RayC

If the government had defined Brexit as a 'Norway' type deal, I'm pretty sure that many (most?) Brexiters would have been up in arms.

Answer (noun): a thing that is said, written, or done as a reaction to a question, statement, or situation. Something that you seem consistently unable to provide To take a look in the mirror (Idiom): To consider, realize, or admit one's own failing or culpability in relation to some issue. Maybe something you should try.

But it's a little more nuanced than that. I don't have any hard evidence to support my contention but I'd suggest that in complete contrast to Finland, pre-Brexit the UK - especially London despite its' high cost of living - was seen as a desirable location by many young EU nationals, and consequently many jobs in the hospitality sector were filled by them. Some may have been students working part-time; others may have taken advantage of freedom of movement and spend a few months here. Since Brexit, the number of EU nationals in the UK is down. Although it won't happen, it would be interesting to see what effect reinstating freedom of movement for EU nationals would have on the Hospitality sector. I suspect that the 128k vacancies would fall dramatically. (Not directed at you: I'm aware that EU nationals can get a visa to work in the UK. The data suggests that they do not want the hassle and expense in doing so).

In which case, it seems sensible to look outside of the EU. This also seems like a country specific problem as - by their own admission and for whatever reasons - Finland is not seen as being an attractive destination for migrants. I'm not sure that this says much about the labour shortages in the UK. Many vacancies are in the Agricultural and Hospitality sectors and are low/ semi-skilled jobs. Many of these jobs were filled by EU nationals pre-Brexit.

The Articles are simply statements of the process and procedures. I don't see why or how they could be anything more? Agreed. If you are implying that the EU would be the dominant partner in any negotiation then, again, agreed. If you are suggesting something else, I can't see what it is. Once again. Agreed although some Brexiters such as Nigel Farage wouldn't. (I think?) we agree that the EU was the dominant partner. Imo it also pretty quickly became clear that they had the better negotiators (especially when it came to lead negotiators). Given this, it can't be any surprise that the final agreement would have largely been on the EU's terms. It's not clear to me what you are suggesting could, and should have, happened? Your comment also doesn't address my point about the lack of agreement about what Brexit meant. If Brexiters couldn't agree this amongst themselves, how could they expect an outcome on which they expect a favourable outcome?

The early indications being a more positive upgrade from the IMF, which suggests UK growth not significantly higher than other nations? Imo not a great deal to hang one's hat on Well, the immediate market reaction to Truss' policy announcements and the subsequent rebound in market sentiment upon her removal for a start. The improvement in diplomatic relations between the UK and EU for another. That's off the top of my head. Obviously our opinions differ.

Not for the first time, I find myself asking, what is your point?

It has happened under a Conservative government which is implementing Brexit. Personally, I don't see the rise in immigration as a failing. However, I also don't see any particular benefit in swapping EU nationals for Asian nationals. (And before anyone goes down that particular rabbit hole: I am not anti-Asian or racist. Just questioning what expertise - benefital to the UK economy - can be found in Asia that can't be found within the EU?)

Yes, you have Did you have any faith in the IMF before their revised figures were published? Did you read the article or merely the headline?

It's good news that IMF currently have more confidence in the UK than they had previously. However, I'll hold off putting the bunting up; imo a bit premature to suggest that a projected 0.4% annual growth rate is a harbinger of decades of future prosperity. This is probably, at least, partly due to us now having a serious politician in charge rather than an incompetent ideologue (someone you supported if I remember correctly?). Interesting that you take pleasure in the problems currently faced by our neighbours.

You seem to be putting great emphasis on the revised IMF forecasts. Have a closer look at the OBR datasets. You will find a lot of results as well as forecasts.

Presumably, the IMF changed their forecasts because new data affected their conclusions. In a similar vein, the OBR has reviewed its' data (and assumptions) and found that there is no need to revise its' conclusions that leaving the EU has - and will continue to have - negative economic consequences for the UK.

Once again, one of the problems of Brexit is highlighted: There is no clear vision of what it is. Farage's vision of Brexit is different from Sunak's which is different from Gove's which is different to .... How can it possibly succeed if you don't know what "it" is?

The Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) disagree https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions

BoE target inflation rate is 2% so, yes, the current inflation rate is way too high. Unless you collect, collate and analyse every transaction made, you will never get the actual inflation rate, only estimates. The UK figures for inflation are based on a basket of goods. The items in the basket are continually updated. The current list can be found in 2023 Excel sheet on this page https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/datasets/consumerpriceinflationbasketofgoodsandservices The basket of goods almost certainly isn't a perfect reflection of consumer behaviour, and the resulting overall rate will therefore be flawed, however, the methodology is clear and imo it gives a reasonable estimate. Imo this is a much better, and more credible, approach then just plucking a figure out of thin air.

On reflection, there's probably no need for elaboration. After all, you laid out such a compelling case in your original post.

Care to elaborate?

The 'new' normal seems to be more a lot more onerous for those involved in the transportation and logistics industries than the 'old' normal. It certainly appears to be a lot more complicated than truck drivers simply flashing their passports as they bid UK immigration officers a cheerful, 'Hail Fellow, well met' and are rewarded with a hearty 'God Speed' in reply. One company's take on the impact of Brexit. https://dfreight.org/blog/significant-impact-of-brexit-on-logistics-market/#:~:text=the new environment.-,Impact on Transportation,UK and other EU countries.

Let's assume that is the case. Then going back to the comparison between the Tories and Farage (UKIP) are you now saying that Brexit - at least, the Immigration part of it - wouldn't have been much different under UKIP? I still don't understand what point(s) you are trying to make?

You seem to be disagreeing with yourself. On the one hand, you say that the Tories have failed to live up to their promise to reduce immigration - and, presumably, are accountable? - while on the other, you imply that they have been the victim of circumstances and, presumably, therefore shouldn't be blamed? It's difficult to know what point you are trying to make.

Is it still circling?????

The straw clutching continues. In the context of Brexit, UKIP and the Parliamentary Conservative Party are one and the same: They both support it. There are probably any number of reasons why the Tories have been unable to reduce immigration. Imo one of the most likely is that the more economically literate members of the Tory party have come to the conclusion that reducing immigration would cause even more damage to the economy. Fortunately, this view seems to hold sway - and is, presumably, shared by the PM - at the moment.

And 'Never ending Brexit' rears its'head again????

So 'Boy David' who left office in 2016 is still pulling the strings in the Tory Party? There's straw clutching and, then again, there's STRAW CLUTCHING. One of the Tory Party's policies is to reduce immigration. The government is responsible for implementing Immigration policy. The Tory party are currently the party of government. Once again, I'm glad of your support in providing evidence to support my points.

Still plays a good tune and the lyrics still hold true.