Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Ask HN: What happens after no-deal Brexit?
54 points by aosaigh 21 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 99 comments
This isn't necessarily an ideal question for HN, but as an Irish person living in the UK I'm increasingly nervous of the fallout from the inevitable no-deal Brexit on the horizon and I trust the opinion of HN users.

What do you think the consequences of no-deal is going to be? Is it as bad as everyone thinks?

When I think it about it rationally it seems like it's going to be absolutely chaotic and potentially violent in Northern Ireland.




I think if it even happens (several people I know still don't believe it will), it will in the long term lead to the dissolution of the Union. The position of Scotland is pretty clear here, and I can't see that the status quo will remain in Northern Ireland either. Personally as a British citizen I would not be disappointed to see a united Ireland in my lifetime - Brexit was a good chance to read up on all the history, and I do not believe NI should be ruled from London.

I don't think there will be quite as much chaos and doom as some people predict, but the ports situation will definitely be bad (if you listen to the transport professionals, hauling companies etc. who actually do cross between the UK and mainland Europe regularly). Certain medicines will be in very short supply. There's an endless list of things from mildly inconvenient to downright terrible (if you depend on one of the medicines to live, for example).

The economy is already tipping into recession. Leaving the UK's biggest trade union will make this worse. If the Tories somehow cling to power, expect more cuts. Maybe the NHS will be privatised to save money. The poor and disabled will be shat on even more than they already are.

The wealthy will as always find a way to do just fine. Tax evasion will continue and probably grow (exemption from new EU tax directives and policies).

More companies than have already left will move to the mainland.

More EU citizens will go back home (whether forcibly due to the draconian rules or out of choice). Priti Patel will smile sweetly as the talent exodus decimates entire sectors.

People will try and get on with their lives, but for many it will definitely get harder.

I hate Brexit.


When people claim the NHS is going to be privatised I think it is either deliberate scaremongering or they just don't realise how politically impossible it is. What probability would you assign this happening in the next 10 years conditioned on Brexit happening? I would assign less than 5% chance that this would happen.


> When people claim the NHS is going to be privatised I think it is either deliberate scaremongering or they just don't realise how politically impossible it is.

I'm not so sure. People talking about private provision in the NHS are just looking at the several billions of pounds that the NHS already spends on private provision for NHS services, and at how the Health and Social Care Act works.

We already have large NHS services delivered by private, non-NHS providers. Livewell South West is one example - 2800 staff. Priory Group and Cygnet are two other notable examples. Here's Livewell's page: https://www.livewellsouthwest.co.uk/ Here's a list of Cygnet hospitals: https://www.nhs.uk/Services/Trusts/HospitalsAndClinics/Defau...

Priory Group and Cygnet are involved in some "specialist commissioning" services - low secure and medium secure forensic MH services, in-patient eating disorder services. These are expensive services.

Everything needed for NHS privatisation is already in place after the Lansley reforms. There is nothing stopping large US firms coming over and putting in bids to run NHS services. If they put the right bid in CCGs are compelled by law to accept it, a CCG isn't allowed (by law) to prefer an NHS provider. The reason they haven't already done this is because they can't afford to do it on the money an austerity-funded NHS system is offering.

Of course, this isn't the type of privatisation that parent post is talking about. But if we look at the reduction in provision of drug and alcohol services; of child and adolescent MH services; of adult acute MH services; of community based psychological therapy (unless you want IAPT); well, there are loads of things that people either just do without or they pay for from their own pocket. Some politicians have already said they want to charge people for GP visits or for ambo use.

And all of this is ignoring the group of people who now have to pay for healthcare when they didn't before: the Overseas Visitors Charging Regulations.


[quote] I do not believe NI should be ruled from London[/quote]

Thats a nice sentiment but the problem is that a good amount of NI residents do. :|


The Union you are talking about dissolution being the GB not the EU I assume?


More accurately the United Kingdom. Great Britain is just the island (England, Wales, and Scotland).


Yes, this being the UK someone who self identifies as a Unionist will almost certainly hate the concept of the EU.


Related question: how would they decide who gets to be a citizen of (independent) Scotland?

I expect that millions of people would try to find a link to Scotland for a chance of regaining their EU citizenship.


Scotland for a chance of regaining their EU citizenship

An independent Scotland would need to rejoin the EU, it’s by no means clear it would be able to do so for years if not decades. It would need to join the Euro and it would need massive structural changes to meet the budgetary criteria to do so that would make “austerity” look like Sunday School.

