity. Here’s EIOPA from November.
We’ve shifted an entire portfolio of our EU derivatives clients to our new regulated EU entity. Huge numbers. We’re a major player.
This is mirrored across the City. The UK is basket case, the govt is incompetent, none of our projects rely on the UK govt to deliver, weve taken the default position that the UK will not be able to be used to domicile these contracts,/financial instruments and spent millions moving. All our peers have done the same.
If you want stability, if you want certainty, if you want to mitigate risk, if you want ease of access, cross border infrastructure etc then get the fuck out of the UK. I won’t even say “right now” you should have started your move over a year ago. Leave UK to its racists, they don’t want you here anyway.
I’m a mid level regulatory SME/professional.
Only execs and senior marketing/traders get moved. Everyone else gets made redundant.
For now, only that portfolio is moved, so I have teams to look after/advise based in london still but my long term future hangs in the balance.
Singapore is my favoured path tho, as I could probably get a Malaysian passport and retire and live like a king in KL I guess. Depends on wife and family of course, our ties and obligations here are very much set in stone and it would be violence/ethnic cleansing to require us to flee as refugees. There’s a chance of that albeit small.
That one is the biggest for me.
Closely followed and related to being able to holiday in all these lovely places.
sound advice!