Let's separate this area by area into bite sized chunks so we can understand them, and then look at what we have at the end.
EU is the UKs largest trading partner, about 40-50% of trade depending on whether you count services. That trade % is declining over time, but not fast.
Most of your infrastructure and logistics are built around the EU too so that's a factor to consider.
And you have to be efficient enough to pay for the increased logistics costs.
Even if they wanted to they couldn't alter their trading standards for you, that's why trade deals take so long. Complexity
And you also need to be more efficient.
Simply No. Not that anyone including the more ardent advocates of Brexit have proposed.
That means whatever you do you have to agree a trade deal with the EU.
It's a bluff not because they need us more than we need them etc. It's a bluff because we can't afford it because we have no other immediate options.
Well we have a few options.
1. We stay in the CU and SM.
2. We stay in either or
3. We cut a separate deal that isn't BLUFF option again. ie no massive drop in trade and increase in efficiency.
That's difficult because if they did count as leaving the EU we'd now have an answer on trade - stay in the CU and SM.
But let's assume the government is right. Can we do number 3
If the EU allows you tarrif free trade with no strings theb you could just sign trade deals elsewhere and import cheap goods into the EU that they can't themselves
So the best the EU can do is offer you tarrif free trade but in compliance with their trading rules.
You note none of this is because the EU isn't negotiating fairly...they have no choice
We've been trading with the EU forever, not just the almost 50 years since the EEC. That's a lot of intertwined economy.
Let's say you're really ambitious how long to unwind?
Ok so post brexit we should have spent 5 years reforming the economy and then sent article 50.
Unfortunately we sent it immediately and then spent 2 years doing nothing.
You either swallow CU and SM, or swallow a deal like CU and SM, or you should have waited on article 50.
No brexit advocate has ever suggested another solution to this.
So that's the end of trade. It only took 14 tweets and its just problem 1.
Ireland Ireland oh wonderful Green Land.
I love Ireland. Not just for the beauty or the wonderful peace they've finally managed to agree about the border...but also for the way that without trying, it's been a thorn in the side of all bad plans down the centuries.
A) no real border
B) power sharing
C) a vote if the people want it on reunification
I apologise for anyone who wants me to further complicate this.
And they can be really unhelpful.
If you're in CU and SM or something very close to it there is no border problem. You just carry on.
IF you bluff on WTO you're back to being only fools and horses and a potential back door for dodgy goods into the EU.
So the best thing to do is not bluff.
Which is fine so let's run with that. In order to bluff convincingly we now need to put a border in where one doesn't exist to stop dodgy trade.
1. It directly conflicts with your peace agreement
2. It's crazy logistics (200 crossing points)
3. The simple way is unacceptable to the people propping up your Government
The whole basis of the peace treaty in northern Ireland is no fixed border. That's why some Brexiters started to argue we should end the peace treaty.
Once everyone realised that was crazy, they had to find a way that didn't overturn good Friday.
If you think that sounds unrealistic it's because it is. This hasn't worked anywhere else in the world.
And if they can't install it, that idea won't work.
The same trade argument might apply that if we had waited in article 50 we might have had time. But we didn't.
Everyone will like that except for the obscure party called the DUP who hate that more than anything else you could do.
Unfortunately the DUP are keeping your Government in power and if it collapses there will be a GE. If there's a GE the only issue will be brexit and who knows what'll happen.
If you accept it's a bluff and sue for a trade agreement the issue goes away.
So that's Ireland. 15 tweets and we're just done with issue 2.
I'm putting these into one bucket because while they're different, they have the same problem and they're much bigger issues than most commentators have recognised.
You'll have heard more moderate leavers say that we want to leave the EU but stay in Europe?
If you read the trade section you'll know we have to do a trade deal even if we don't want to.
But let's ignore the financials and jut look at the thing that never changes.
There's no solution at all to it producing all its own energy.
There might be a solution to food production but it's years away and if you wanted it you should have waited on article 50.
Essentially that's what the EU has given us, a nice efficient system of managing both across countries.
You will get an immediate and large hike in food and energy prices and there's nothing you can do about that by trading more cleverly because its based on your geography.
So. If you thought there weren't already enough reasons to point out that WTO is a bluff, that's another one.
Unless you want to live in the dark and the the cold and live on cabbage.
Why this one doesn't get talked about more is beyond me.
How to start this one and try to be objective?
Ok let's lay out some ground rules.
Emotions stay out of it. We try to just look at facts with one exception.
A large proportion of the population THINKS migrants are a problem and that needs resolving whatever else
1. Train our own population to do the jobs
2. Find some other system of immigration like
Option 1. Is difficult. We already have close to full employment and as we've seen since brexit vote we already have problems with nurse recruitment and farming labour because of brexit.
Brits don't seem to move for work in the way other Europeans do.
So in the face of a British population that won't or can't move (both may be true, I'm avoiding getting into the politics of that).