Having said that if they vote for it in a referendum, I wish them good luck. The SNP gets an awful lot of mileage out of calling for it but they never talk about what they would do without the Barnett Formula money.


Yep, that's why I was careful to say 'a chance'.

I remember this being a key point of the 2014 referendum - the 'Yes' side seemed to be overly optimistic about the process of joining the EU.

However if Scotland has already been dragged out of the EU against the will of most of its people, it changes the terms of that debate quite a bit. A chance of joining the EU seems better than being part of a country that likely won't rejoin for many years (if ever).


It’s further complicated by various EU countries having regions chafing for independence that they would not like to encourage. If Scotland can leave the UK and become an EU member what happens in Spain? Or Belgium? Or even France? They will want to draw a line in the sand. It is most likely that Scotland will end up outside both the UK and the EU. The Shetland Isles, where the oil actually is, favour remaining part of the UK and if we’re honouring referendums they’ll get that option and Scotland will be left with nothing and no one. And the SNP will blame everyone but themselves.


Well for any region that becomes independent via legal means in a fashion well-documented by international observers as being legitimate, then they'll consider allowing them to join the EU just as they would for any other country?

Just because there's a Cornish separatist movement doesn't mean the EU is worried about the implications of an independent Cornwall.


It would be up to an (independent) Scotland to determine the rules. At the time of the last referendum relatively liberal rules were being tossed around (one parent born in Scotland as I recall being one possible criterion). Countries obviously vary a lot in how hard or easy it is to claim citizenship.


My understanding is you can get Irish citizenship if you have Irish grandparents. I'd expect that to be the same and for the Scottish government to offer citizenship to current residents.

My hope is to use my wife's Scottish heritage to move there in the not too distant future.


Any UK citizen can move there while it's still part of the UK. Do you think there would be minimum residency requirements for citizenship?

It's a bizarre thought that we may be seeing English illegal migrants being deported from Scotland in the not-too-distant future.

Also, how quickly could Scotland join the EU? I remember that being one of the sticking points of the first independence referendum.


Honestly I wouldn't be surprised to see the Scottish government make it easy to get citizenship, at least in the short term. It would be an easy PR win to show large numbers of Brits requesting Scottish citizenship.


I hope so as I'd be one of those applying and moving. The whole Brexit mess is very very depressing. I hope the mess we are making goes to bolster Europe as a whole and show how it's so much better to just get along.


Which includes everyone born in Northern Ireland too - i.e. anyone born on the island of Ireland. A surprising proportion of Brits are eligible.


As a dual British and Australian citizen living in Scotland, how they will decide who can continue living here concerns me greatly. I wasn't born here, or even in the UK, and haven't been here for long. But, I have all the rights to live and work here now, but have no idea if I still will, or if I'll be restricted. Surely it can't be as simple as whether you were born in Scotland or not, but what will be the measure?


During the last indyref, I'm fairly sure that anyone (British) living in Scotland at the time the referendum started would be granted Scottish citizenship, should they want it.

Obviously, the circumstances have changed drastically, and since indyref2 will have far more support post-Brexit I can imagine that the SNP wouldn't necessarily need to sweeten the deal as much.


Well, a lot would have to happen before that came about - the UK government would have to agree to Indyref2 and a majority of my fellow Scots would have to vote in favour of independence.

At this stage I think it is safe to say that it is very unlikely we'll get past the first of these.


It may not be as far away as you think. A lot of Scots are understandably angry at false promises from the 2014 referendum (the famous Better Together tweet [0]) and now Brexit (Scotland voted overwhelmingly to Remain). Polling is starting to show a majority in favour of Indyref2 and voting for Independence in another referendum. Plus voting intention showing SNP taking almost all of Scotland's seats in a Westminster election. They're already the third largest party in Westminster. There are talks of deals with Labour promising Indyref2 if the SNP support a Labour government.

[0] https://twitter.com/uk_together/status/506899714923843584


If we crash out without a deal the case for a new referendum becomes a lot easier. It's a fundamental change to the Union and completely negates a large part of what the no campaign claimed where the benefits of staying together. I do think if we get a deal or just remain in the EU that Indyref2 will be much harder to sell.


The NHS was founded in the ashes of WWII.

