Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Chancellor accused of ‘colossal’ waste of taxpayers’ money on outcome opposed by MPs and voters

Chancellor Sajid Javid has committed an additional £2.1bn to efforts to stave off expected disruption caused by a no-deal Brexit, prompting accusations of wasting taxpayers’ money on an outcome opposed by MPs and voters.

The announcement – which brings to £6.3bn the amount set aside by the Treasury for no-deal preparations – was branded “a colossal waste of money” by anti-Brexit campaigners, who pointed out that opinion polls have consistently shown that voters would rather stay in the EU than leave without a deal.
[...]
n a sign of the additional bureaucracy which the government expects a no-deal Brexit to create at Britain’s ports and airports, the package includes £344m for border and customs operations, including the recruitment of an extra 500 Border Force officers, training and new IT.

Additional funds will be made available for the Operation Brock traffic management system, under which thousands of lorries are expected to be parked on A-roads and motorways and in the disused Manston airfield in Kent as they queue to use the port of Dover.

Some £434m will be devoted to trying to maintain supplies of medicines and medical products by boosting freight capacity and providing warehouse facilities for stockpiling.

In all, an immediate cash boost of £1.1bn will be directed at critical areas like border operations, medicines and transport, and a further £1bn made available for use by local authorities and devolved governments as the 31 October deadline for Brexit approaches.

The extra money doubles the amount committed to Brexit funding this year and brings the total cost of no-deal preparations to around £100 for every man, woman and child in the country.
[...]
Announcing the additional £2.1bn, Mr Javid said: “With 92 days until the UK leaves the European Union it’s vital that we intensify our planning to ensure we are ready.

“We want to get a good deal that abolishes the anti-democratic backstop. But if we can’t get a good deal, we’ll have to leave without one. This additional £2.1bn will ensure we are ready to leave on 31 October – deal or no deal.”

Some £108m of the new money will be spent on support for businesses likely to be affected by a no-deal Brexit, while another £138m will go on an information campaign to help people and businesses get ready to leave. There will also be increased consular support and information for Brits living abroad.
... ... ...

Boris Johnson's government is more unpopular after his first week as prime minister than any other incoming administration in the last 40 years, according to a new poll.

Three quarters (75 per cent) of voters are already dissatisfied with the new government's performance, compared to just 18 per cent who are satisfied, according to an Ipsos MORI survey.

The net satisfaction rating of -57 is the worst for any incoming government in 40 years of the company's polling, and is significantly lower than the next worst rating of -31 given to John Major's new government in December 1990.

The finding is likely to in part reflect ministers' repeated threats to take Britain out of the EU without a deal on 31 October - a move opposed by half of voters.
... ... ...

Exclusive: Analysis includes stark assessments of potential problems including panic-buying and civil disorder

The UK is currently less able to cope with a hard Brexit than it was in the spring, with the real risk of panic-buying in the run-up to Christmas and civil disorder if the country leaves the EU without a deal on 31 October, an official document reveals.

The prime minister, Boris Johnson, has made Michael Gove responsible for “turbo-charging” Brexit planning, and on Thursday the new chancellor, Sajid Javid, announced an extra £2.1bn of funding to prepare for a no-deal exit.

But with less than 100 days to go before the autumn deadline, the Cabinet Office’s own internal analysis includes stark assessments of the potential problems ahead.

A document circulating Whitehall shows some of the government’s “reasonable worst-case scenarios” (RCWS) have changed over the summer, including those related to the supply of food and medicines.

In a stiffening of language, papers seen by the Guardian say:

• A reasonable worst-case scenario is that the supply of medicines and medical supplies “will be impacted by reduced flow rates across the Dover Straits”.

• While officials are not anticipating an overall shortage of food, they believe there will be disruption to the food supply chain. This “will lead” to increases in prices of certain fresh produce, “which could impact on vulnerable groups”.

• There is also a risk that “panic buying will cause or exacerbate food supply disruption”. The document states: “The UK growing season will have come to an end and the Agri-food supply chain will be under increased pressure at this time of year due to preparations for Christmas, which is the busiest time of year for food retailers.”

• Stockpiling of medicines for vets “will not be able to match the 4-12 weeks worth ... which took place in March, 2019”. The document says the options for diminishing these risks are not financially viable, and that any disruption in the supply of medicines “would impact the UK’s ability to prevent and control disease outbreaks”.

The document also echoes specific warnings made to government earlier this year, including that “demonstrations are likely to take place across the UK and may absorb significant amounts of police resource. There may also be a rise in public disorder and community tensions.”

It reiterates the likelihood that “low income groups may be disproportionately affected by price rises in utilities and services” and by “price rises...including food and fuel”.

There is also concern that food banks may struggle for funding – a record 1.6m emergency food parcels were given out by the Trussell Trust food bank network last year – more than 500,000 of them to children.

Though ministers insist “worst-case scenarios” are not predictions, they are used by officials for planning purposes to help highlight and address problems.

The money announced on Thursday includes sums to pay for stockpiling medicines, though hospital heads have previously warned this might not be enough to stave off shortages.
... ... ...

English councils have been told to designate a “Brexit lead” to work with central government to prepare for the possibility that the UK will leave the European Union with no deal at the end of October.