And a population that doesn't want to do manual work like fruit picking or nursing, this seems to rule that option out... However.
Fruit pickers might be able to be trained quickly, plumbers and sparkies need more training and nurses need the longest of all.
So if you wanted to stop migration you needed to start training brits about 3 years ago.
That's a tall order. I think we should at least try option 2
We prioritise high skilled migrants and presumably we make exception for low skilled workers like fruit labourers who can come for a summer season?
Something like that?
A) who is scoring and approving all the migrants?
B) who is chasing the summer workers down if they don't want to leave?
A) approvals at the home office is already a hopelessly long winded process. Youre about to add 100s of thousands of additional people to it, all of whom need to be scored.
Can it be done? Maybe. If you stated a decade ago.
B) the inability to chase up on migrants from the EU is the reason why the UK is not already doing it.
As I posted at the start of this section FOM allows for better migrant management. We just can't afford it. So the idea we can afford something more rigorous seems hard.
So where does that leave us with migration?
Well we should have waited on article 50 and solved it over the longer term. And we can't afford to lose our trade agreements that come with FOM.
But if you wanted to do it anyway you need a massive cash injection. Brexit bonus?
That took 12 tweets to simplify. Immigration is emotive but its actually pretty factual.
Either accept it or spend a lot of money managing it.
Depending on your politics both are possible. But don't pretend it can be done simply by leaving the EU.
This one has got a ton of media attention but it really shouldn't have since its a complete red herring.
Suffice as to say it's only an issue if you promised a big brexit bonus to spend on, say the NHS.
Let's get into it in the next section.
The divorce bill is essentially what we owe the EU when leaving. For all the fuss about it in the press it's just contract terms.
You buy a house, if you sell it you pay off the mortgage. You don't walk off with all the cash.
Our bill is all the mortgages we signed up for
And then there's a bit of the bill that theoretically pays for market access rights... But that probably would be what we'd pay anyway.
Except if you unwisely promised the people a brexit bonus to fund, for example the NHS.
Now you have a problem
Your bonus is gonna cost you a shed load of cash too. About £4B a year just for Mr Johnson's promise on the NHS. Then you've probably got to find another £10B a year for the divorce bill and all this while your economy is dealing with the trade impact (see first section).
How do you solve this?
Hard. Apparently you're going to need to sign a lot of trade deals fast. If you demonstrate you don't pay your debts, good luck.
An easy peasy one, only 6 tweets. If you leave a restaurant don't be upset if they ask you to settle your food bill first
There's no reason this gets attention except for the fact that people promised brexit would be easy and with lots of upside. And this is clearly not that
I wanted to call this section regulations but that seemed so boring, so let's pick some interesting topics of regulation to make this as simple and real as possible.
Let's start with keeping the planes flying.
It's a massive series of interconnected things that have been put in place to make everyone's life easier.
Well until you try to leave that is
If you read the trade section you know WTO no deal is a bluff. But if one of the more mad politicians calls that bluff then they won't be flying home.
There's a thing called MRI in medicine you probably heard of. MRI is called magnetic resonance imaging....but here's the thing it's only called that so people don't get scared by the real name. NMR
Don't worry, it's perfectly safe, they just changed the name so you don't have to worry.
But they didnt change the process. These machines need you to swallow trace amounts of nuclear isotopes in order to function.
Of course this is regulated by the EU And that goes on exit.
So it would probably all eventually get worked out. But that all takes time and these isotopes degrade. Quickly.
If we crash out of the EU we'll have drug shortages. Again it could be resolved but some people can't wait even days.
If they spend all their time arguing about trade, they are not resolving important stuff like this.
There are at last count about 700 major issues to resolve with Brexit and over 50 tweets I just simplistically explained 6 of them.
If you knew nothing about the scale of challenge facing the UK, hopefully now you have some idea. Let's just recap a few things.
Trade. You need a deal or you go into really bad recession. WTO is a very unconvincing bluff.
Northern Ireland is only a problem when you're bluffing. Once you stop bluffing it goes away.
Geography. If you try to fly or ship in perishables that's gonna cost you.
Divorce Bill, which should be called the restaurant bill. Its reasonable and only a problem if you already spent the money on say migration
Regulation. There are lots of them. They all need solving
If you absolutely wanted to leave the EU, you could do it, given time to prepare and carefully plan.
The problem with the UKs position is that the immediate article 50 notification killed time
To reverse 40 years of deep integration and 1000s of years of real trade that's actually an impressive timetable.
Unfortunately that's not how we did it. People were promised the impossible and told it would be easy
At every turn instead of sorting out own issues out we blamed the EU. And the more we blamed them, the less time we spend facing up to the issues.
Here's the thing. If you've read this far you know we need 5-10 years minimum.
The transition gives us another 3. Tops.
Like the rest of us I hope you'll question their honesty, motivations and personal gain.
Thank you for your time.
Enjoy and feel free to share.