Cutting it to save money is backwards; it is an investment that pays dividends in human wealth.

So, with the EU agreements out of force, but not structure to replace it, what's to stop business as usual anyway? OK so now UK has no treaty for importing oranges or whatever. But that doesn't mean they are going to start actively blocking imports and sales. Sure some nation could do that, but those would be stepwise policy changes, not automatic chaos.

Law governs people, but it doesn't control them. People due what they think will work, even if paperwork changes.


I don't hate Brexit so let me try to counter-balance your views a bit, which seem to come straight from the pages of the Guardian.

if you listen to the transport professionals, hauling companies etc. who actually do cross between the UK and mainland Europe regularly

Which transport professionals are you listening to? The head of Dover port and the head of UK Ports have both said they are all prepared and there either won't be any disruption or it'll be straightforward to manage. The port executives on the French side are saying the same thing.

I've actually read the API specs for the French "InterBrexit" customs IT system. It's not as complex as I thought it'd be.

So it appears the opposite is true - transport professionals are saying they're ready and there's nothing to fear.

I suspect there will be no actual disruption to ports in the case of no deal.

Certain medicines will be in very short supply

This assumption is based on the idea that ports will be disrupted, but see above. Also the NHS has been preparing to use planes instead of ships/trucks from France for medicine. That would appear to work fine - medicine is not especially bulky.

I strongly suspect there will be no disruption to the supply of medicines.

The economy is already tipping into recession. Leaving the UK's biggest trade union will make this worse.

This very much depends on how you define it and what you compare it to.

GDP growth last quarter was -0.2%, but a "technical recession" requires two consecutive quarters of that, so we'll see next quarter.

If you describe the UK as "tipping into recession" because growth was -0.2% last quarter, then you must also agree that Germany has tipped into recession twice in the past year:

https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/gdp-growth

So this is hardly something to trigger negativity about the UK. The UK economy has been doing better than the other best economy in the EU.

If the Tories somehow cling to power, expect more cuts. Maybe the NHS will be privatised to save money.

You mean the party whose leader just gave a speech where he said:

"Because after 70 years of the existence of the NHS - 44 of them under a Conservative government - it is time for us to say loud and clear 'We are the party of the NHS'. And I claim that title because it is our one nation conservatism that has delivered and will deliver the economic growth that makes those investments possible"

Labour have been claiming the NHS is going to be privatised since forever and not only does it never happen but it has never happened despite a supposedly conservative government being in power for most of the NHS's history.

It's just a canard and not related to Brexit, just your own political assumptions, which are based on misunderstandings of your opponents policies.

More EU citizens will go back home (whether forcibly due to the draconian rules or out of choice). Priti Patel will smile sweetly as the talent exodus decimates entire sectors.

More will go home than what? Are you aware that net EU migration has continued to be positive and high ... at no point in the past decade have EU leavers offset EU arrivals.

Moreover, it's not at all clear that Boris will actually reduce immigration after Brexit. He is famously pro-immigration and only talks in his speeches about trade policies, etc. If Boris does pull the UK out, I expect Farage to immediately start campaigning on actually reducing immigration because it's clear that neither Tory nor Labour parties will ever actually do it regardless of what they claim.

People will try and get on with their lives, but for many it will definitely get harder.

That's pure supposition. I think for many it will get easier. For instance, if points-based immigration is brought in, it will get easier for talented people who want to move to the UK but couldn't today because of the pressure caused by unlimited inward immigration of low cost, low skilled labour from the former eastern bloc.


I imagine Britain will wind up like Los Angeles with something like 1/3 of the population forced to live on tents while working 2 jobs with no access to healthcare even when a car runs you over.


That is not how Los Angeles is at all. It has a homeless problem, but by and far it is not a full third of the city population. Regarding healthcare, any homeless are eligible for Medi-CAL, so that part isn't true either. The thresholds are a little weird, but unless you earn 6 figures you either get Medi-CAL or a health insurance plan off CoveredCA with the state footing some of the premium based off income, family size, etc


I am friends with an MP who is on the Remain side, and I've quizzed him off and on for some time. He tells me there will be some movement in the currency exchange markets, on the London stock exchange, but by and large life will just keep moving along. Manufacturing agreements with Asia and the Americas are in place, so no disruption to most of that. He thinks some food staples might be in short supply but companies have been preparing for Brexit for a year now, so disruption should be minimal. He believes the future of Britain is within the Union, but he personally believes all talk of disruption and shortages is just politics.

