Mess was started by Vote Leave campaigning with no written prospectus. “Leave SM/CU” was declared late. Messy. Then ERG nutcase pressures. Then Lancaster House speech baked inflexible positions.
For example, after Brexit vote, many of us accepted result (albeit w/ serious misgivings about behaviour in the referendum).
I, for example, wrote academic pieces about how to build UK-EU science after Brexit. Many of us up for discussion & co-work.
Lancaster House killed that.
We’d even been holding meetings about the UK as a “third pillar” (alongside EU & EFTA) within the Single Market- with advice from Norweigen reps.
But all such discussion got rejected out-of-hand by ERG/VL/Govt/BBC.
Felt like they’d won by an inch but felt entitled to miles.
This hostile “winner takes all” attitude drove Brexit away from any national compromise to one of open hostility.
For every 17 people who voted Leave, 16 had voted Remain. If just 1 in 17 Leave voters had changed mind - all wld be reversed.
But ERG crowed “biggest vote evah!”
Given the ERG-driven govt had absolutely torched the middle ground and cemented Lancaster House early on…
…those who had accepted the vote and thought there could be a mutual solution-finding then flipped into outright opposition to what we felt was a robbery of our nation.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
You’re talking about a no-deal Brexit here, which would’ve instantly shafted “our science & tech agenda”.
It would’ve frozen all UK Horizon 2020 projects with UK as coordinator (issue wasn’t technically solved), wrecked future collabs, UK reputation [thread]
Also, there would have been instant cessation of data passing between UK and Single Market labs/sci teams. That’s because there would have been no contractual underpinning for data security.
There would also have been no deal on movement of experts/ qualification recognition…
Supplies of sensitive/dangerous/ biological substances would be put on hold (eg DNA or test samples that need chilled/ deep freeze transport) for lack of known regulation and insecurity around time to transport materials that require special shipping conditions…
Right - only thing I intend to say about GB News...
... it’s a walking midlife crisis. It’s a bunch of rich privileged media insiders buying a leather jacket and a £££ bike, running away, calling themselves “the outsiders” and then not knowing how to work the damn bike.
That doesn’t matter. We really need to talk about data “anonymisation”.
It is not water-tight at all and re-identification is very easy especially with health data (when combined with other datasets). This is a huge issue that needs to be discussed publicly.
Re-identification is a fascinating field, where it becomes increasingly easy with more and more publicly available online data about people.
Here’s a fun example about “anonymous DNA” (individuals) re-identification just using publicly available data.