The continent’s economic woes are confined to the business pages, whilst the scandalous conduct of the European Parliament is simply unreported.
Any significant agreement with the EU would require continuous alignment between Westminster and Brussels in terms of regulation. Will we end up, to coin a phrase, shadowing the Customs Union?
Exiting the EU has enabled us to get the jump on Brussels in an industry already flourishing in the Americas. But interfering with genomes may not be an unalloyed good.
EU regulations and directives do form a major block of domestic law and do generate a lot of business costs. We know this because Whitehall’s own past internal audits have revealed it, a field I have been tracking since John Major’s day.
The European Parliament is not a Parliament at all. Clarity never arrives. All is opaque, an endless subterranean wrestling match, for the irrelevant voters intolerably dull.
“The Treasury Finance Ministry view of the world isn’t about structural reform to increase the productive capacity of the economy.”
Our columnist provides the second piece in our series this week about Brexit – almost a year since the end of transition.
‘Let their frail elderly be unvisited in care homes. Let their weddings be postponed’, is the message of this Prime Minister.
Leavers and Remainers have been premature to judge this major constitutional change.
A section of the commentariat was so unbalanced by the referendum result that it now automatically sides with the EU.
The country’s Prime Minister is a classic cakeist – berating the EU on the one hand, but not seeking to leave on the other.
Anti-corruption and cementing new treaties should take precedence over softer fashionable favourites.
The negative economic and political real-world consequences of implementing the Protocol cannot be what either intended.
The sovereignty of Parliament, as the representative of the people, has been eroded, and power handed to an increasingly assertive bureaucracy.