Personally, I believe him. I think a lot of politics is filled with doomsday scenarios and fear mongering, but we're talking about a major, modern economy. Brexit reminds me of Y2K. Lots of talk, lots of worry, but nothing really happened.


>Brexit reminds me of Y2K. Lots of talk, lots of worry, but nothing really happened.

What an ominous analogy. I hope for the sake of those who live there nothing happens - but the y2k bug was more than “lots of talk and worry”. People identified the problem and worked diligently to get it fixed before shit hit the fan - just because nothing happened doesn’t mean nothing was done. I don’t think you should take a laid back attitude and assume someone else will do all the work.

On a related note, I worry this is how climate change will be treated if addressed. Some clueless peoples will simple hand wave the problem away and ignore the years of energy change and research that had to be done because “nothing bad happened”


> just because nothing happened

There were substantial problems, but because of the high level of alert, they were fixed very rapidly.

> People identified the problem and worked diligently to get it fixed before shit hit the fan

This, a thousand times.


Re: climate change, that'd be a nice problem to have


It's important to believe the message and also dont believe the hype. I think the metaphor is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


> Manufacturing agreements with Asia and the Americas are in place, so no disruption to most of that

Sorry, what agreements are these exactly? Not talking about existing agreements between the EU and these countries, but specifically with the UK? The Japanese in particular have been moving operations out of Britain [1]

Also the leaked Yellowhammer documents [2] - produced by experts in the UK civil service - tell a different story to what your MP friend is saying.

So if you have any links that back this all up please post them here.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-03/japan-wav...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/27/japan-blunt...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Yellowhammer


I thought Y2K was calm because it was a well-understood problem that had hundreds of thousands of pounds invested in fixing and mitigating the effects? Brexit is an unsolvable political problem that was created out of absolutely nothing but the desire for power.


Hundreds and thousands of pounds? Worldwide, it meant replacing wholesale hardware and software systems and exceeded billions - it was just distributed throughout the world economy.


I mean Prince wrote a song about Y2K in the 80s.


Y2K is a really bad example. It's a near certainty that, had everyone just sat back and collectively said "It will just be fine," bad things would have happened.

We don't really know how bad. Maybe "just" a lot of financial systems screwed up with people losing access to their money for weeks or months. Or maybe at least partial failures of the electrical grid and other systems. But almost certainly not good.


Y2K had huge amounts of resources thrown at it to make sure it wasn't a problem so I'm not sure that's the best analogy.


Surely that is in response to Brexit as in Brexit with a deal?

A No-deal Brexit is quite different and will surely have real life consequences, not in the least in Northern Ireland.


Interestingly Y2K is not over. In Norway for example the national insurance number has year as a two digit string. A small number of people every year find themselves in a position where the state considers them as eligible to for instance re-attend kindergarten... At some point in the 21st century duplicate numbers may start being issued.

There will be long tail of repercussions to using two digit years for most of the rest of the century.


There's also the 2038 problem [1] although it apparently is mostly an issue with embedded systems. It's not clear that it's a particularly widespread problem but that's mostly just based on the fact that there doesn't seem to be much discussion about it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem


There's also the Y2036 problem which is part of Y2038, and other issues in 2028, 2040, 2042, 2048, 2050, 2079, 2080, 2100, 2106, 2108, 2137, 2262, 10,000, 32,768 and 65,536 - although I'm sure by the time we reach the latter end of the list we'll have replaced the affected systems ;)


> Manufacturing agreements with Asia and the Americas are in place,

What is a "Manufacturing agreements" and how does it replace the single market framework?


what does he think about N.I. and good friday agreement


More than likely the dissolution of the United Kingdom. Scotland will have another referendum if we leave with no deal, and odds are they will vote yes this time. A hard border in Ireland will more than likely result in a vote for re-unification, and depending on how bad it goes for NI in a no deal scenario it's not unlikely for that to happen too.

In the short term we'll probably struggle with logistical issues, getting freight through the ports, shutting down motorways around Dover, etc. There will be more pain for people travelling to the EU, especially for those that do business there. Nothing apocalyptic there but definitely stuff we've not had to think about for decades. We'll end up falling in line with their regulation and things anyway I expect so I wouldn't expect to see any major trade deals with the US any time soon.