But a £20m funding pledge to help authorities step up preparations was immediately described as an “insult”, as the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) was forced to concede that the full amount had already been pledged in previous announcements.

In the new policy announced on Saturday, Robert Jenrick, the recently appointed communities secretary, instructed authorities to appoint staff in every community to plan intensively for Brexit with local stakeholders.

The funding was being made available for communications as well as for recruiting and training new staff, Jenrick said.

Officials were considering how best to allocate the cash to ensure that those areas facing more acute potential stresses, such as ports of entry, get the funding they need. Shared equally, it would amount to about £57,000 for each of England’s 353 councils and combined authorities, according to the Guardian’s calculation.

The Labour MP Jess Phillips said: “The idea that £20m across the 353 main councils of England is enough to prepare is an insult to our intelligence and to the hard work of public servants struggling with the consequences of the government’s decision to force a vicious Brexit on us.”

Criticism intensified after a MHCLG spokeswoman admitted half the pledged funding comes from the chancellor Sajid Javid’s £2.1bn announcement on Thursday. The other half comes from funding announced by the department in January, she added.

“This offers no new money and no new ideas for how to address the cliff-edge councils are facing,” Andrew Gwynne, the shadow communities secretary, said.

The Liberal Democrat MP Christine Jardine added: “This extra money is a drop in the ocean for cash-strapped councils desperately concerned about what no-deal Brexit will mean for crucial public services in their areas.”

Councils across the country welcomed the funding but highlighted the shortfall they are already facing.

Kevin Bentley, the chairman of the Brexit taskforce at the Local Government Association, said: “With councils already facing a funding gap of more than £3bn in 2019/20, it is more important now than ever that councils receive the resources they need for their ongoing Brexit preparations.

“There remains information and advice gaps that councils are facing while helping their communities prepare, which need to be met by the government.

“Councils also need certainty to plan for their communities over the longer term, such as on the domestic replacement for EU funding.”

£20m fund for local authorities dwarfed by £100m set to be spent on 'public information campaign' on no deal

Government ministers have been condemned for spending five times more on no-deal Brexit "propaganda" than on helping local councils prepare for the possibility of the UK leaving the EU without a deal.

On Saturday the government announced a £20m fund to help councils with no-deal planning and ordered every local authority to appoint an official to work with the government and oversee preparations.

But critics pointed out that the sum is dwarfed by the up to £100m that will reportedly be spent on a "public information campaign" designed to inform people about the consequences of a no-deal Brexit.

The £20m funding for no-deal preparations equates to only around £60,000 per council.
... ... ...

LONDON (Reuters) - Scottish voters would back independence and they want another referendum in the next two years, a poll published on Monday showed, indicating that the United Kingdom could be wrenched apart shortly after it leaves the European Union.

Asked how they would vote in an independence referendum, 46% of the 1,019 surveyed Scottish voters said they would vote for independence and 43% said they would vote against, according to a poll by Michael Ashcroft.

Excluding those who said they did not know or would not vote, this amounted to 52% to 48% for an independent Scotland.

“I found a small majority in favor of a new vote – and the first lead for an independent Scotland for more than two years,” Ashcroft, a Conservative who opposed Boris Johnson’s successful bid to be prime minister, said.

Johnson, who took over from Theresa May last month and is unpopular in Scotland, was booed as he entered a meeting last week with Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon who is demanding London agree to another referendum.

The poll is the first lead for Scottish independence in a published poll since an Ipsos MORI survey in March 2017, and the biggest lead since a spate of polls in June 2016, shortly after the EU referendum, Ashcroft said.

If there was another referendum and if Scots voted out, it would mark the biggest shock to the United Kingdom since Irish independence a century ago - just as London grapples with the fallout of a possible no-deal Brexit.

No-deal Brexit is British PM’s ‘central scenario’, chief Brussels envoy reportedly says

Boris Johnson has no intention of renegotiating the withdrawal agreement and a no-deal Brexit is his “central scenario”, EU diplomats have been briefed following a meeting between the prime minister’s chief envoy and officials in Brussels.

David Frost, who replaced Olly Robbins as the government’s chief Europe adviser, was said to have instead sought to discuss how negotiations could be reset after the UK crashes out on 31 October, during his recent talks with senior EU figures.

“It was clear UK does not have another plan,” a senior EU diplomat said of the meetings with Frost. “No intention to negotiate, which would require a plan. A no deal now appears to be the UK government’s central scenario.”
... ... ...

Some harsh words from Larry Summers, the former US treasury secretary, who has claimed it is “delusional” for Britain to expect a favourable trade deal with the US.

“I’m not sure what Britain wants from the United States that it can plausibly imagine the United States will give,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“If Britain thinks that the American financial regulators who have great difficulty coming together on anything are going to come together to give greater permissions and less regulation of UK firms, I would call that belief close to delusional.”

He added: “Look at it from America’s point of view: Britain has much less to give than Europe as a whole did, therefore less reason for the United States to make concessions. You make more concessions dealing with a wealthy man than you do dealing with a poor man.

“Second, Britain has no leverage. Britain is desperate. Britain has nothing else. It needs an agreement very soon. When you have a desperate partner, that's when you strike the hardest bargain.”