Thread by @uk_domain_names

I apologise for the braincells that will undoubtedly die as a result, but if you want to read the ERG's Brexit myth-busting document they put out a few hours ago, it is available at the link below. Or you could just slam your hand in a door a few times.
globalbritain.co.uk/wp-content/upl…

I'll just let this linger...
A) The ERG want a hard Brexit (i.e. no deal)
B) The document, flawed though it is, supposedly busts the myths in a UK-EU free trade deal (which of course wouldn't exist under a no deal scenario)

Reminds me of David Davis and Jeremy Corbyn wittering recently about all the negotiations they'll be able to do during the transition period following a no deal Brexit.

Except that there won't be any transition period. Because. It's. No. Deal.

Ok, one more, just for a laugh...

The document claims that just-in-time can work across customs frontiers because it does so elsewhere in the world.

But those "elsewhere" places have had hundreds of years to set up their businesses to "work" with the constraints of their

specific situation. They aren't proposing to suddenly change their relationship with their nearest neighbours.

Our industries have had decades of free movement, and have built their entire processes around JIT EU-style. Brexit will change that.

It's the difference between being

born blind, and suddenly going blind in your 70s e.g. due to an accident. It's no good using the example of somebody who has accommodated themself to their unique situation since birth as an example of how somebody who is suddenly blinded late in life can cope. Chalk and cheese.

Oh, go on. You've twisted my arm. Let's have another:

The claim that Norway and Switzerland aren't calling for a customs union with the EU. That much is true. They're not.

Where the argument breaks down like an icecube trapped in a blowtorch is the fact that both Norway

and Switzerland have reached comprehensive accommodations with the EU (Norway: EFTA/EEA; Switzerland: a very very complex special deal, put together over many years) that mean they're much much much better off than we would under the ERG's Canada+ stupidity of a deal.

The more I read it, the more I want to just tweet 280 characters of rude words. But, as anyone who has followed my tweets for more than a few days already knows, that's not me.

So I will limit myself to screaming silently into a cushion... then making a nice rich hot chocolate.

Hmm. The arrogant people who put the document together presumably assume nobody's going to actually *read* the sources in the footnotes. Because of course, as soon as you do, different patterns emerge. For instance CLECAT's "The future economic partnership between the EU and UK"

It has the following to say about a no deal Brexit (which is what the ERG effectively want): "Wasting valuable ingredients like human resources, budgets and IT capacity is not something trade or its (logistic) service providers can afford and therefore, preparing for a No-Deal

scenario is actually near to impossible for the private sector and a No-Deal should be prevented at all cost."

Hmm. Not exactly a ringing endorsement, but the ERG paper did manage to pinch a sentence out of context, so that's all right then.

The whole document reminds me of those dodgy film reviews unethical promoters put on posters. You know the ones...
"Epic spectacle on a grand scale." - FilmNut

(Actual review: "While the director may have intended an epic spectacle on a grand scale, the net effect is like

sitting at your grandmother's kitchen table, watching toddlers throw biscuits at each other. The poorly lit, poorly framed battle scenes compete in pointlessness with the amateurish dialogue and journeyman acting. Avoid."

I keep coming back to this dishrag of a document. Like two cockroaches mating: shudderingly unpleasant, yet somehow draws the eye. Must move on... [clicks "x" on the PDF reader. Phew!]