Thread by @IanDunt

BJ says he will show to "best of his ability" that Remain concerns can be allayed.

He cites three fears: 1) Loss of geo-strategic status. 2) "Spiritual/aesthetic". This is the 'we're leaving EU, not Europe' bit. 3) Economic fear.

Think it's already clear how he's going to dodge those. 1) UK will be buccaneering. 2) leaving EU not Europe. 3) It's fine, we'll get trade deals with growing world economy.

This isn't really BJ speaking to Remainers. It's BJ speaking to Brexit lobby, who want a positive upbeat story, rather than the daily chipping away of confidence in the face of complexity/reality.

"Is this the time for Brexit winners to gloat. It's not good enough now for us to say to Remainers, 'you lost get over it'."

Genuinely Brexiters could have done something useful if he'd made a speech like this 18 months ago. But after a year and a half of gloating, it's a little late lads.

BJ on point 1) UK still committed to defence of Europe. In reality defence offer a strategic UK advantage in negotiation.

BJ now pretending outward travel of Brits entirely unaffected by end of free movement. If he spoke to @BritishInEurope he'd know how false that was.

Brits losing free movement rights. Young struggling artists who needed to be able to go quickly to a European city to work will be unable to do so.

"We all want to make Britain less insular, don't we?" Silence in the room.

BJ tries to put internationalist spin on a nativist project, gets no response, How strange. It's almost like it's some kind of authoritarian Little Englander spasm

"It's not about shutting ourselves off. It's about going global." In a moment he will argue against keeping EU regs, which in turn means UK airlines can no longer fly routes between European cities.

Brexit "fulfils the liberal idealism of John Stuart Mill himself". He;s taking the lords name in vain.

Not having that. Cretinous buffoon.

Boris now pointing out complexities of EU set-up. Does average member of the public know what's entailed by 'praying against' a statutory instrument'?

Do they know how amendments are selected on legislation? Do they fuck. Better scrap the whole thing.

BJ now repeating the lies about "low wage" immigration and "what many see" as the impact on domestic wages. "Many see" - what a cowardly cop-out.

In other words: 'I know it;s nonsense, but people perceive it to be true, and therefore we must do something about it.'

Now expressing lunatic proposition that decline of Ukip is because govt has adopted its self-harming immigration policy wholesale.

"Would be absurd if we were obliged to obey laws over which we have no say and no vote". So back on hard Brexit, with all the economic consequences that entails.

It's OK though, BJ says, because some countries outside the EU have grown faster than EU countries. Fucking hell. What a water tight argument.

"Only by taking control of our laws that UK entrepreneurs can innovate". 2 things happening here.

1) He's prioritising imaginary future business over the actually currently existing ones, which do not want this.

2) He's wrong. Entrepreneurs want one-decision regulation. Product can be vouched for as safe by EU, who then negotiate with rest of world.

Outside EU agencies, they have to get it done with UK regulator, then EU, then everyone else. Five regulators replace one.

Incredible. BJ now blaming his governments total failure to build new homes on the EU.

Just incredible. You think you've built a thicker skin against the outrageous hypocrisy in Westminster and then someone comes along and corrects you.

After we leave "we'll no longer be able to blame Brussels for our woes". Just amazing. 'If we leave the EU then I promise I'll stop telling lies about it.'

God this is bad. This is all he's got. The argument is: We will pay no policy attention to you. We will pursue the hardest interpretation of the vote.

Confidence and optimism will save us.

But none of the things we said about Europe and immigration were really meant and now we're going to pretend we never said them apart from when we don't.

Please someone ask him some details.

Are you still saying we can have cake and eat it, or will you admit trade will suffer?

BJ: We can do great free trade deal with EU. We can have frictionless trade and take control of tariffs.

So that's a yes to cake then.

Does this apply to transition?

BJ: No, things stay as they are during transition.

Where is the clarity?

BJ: You have an abundance of clarity in the PM's Lancaster House speech.

Amazing.

"We've got to get over the positive agenda. We have to get out there and explain it.... We may be able to do amazing things with our regulations on organic carrots."

I'm not making this up.

Has the language you've used been disparaging to Remainers?

BJ: "I've always been extremely moderate in my language and living and caring."

"It'd be much better if we could all get together and get behind this project."

Same deal as it's been throughout: We'll change nothing, hurry up and get on board.

You've set yourself against any alignment. What if Cabinet say they do want it? Will you offer solidarity and not resign?

BJ evades.

BJ now defining alignment as UK unilaterally mimicking EU regulations. That's a dead end. Means nothing to EU, won't facilitate trade.

He's a shower of mendacious arguments and self-interest.

BJ says negotiations are "going well by the way". Fuck me I'd hate to see them go badly. What would it involve? Barnier carrying May around like a sack in a protracted victory dance.

Do you think some of the anger fuelling Remainers comes from when the govt called them things like saboteurs?

BJ pretends no-one made that type of suggestion.

He avoids frantically. "These are people's feelings and people's feelings matter." Vacuous blathering nonsense.

"I don't want to give some kind of frivolous, pat, off the cuff answer."

Yeah, he actually said that.

That's it. Fuck me, what a waste of my time.

Anything good to say there? Maybe. He confirmed - unlike the trade ministers last week, that everything stays the same in transition. Useful.

Qs from journalists were much more searching and instinctively critical than they have been on previous occasions.

Focus on cakeism again suggests there is widespread acceptance now of trade/control trade-offs, which wasn't necessarily there before.

Repeated mention of ppl trying to stop Brexit/2nd ref reflects growing alarm from Brexiters at increased organisation/eloquence of Remain campaign.

And growing dismay at their own inability to viably deliver their project.

Slim pickings. Unfortunately it is too early for gin.