If you can't comprehend the difference between freight, usually not time critical, arriving in containers in ports with generally several weeks on water before it gets here, and wheeled freight which arrives on trailers and is often time critical, not least in driver hours, then I worry about you. The first is how most of our freight from China etc gets here, the latter how most of our freight from the EU gets here.

The container ports at Felixstowe and Southampton are built with plenty of space for customs clearance where things can sit even if the six weeks at sea hasn't been enough to get the paperwork sorted. The port of Dover and the tunnel exit at Folkestone aren't, because they are developed for immediate clearance with minimal fuss and the stuff they are delivering often can't sit around anyway. Where are they going to go, who is going to do the customs clearing, what paperwork is ready to go on day 1?


And even if your government's opening gambit under WTO rules is to just not bother with inspection and duty (wait til you meet the people who enforce World Trade Organisation rules, you'll love them) we know that the French and the Dutch will enforce the EU rules which protect the single market. Thus delays at Calais are the greater issue than those at Dover.

Your answer, as ever, appears to be "ignore the detail, it'll work itself out". But then this is what happens when ignoring experts was a key plank of your agenda.

Ignoring detail, blaming others, not answering questions and outright lying won the Leave side the referendum. It simply isn't good enough now you have to implement the unformed policy you fought for. But I've long given up expecting Leavers to take any responsibility for this whole sorry mess.

If that's the case, why bother leaving the biggest trading block in the world?

Because reasons - but definitely *not* racist xenophobia, deliberately stoked by people who have billions resting on short positions against the £. Definitely not that.

I have found it interesting how little Government & media support there has been for the Hong Kong protestors. Surely not related to our desperation to do a trade deal? Sod labour standards, environmental protection and anti-corruption measures.

Because whilst that is a benefit there are numerous downsides as you well know - this was never about the movement of goods this was always about control and being subservient to the EU. Is free trade worth having your laws implemented elsewhere, is a free trade deal worth your having to refer to ECJ, is a free trade deal worth the EU telling you where you can fish and who can fish in your waters. Is a free trade worth the billions you have to put in to support other countries and the amount of waste that inevitably comes when huge public bodies emerge? etc. etc.

Given the contents of the Yellowhammer document - it's a yes from me, to all your loaded questions.

On that matter - I've yet to speak to a Leaver who could reasonably articulate which EU laws have negatively impacted them; can you?

Obviously yes. Control & subservience are just emotive words spewed out by those who really want to control us. Just how much local control has Cameron's localism reforms given us? The major problems in this country are as a result of domestic policies pursued by a Tory party, using the excuse of a capitalist inspired world recession, to impose austerity & who couldn't give a stuff about the impacts on the worse off in society. I would say it is far more efficient that one body agrees & manages trade deals with the rest of the world than a bunch of desperate numpties pleading with a 100 individual countries.

So, should they gain power in the forthcoming election (when it finally happens), the Libdems have voted to scrap article 50 and remain in the EU, reneging on the referendum result.
Controversial or political masterstroke (remembering that they would have course have to gain a Parliamentary majority first, which is very highly unlikely)

I'm a lifelong Lib Dem voter (with the exception of about 6 years from 2010 when I was full of rage and politically homeless). However often Jo Swinson wants to say she aspires to be the next Prime Minister, we all know it is a load of old cobblers. When you know you cannot possibly gain power then you could write a manifesto offering a unicorn for every family that cries diamonds. So to me that whole revoke article 50 is a red herring. The commitment to push for a second referendum is their only Brexit policy decision that's relevant imo.

It will be an interesting election for sure.
As you rightly say, the chance of the Libdems gaining power is 0, although with such a black and white statement, their realistic hope will be to pick up "remain" voters from both Labour and The Tories.
Of course, unless they do a deal with Farage, the Tory vote could well be split down the middle and who knows what will happen to Labour, who despite having "a clear policy", need to firmly pick a side.
Their poll ratings, for an opposition party against a minority ruling party, are abysmal, currently sitting 4th behind the Tories, Brexit and Libdems.

I think that when the campaign kicks off for real, we will all need translator's and lie detectors to cut through the current trend of spewing made up rhetoric and numbers.
Your suggestion of a Unicorn for each voter is likely to be closer to the truth than many of the promises that are to come and in Boris' case already made. He's already put Labours "magic money tree" firmly in the shade.