Politically even if the U.K. somehow stays together the Conservative party is going to end up bearing the blame for this. There is no real pathway to this being successful for those people that are hurting the most, they were lied to and even if they get what they think they want, they are going to pay the cost of that. How that shakes out is anyones guess, I wouldn't be surprised to see the country swing further to the right with the help of the tabloid press. Especially when we have to increase immigration from non-eu countries to bolster the people that leave, just within the NHS this is going to be required. Couple that with stagnant growth and a continuation of austerity there is going to be some real anger within the working class.

Essentially we're probably looking at another lost decade at least, a descent into darker and darker politics and finally when we're back to the original position when we entered the EU as the sick man of Europe we'll probably vote to rejoin.


I'm concerned, but mainly for the mid-term future than immediate starvation and riots.

Borders and ports will cope - only after a period of obviously not having nearly enough customs and other staff for borders and checks. Temporarily difficult then. Particularly as we have a government that doesn't want to spend on any necessary service.

Good Friday agreement is my biggest short term concern. That requires a lack of borders, and Brexit seems to require the impossible in NI. Mid-term I see reunification. Short term could get ugly if there's border posts, and just one incident...

Mid term, it's destroyed UK's international reputation, it's boosted independence thoughts across the nation, and our politicians of all colours are clearly no longer fit for purpose. You tell me where that takes us. I see a further decline of science and business as more goes to the EU than here. Why would a project choose to locate in a post-Brexit UK with no EU agreement?


I think the UK will have to give up N.I. to Ireland at some point to avoid an all out war. EU is good at keeping peace the last few decades, but Europe has always been at war internally before that so it looks like it will be back to BAU


It's not really for the UK to "give up" NI - under the Good Friday Agreement the island of Ireland can be unified at any time if the populations of the North and South consent to it.


> EU is good at keeping peace the last few decades

The Bosnians would beg to differ on this point [1]. It was not so long ago, and yet it all started on very similar terms as Brexit: the breaking of Yugoslavia into multiple parts who wanted different things (Serbia vs the others) via referendums reminds me a lot on how Brexit started.

I don't think we're at the point where entire factions of people hate each other enough to start, support and sustain an all-out war, but then again with MPs getting daily death threats (some even actually getting murdered [2]) and the political dialog shifting towards low-levels of populism, it's tempting to think that the scales might tip at some point.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jo_Cox


I suppose to those (including myself) who haven't really experienced most of the religious and other sectarian violence first-hand, the tenuousness of peace between two supposedly civilized Western European countries is a bit hard to appreciate. (Even if there are some analogs in the US with the former Confederacy and related racial tensions.)


The Northern Irish who identify as British would not be very happy there. Pretty sure they would not accept this.


So are they ready to trash the Good Friday agreement and go back to The Troubles? Because that's the alternative.


Giving Northern Ireland to Ireland against the will of the people living there does trash the Good Friday Agreement. The press and the EU haven't been talking about that side of it because it doesn't fit their narrative, but it's rather important. One of the key reasons why the Troubles happened the way they did and why Britain hasn't given Northern Ireland away already is that a large faction of the population are violently opposed to that, with emphasis on the violence part, and are willing to use all of the same tactics as the other side to get their way. That's why peace in Northern Ireland was so hard to achieve.


but right now NI belongs to UK against the will of a lot of Northern Ireland. All the border counties e.g. have voted for Sinn Fein for UK parliament. Possibly those counties need to join the republic?


Why should they have to trash the good friday agreement in the first place? NI voted to remain.


They have to trash the Good Friday agreement because it requires a customs-free border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. This isn't possible with Brexit: having a customs-free border means anyone can just import anything into or out of the UK through NI.

Maybe one solution would be to have a county-by-county referendum, where each county in NI gets to decide whether it wants to stay in NI or instead join Ireland. This would make NI smaller, but would concentrate the UK loyalists in it, and the number of Republicans (the ones who want to rejoin Ireland) would decrease a lot (many would be in the counties that would leave, which are probably mostly right on the border, and some might even move), so maybe re-establishing a hard border would be more palatable then.


That amounts to repartioning Ireland. The original partition in 22 was traumatic, and we're still living with the consequences today. The partitioning of India in 47, and the British Mandate of Palestine in 48 were also traumatic and bloody events. Partition generally causes forced population transfer, which tends to lead to bloodshed.


Well, they're going to have bloodshed anyway, so wouldn't it be better to minimize it? The IRA isn't going to stand for going back to the way things were before the GF agreement.



Because neither Northern Ireland nor Scotland have the power to decide unilaterally to stay in the EU as independent countries even if that were the desire of 100% of their respective populations (which of course it is not).


Is repatriation to mainland UK not a possibility?


Unionist Northern Irish people feel Northern Irish. Not mainland British. They don't feel English, Welsh, or Scottish. They're not in some sort of newly-established colony from whence they could be plucked and re-settled. This kind of comment screams of ignorance of the entire damn situation that's caused the Troubles and much more besides.


From an outside point of view, it seems crazy to split off and annex a part of an island. The shoreline very clearly marks the border. Obviously I understand the Brits who have lived in Northern Ireland for generations might feel differently about this and it's a complex issue for sure.


It's the Catholic-Protestant history. Not Brits living in NI.

The Northern Irish 6 counties did not want to unify with Ireland when Ireland was born in 1919. Those 6 were the protestant majority counties, who wished to stay with the UK.

Changing demographics and birth rates over the following century, increasing secularisation in the Republic, and increasing numbers who simply don't care about religion makes that far less of the issue.


Catholic/Protestant history and the British colonisation of Ireland are inextricably linked: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantation_of_Ulster


Yes of course, but there comes a point where they see themselves as indigenous Northern Irish, or Irish, not British or colonists.

Just as those ruling in London no longer see themselves as Norman French, or in my UK county Danish.


Welcome to colonism. Have a look at africa, the borders there are a bit more arbitary.

But in ireland it is not only about the english living in north ireland, but more about the irish living there. It was more about catholic vs. protestant.

Not so easy to dissolve, but I hope the last blood happened long ago enougj for both sides to forget and move on, even if england messes up the deal amd the border becomes an issue again.


This is one of the conversations where the difference between English and British actually matters. I don't think you're talking about the small number of English people living in Northern Ireland here are you? And I'm pretty sure the UK is the one that might mess up the deal rather than England (don't forget Wales voted to leave too).


> don't forget Wales voted to leave too

This is debatable. It was very close and the large numbers of English retirees in parts of Wales that made it seem that Wales voted to leave. Brexit is very much an English project.


Wow you're totally right, it looks like it was down to English people in Wales; TIL and all that.

Citation: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/sep/22/english-peop...


maybe england should just leave the UK and let the rest stay in EU.


I would be very interested to see what a vote for 'English independence' would return. It'd be fascinating considering the benefit we gain from it, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a large majority vote to go it alone.


I did, because the parent I refered to, did talk about them ..


Think Mad Max on mobility scooters. I've stock piled food. The Irish border is already an issue, I was there recently when two bombs were found. I doubt it will be pretty.


It would require a lot of agreed-upon things to continue as agreed rather than end upon the overarching agreement (i.e. membership of the Union) coming to an end. This is largely what Brexit-positive people seem to think would happen in the case of a no-deal, i.e. "nothing much would change" because to rock the boat would be too much.


What I fear is the UK government (and the press that support it) continuing its policy of doing very little and blaming everything on the EU. For example:

1. UK leaves without a deal, leaving an open EU border between Ireland and NI. 2. UK refuses to do anything to enforce this border or stop the movement of goods and people across it. 3. Ireland / the EU needs to protect its borders so they put up fences and vehicle checkpoints. Perhaps even with help from other EU countries' security forces. 4. UK right wing press runs stories full of angry language about the 'invasion'

I fear we'll see this process repeated every time there's a shortage of anything - it will all be the EU's fault, and entering into any transitional agreements with the EU (if they are gracious enough to grant us any) will be 'surrender' or 'capitulation'.

This is a worst case scenario, but I fear we are heading for serious civil unrest and violence


Interest rate cuts by the BoE, the pound weakens, Asian foreign investment - Japan and China would love to build high speed rail for an international market. Companies like Huawei will offer turn key solutions to government infrastructure projects. You can hedge by buying Swiss francs, Aussie dollars or Japanese Yen. Or purchasing an investment property or a plot of land for future development, immigration from Asia will see a rising demand in housing, cheap accommodation. Long term the UK becomes a type of Hong Kong for wealthy Europeans - tax haven and pivot point of entry into the European market. More jobs will be created in tech, manufacturing and construction.


I am quite close to a couple of people actually working on Brexit ... and while of course they won't tell me any specifics, the message that I'm getting from the body language, eye-rolls and exasperated sighs is ... pretty bleak.


The Belfast Agreement / Good Friday Agreement will be trashed and we'll lose the tenuous peace we had in NI.

Watch Raab talking about the Good Friday Agreement: https://twitter.com/deirdreheenan/status/1175701674767388672

And here is the actual document that he hasn't read: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-belfast-agree...


Renewed conflict in Northern Ireland, breaking the Good Friday agreement, leading to open war between the EU and the UK, with Scotland seceding during the chaos and joining the EU.

Or, renewed conflict in Northern Ireland and huge tensions between the EU and UK leads to the Queen taking control since the UK obviously doesn't know how to govern itself any more. Honestly, this seems like the best outcome; they'd be better off with royal rule than what they've chosen.


It will be bad, although with the complete inability of UK leaders to get anything done or make decisions much damage has already been done.


Funny you wrote that.

The whole point of brexit was to be able to make their own decisions.

Didn't start off that well.


Isn't "remain" option possible?

Pardon my kidnapping the thread, but I don't think HN would appreciate splitting the discussion.


Yep, it's still possible but increasingly unlikely at this point. The U.K. government have made an ultimatum today that the E.U. either accepts their "new" deal, or they leave with none. This deal isn't acceptable to the E.U. so there is an impasse.


Except that under the Benn act, the PM is legally obliged to seek an extension from the EU if a deal isn't agreed.


Yes, good point. While I hope that this is the case, my feeling after today is that the PM etc. doesn't care


Sadly that's my feeling too. He's already publicly said he would rather 'die in a ditch' than ask for the extension


If the Liberal Democrats back down on Corbyn running a caretaker government we could very well see a second referendum that would more than likely return a remain result.

It certainly doesn't settle things, we're going to have these issues for years to come, but may take us away from the cliff edge.


In NI:

- Irish border posts are setup

- Lots of confusion at the border

- Small groups of young men throw rocks at the border guards

- Escalations occur

- People die

- New era of the troubles ushered in

- 10 years later and thousands killed / displaced

Meanwhile in scotland

- Scottish referendum tabled

- Overwhelming support to leave the UK and rejoin the EU

- Referendum passes (just)

- UK dissolves into England, Wales and NI

NHS still underfunded.


nothing special


Can you elaborate on why you think this? Genuine question


most important treaties will be negotiated under new treaties, as it's in interest of both parties (people tend to forgot it's not in U.E. interest to have no deal at all). If there was a real threat, The City would have already left somewhere else, and it's not the case. Actually, it's pretty obvious that U.E. makes everything they can to impeach the Brexit that's why I tend to think the real threat is more for U.E. (as an institution) than for UK.


Even if you were correct, negotiating treaties takes time and the British politicians have already demonstrated major lack of skills in this area.

EU tried for 30 years to come to agreement with Brits. they dragged their feet and caused lots of friction even when they had great offers. Why would things be better this time?


Things tend to happen extremely quickly in real emergencies. They might get some bad trade deal but people wont starve.


U.E. has already treaty with many countries or others unions (like UE), so it might be pretty easy. Also looks at economical situation in UE, they are not in a situation where they can be in economical conflict with (or at least isolated from) a country like UK


Seriously, what is U.E. ?


...well, i'm french, it's written that way, but i can't seriously believe you didn't guess. Right ? ;)


We know exactly what happens because it’s actually defined in treaties, specifically WTO rules will apply. The UK is a full member of WTO independently of the EU. It’s important to remember that “the deal” isn’t a thing that was mentioned on the pamphlet that went through everyone’s door before the referendum. That just said that the government will implement whatever the people vote for (which was to leave). It’s entirely something the necessity of which was made up after the fact, as a face-saving measure by a political class that badly misjudged the national mood.

It is obvious to anyone who has ever negotiated for anything, ever, that no deal is better than a bad deal. Ask yourself why Remainers are so keen to take that option off the table and keep asking for extensions indefinitely.


> It’s important to remember that “the deal” isn’t a thing that was mentioned on the pamphlet that went through everyone’s door before the referendum.

This was the pamphlet of the official Leave campaign:

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/our_case.html

It said "There is a free trade zone from Iceland to Turkey and the Russian border and we will be part of it", and "Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden stop - we will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any legal process to leave".




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: