Discussion:
David Davis, impact assessments and sectors analyses
Add Reply
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 19:16:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Given what Davis is saying here:



And what he is saying here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked

Has Davis been telling porkies?

He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?

Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?

Additional footage of him talking about this issue:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 19:20:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?

i don't like that word...

i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 19:36:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.

Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?

It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?

ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 19:43:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
i'll buy that as long as i get a discount
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
yes
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
baloney baffles brains
Post by James Hammerton
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
davis has a rep for ethical sensibility...

my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 19:56:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
i'll buy that as long as i get a discount
Given I'm offering it free I'm not sure what that entails...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
yes
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
baloney baffles brains
Are you suggesting Davis is baffled or is baffling his interrogators or
both?
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
davis has a rep for ethical sensibility...
Maybe, but how do you square the latest statement about the lack of
impact statements with his earlier comments?
Post by abelard
my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
You mean talk the clock out?

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 20:04:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:56:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
i'll buy that as long as i get a discount
Given I'm offering it free I'm not sure what that entails...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
yes
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
baloney baffles brains
Are you suggesting Davis is baffled or is baffling his interrogators or
both?
mostly baffling...but perhaps he's having difficulty
keeping his stories straight
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
davis has a rep for ethical sensibility...
Maybe, but how do you square the latest statement about the lack of
impact statements with his earlier comments?
with difficulty!
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
You mean talk the clock out?
yes
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 20:24:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:56:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
i'll buy that as long as i get a discount
Given I'm offering it free I'm not sure what that entails...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
yes
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
baloney baffles brains
Are you suggesting Davis is baffled or is baffling his interrogators or
both?
mostly baffling...but perhaps he's having difficulty
keeping his stories straight
I'm not sure how ethical it is to be deliberately baffling... I guess
there's a justification in terms of trying to keep the EU second
guessing during the negotiations, alongside trying to avoid getting
derailed by HM Loyal Opposition or the de facto opposition in the Tory
party or the other de facto opposition in the media if they get hold of
a detail out of context and turn it into a picture of apocalypse raining
down on us, the cure of which is to stop Brexit...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
davis has a rep for ethical sensibility...
Maybe, but how do you square the latest statement about the lack of
impact statements with his earlier comments?
with difficulty!
Me too!
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
You mean talk the clock out?
yes
Leaving the EU without any agreements to smooth the transition from EU
member state to being outside the single market in place has me nervous
- whilst I'm not sure e.g. North et al (Brexiteers who concluded the EEA
option is the only workable Brexit) aren't over egging the consequences,
ISTM likely there will be some disruption caused by that, that neither
side wants. Contingency planning can only go so far since the issues
require cooperation to be fully circumvented. There appears to be a
consensus that without a deal we will suffer an economic hit and I'm not
sure that's wrong.

This makes talking down the clock look more like a game of chicken than
a normal negotiation to me...

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 22:18:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 20:24:01 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:56:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
i'll buy that as long as i get a discount
Given I'm offering it free I'm not sure what that entails...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
yes
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
baloney baffles brains
Are you suggesting Davis is baffled or is baffling his interrogators or
both?
mostly baffling...but perhaps he's having difficulty
keeping his stories straight
I'm not sure how ethical it is to be deliberately baffling... I guess
there's a justification in terms of trying to keep the EU second
guessing during the negotiations, alongside trying to avoid getting
derailed by HM Loyal Opposition or the de facto opposition in the Tory
party or the other de facto opposition in the media if they get hold of
a detail out of context and turn it into a picture of apocalypse raining
down on us, the cure of which is to stop Brexit...
i can imagine he was waffling nd he said more that he intended
because he wasn't attending

maybe he's rather intellectually lazy
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
davis has a rep for ethical sensibility...
Maybe, but how do you square the latest statement about the lack of
impact statements with his earlier comments?
with difficulty!
Me too!
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
You mean talk the clock out?
yes
Leaving the EU without any agreements to smooth the transition from EU
member state to being outside the single market in place has me nervous
- whilst I'm not sure e.g. North et al (Brexiteers who concluded the EEA
option is the only workable Brexit) aren't over egging the consequences,
ISTM likely there will be some disruption caused by that, that neither
side wants. Contingency planning can only go so far since the issues
require cooperation to be fully circumvented. There appears to be a
consensus that without a deal we will suffer an economic hit and I'm not
sure that's wrong.
i'm not sure it's right
Post by James Hammerton
This makes talking down the clock look more like a game of chicken than
a normal negotiation to me...
i'm afraid there isn't a much better choice....

i don't believe the eussr will negotiate with honesty...
but i thing (to use a ghastly cliche) britain has the whip hand

so they'll adapt a workable agreement...

their judgement in trying to play hardball with cameron was
dreadful...i see little sign they've learnt much from that
--
www.abelard.org
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 23:36:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 20:24:01 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:56:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
i'll buy that as long as i get a discount
Given I'm offering it free I'm not sure what that entails...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
yes
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
baloney baffles brains
Are you suggesting Davis is baffled or is baffling his interrogators or
both?
mostly baffling...but perhaps he's having difficulty
keeping his stories straight
I'm not sure how ethical it is to be deliberately baffling... I guess
there's a justification in terms of trying to keep the EU second
guessing during the negotiations, alongside trying to avoid getting
derailed by HM Loyal Opposition or the de facto opposition in the Tory
party or the other de facto opposition in the media if they get hold of
a detail out of context and turn it into a picture of apocalypse raining
down on us, the cure of which is to stop Brexit...
i can imagine he was waffling nd he said more that he intended
because he wasn't attending
That's plausible.
Post by abelard
maybe he's rather intellectually lazy
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
davis has a rep for ethical sensibility...
Maybe, but how do you square the latest statement about the lack of
impact statements with his earlier comments?
with difficulty!
Me too!
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
You mean talk the clock out?
yes
Leaving the EU without any agreements to smooth the transition from EU
member state to being outside the single market in place has me nervous
- whilst I'm not sure e.g. North et al (Brexiteers who concluded the EEA
option is the only workable Brexit) aren't over egging the consequences,
ISTM likely there will be some disruption caused by that, that neither
side wants. Contingency planning can only go so far since the issues
require cooperation to be fully circumvented. There appears to be a
consensus that without a deal we will suffer an economic hit and I'm not
sure that's wrong.
i'm not sure it's right
Why?

I've raised the problems in outline with you before, but I'm not sure
why you think they're overegged, especially when it comes to a literally
no deal situation.
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
This makes talking down the clock look more like a game of chicken than
a normal negotiation to me...
i'm afraid there isn't a much better choice....
What's your view of the EEA/EFTA option?
Post by abelard
i don't believe the eussr will negotiate with honesty...
but i thing (to use a ghastly cliche) britain has the whip hand
Because of the loss of British money for the EU budget?
Post by abelard
so they'll adapt a workable agreement...
their judgement in trying to play hardball with cameron was
dreadful...i see little sign they've learnt much from that
I don't think Cameron did well out of that. He went into the subsequent
referendum with not much to show for the renegotiation (especially
compared to what was originally set out) and promptly lost it, and then
decided he'd had enough...

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
abelard
2017-12-06 23:56:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 23:36:28 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 20:24:01 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:56:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
my theory is 'talk it out'...without alienating voters
You mean talk the clock out?
yes
Leaving the EU without any agreements to smooth the transition from EU
member state to being outside the single market in place has me nervous
- whilst I'm not sure e.g. North et al (Brexiteers who concluded the EEA
option is the only workable Brexit) aren't over egging the consequences,
ISTM likely there will be some disruption caused by that, that neither
side wants. Contingency planning can only go so far since the issues
require cooperation to be fully circumvented. There appears to be a
consensus that without a deal we will suffer an economic hit and I'm not
sure that's wrong.
i'm not sure it's right
Why?
I've raised the problems in outline with you before, but I'm not sure
why you think they're overegged, especially when it comes to a literally
no deal situation.
one door closes another opens...
you can't sell cars in germany they'll sell more brit cars

i don't have a great concern over money but money seems
to drive the electorates...
even if the country was 10% less wealthy no-one would starve.

my view of the world is clearly not mainstream...i'm not ruled
or driven by money
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
This makes talking down the clock look more like a game of chicken than
a normal negotiation to me...
i'm afraid there isn't a much better choice....
What's your view of the EEA/EFTA option?
mostly apathy!
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
i don't believe the eussr will negotiate with honesty...
but i thing (to use a ghastly cliche) britain has the whip hand
Because of the loss of British money for the EU budget?
and the markets
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
so they'll adapt a workable agreement...
their judgement in trying to play hardball with cameron was
dreadful...i see little sign they've learnt much from that
I don't think Cameron did well out of that. He went into the subsequent
referendum with not much to show for the renegotiation (especially
compared to what was originally set out) and promptly lost it, and then
decided he'd had enough...
sure...he's there if britain ever decides it want real leadership
again
--
www.abelard.org
Joe
2017-12-07 08:40:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 00:56:37 +0100
Post by abelard
sure...he's there if britain ever decides it want real leadership
again
He threw his toys out of the pram and stormed off, having told us
before the referendum that he wouldn't do that. I believe he did so to
force an immediate change in administration, and therefore to cancel
his government's promise to honour the result of the referendum.

A lot of Conservative voters won't forget that quickly. The suits would
have to be insane to reinstall him as leader.

Besides, it's not leadership we need from a Prime Minister, it's
integrity and competence. Blair was a brilliantly charismatic leader,
but absolute crap at running a country, and the less said about his
integrity, the better.
--
Joe
abelard
2017-12-07 10:31:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 00:56:37 +0100
Post by abelard
sure...he's there if britain ever decides it want real leadership
again
He threw his toys out of the pram and stormed off, having told us
before the referendum that he wouldn't do that. I believe he did so to
force an immediate change in administration, and therefore to cancel
his government's promise to honour the result of the referendum.
don't be so romantic...what's going on at the moment is simply
boring....boring....boring...

he's reestablished the party, that took intelligence and serious
ability...what is being done now is mere administration and
blithering
Post by Joe
A lot of Conservative voters won't forget that quickly. The suits would
have to be insane to reinstall him as leader.
i can't see him wanting the job atm...come any real crisis and
things would get 'interesting' again

'conservative voters' no more own cameron than they own you
Post by Joe
Besides, it's not leadership we need from a Prime Minister, it's
integrity and competence. Blair was a brilliantly charismatic leader,
but absolute crap at running a country, and the less said about his
integrity, the better.
all a person like bliar can do is....damage...mainly because
he is an arrogant dullard...

the present administration is doing very little...often that can
be the very best administration for a society...

most 'leaders' come and go...hardly leaving a ripple behind them...

theresa may well do that...
--
www.abelard.org
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-12-07 10:49:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
Post by Joe
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 00:56:37 +0100
Post by abelard
sure...he's there if britain ever decides it want real leadership
again
He threw his toys out of the pram and stormed off, having told us
before the referendum that he wouldn't do that. I believe he did so to
force an immediate change in administration, and therefore to cancel
his government's promise to honour the result of the referendum.
don't be so romantic...what's going on at the moment is simply
boring....boring....boring...
he's reestablished the party, that took intelligence and serious
ability...what is being done now is mere administration and
blithering
Post by Joe
A lot of Conservative voters won't forget that quickly. The suits would
have to be insane to reinstall him as leader.
i can't see him wanting the job atm...come any real crisis and
things would get 'interesting' again
'conservative voters' no more own cameron than they own you
Post by Joe
Besides, it's not leadership we need from a Prime Minister, it's
integrity and competence. Blair was a brilliantly charismatic leader,
but absolute crap at running a country, and the less said about his
integrity, the better.
all a person like bliar can do is....damage...mainly because
he is an arrogant dullard...
the present administration is doing very little...often that can
be the very best administration for a society...
most 'leaders' come and go...hardly leaving a ripple behind them...
Tory leaders come and go with hardly a ripple, but I think the socialist
leaders have more invested in them somehow (a saviour that is the answer
to all our problems sort of thing). I think it's the cult of personality.
Post by abelard
theresa may well do that...
James Harris
2017-12-06 20:31:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
I watched the evidence session. Davis doesn't do himself any favours as
far as his PR goes but at the end of the day I thought his comments were
consistent.

Specifically:

Government departments have produced sectoral analyses which document
information about sectors as they stand at a point in time. These are
working documents and get updated from time to time.

The government was perhaps a little unwise in overselling such
documents, overclaiming what they represented.

The Brexit department under Davis does NOT believe in producing impact
assessments of the kind requested. I have to say I completely agree.
Such forecasts are a sop - a security blanket which managers might
produce so they can say they have produced them, but they are next to
useless. Instead, Davis believes in making judgements based on the
aforementioned analyses. Again, I think he is right.

He did say, however, that as part of this process the government would
produce real impact assessments in specific circumstances:

* When facing specific upcoming aspects of negotiation. The impact
assessments would relate to the issues they were about to negotiate and
would be confidential.

* When considering the WTO option.

* When laying a new bill before parliament. It would be normal to
produce such assessments to go with bills.


He has been completely consistent for months in the way that he
described his approach. So have other ministers like Robin Walker. Each
time I have seen them comment on stuff like this they have said that
there are no formal impact assessments but that they have gathered
studies on the UK's economic needs. And that has turned out to be
accurate. It is a great pity that the media are reporting them as though
Davis has "admitted that he has done no assessments of the impact of
Brexit". That suggests that they have no idea and that an idea is
haveable(!). It gives a completely false picture.

In summary, a sectoral analysis is a working document which looks at the
subject NOW, at a point in time, whereas an impact assessment is an
estimate or projection of the FUTURE - and may be no more than a guess.
The two are not the same at all. I suspect that in an effort to be
reassuring the department may have given the impression that the
documents they had produced were more prognosticatory(!) than they are.
But ISTM that's normal human speech, open to varying interpretations; I
don't see a contradiction. Do you?
--
James Harris
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 21:30:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
      'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
I watched the evidence session. Davis doesn't do himself any favours as
far as his PR goes but at the end of the day I thought his comments were
consistent.
Government departments have produced sectoral analyses which document
information about sectors as they stand at a point in time. These are
working documents and get updated from time to time.
What is the purpose of these sectoral analyses?
Post by James Harris
The government was perhaps a little unwise in overselling such
documents, overclaiming what they represented.
ISTM comments such as the following are difficult to square with the
claim that no impact assessments have been made - i.e. ISTM they are at
least guilty of overselling what is going on:

"We currently have in place an assessment of 51 sectors of the economy.

"We are looking at those one by one, but the aim at the end is that this
will inform the negotiating approach so that no one gets hurt.

"I should mention that we are also doing that assessment in a way that
will throw up whether something has an impact on the individual nations
of the United Kingdom, as well as on the UK as a whole." - David Davis
to the HoC on 20th Oct 2016.
Post by James Harris
The Brexit department under Davis does NOT believe in producing impact
assessments of the kind requested.
Yet that comment above talks about both assessment and impact...

I have to say I completely agree.
Post by James Harris
Such forecasts are a sop - a security blanket which managers might
produce so they can say they have produced them, but they are next to
useless. Instead, Davis believes in making judgements based on the
aforementioned analyses. Again, I think he is right.
I'm inclined to agree that forecasts are problematic, but then what are
these "sectoral analyses" doing if they're not indicating issues that
might need to be addressed if we leave the EU under the possible likely
scenarios? What is the point of them?
Post by James Harris
He did say, however, that as part of this process the government would
* When facing specific upcoming aspects of negotiation. The impact
assessments would relate to the issues they were about to negotiate and
would be confidential.
* When considering the WTO option.
* When laying a new bill before parliament. It would be normal to
produce such assessments to go with bills.
He has been completely consistent for months in the way that he
described his approach.
Would you say that consistency extends not just to his committee/HoC
appearances but his interviews in the media?

So have other ministers like Robin Walker. Each
Post by James Harris
time I have seen them comment on stuff like this they have said that
there are no formal impact assessments but that they have gathered
studies on the UK's economic needs. And that has turned out to be
accurate. It is a great pity that the media are reporting them as though
Davis has "admitted that he has done no assessments of the impact of
Brexit". That suggests that they have no idea and that an idea is
haveable(!).
Are you suggesting that they have some idea but that an idea is not
"haveable"?!

It gives a completely false picture.
Post by James Harris
In summary, a sectoral analysis is a working document which looks at the
subject NOW, at a point in time, whereas an impact assessment is an
estimate or projection of the FUTURE - and may be no more than a guess.
The two are not the same at all. I suspect that in an effort to be
reassuring the department may have given the impression that the
documents they had produced were more prognosticatory(!) than they are.
But ISTM that's normal human speech, open to varying interpretations; I
don't see a contradiction. Do you?
I see a disconnect between some of the quotations and the statement that
no impact assessments have been done. I note that he does say the
sectoral analyses have been done.

I grant that looking at what he says overall in each of the meetings in
detail and looking at that over time may give a different impression
from taking specific comments out of context. But I think even allowing
for that he has oversold things in some of his pronouncements.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
James Harris
2017-12-06 23:08:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
      'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
I watched the evidence session. Davis doesn't do himself any favours as
far as his PR goes but at the end of the day I thought his comments were
consistent.
Government departments have produced sectoral analyses which document
information about sectors as they stand at a point in time. These are
working documents and get updated from time to time.
What is the purpose of these sectoral analyses?
I'll have a go at explaining them but Davis is best to answer that and
his appearance is here:
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/887635ea-6bb5-4b0a-8bf7-3875507a319b


AIUI from Davis' various appearances the analyses are to document each
sector's state and needs - both qualitatively and quantitatively; the
government is to use them to understand the UK and its economy. They are
NOT impact assessments as such but the government does intend to use
them to inform policy. I remember Davis saying he asked businesses to
quantify their needs so you could regard those numbers as helping assess
the impact of a loss.
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
The government was perhaps a little unwise in overselling such
documents, overclaiming what they represented.
ISTM comments such as the following are difficult to square with the
claim that no impact assessments have been made - i.e. ISTM they are at
"We currently have in place an assessment of 51 sectors of the economy.
Yes, the assessments document the economy as it exist now. They are not
forecasts.
Post by James Hammerton
"We are looking at those one by one, but the aim at the end is that this
will inform the negotiating approach so that no one gets hurt.
That sounds good to me.
Post by James Hammerton
"I should mention that we are also doing that assessment in a way that
will throw up whether something has an impact on the individual nations
of the United Kingdom, as well as on the UK as a whole." - David Davis
to the HoC on 20th Oct 2016.
Again, that fits in with what I expected.

If the "impact" part seem incongruous, I don't believe it is. Davis said
today that he was distinguishing between information and formal impact
assessments - though I thought it strange that he looked uncomfortable
as he said so. I got the impression that he was being disingenuous and
was deliberately choosing to use a formal definition of "impact
assessment" rather than a looser definition of the term which might
encompass the sectoral studies.

Put another way, various inferences could be deduced from information in
the sectoral analyses but they were not, in themselves, predictions.

Frankly, I suspect that over the past few months Davis might have been
trying to avoid letting the committee see information which could
compromise the negotiations. I suspect he doesn't trust them completely.
Neither do I. That would lead to his choice to use a specific definition
of "impact assessment" to avoid disclosing information which someone who
is vehemently anti-Brexit might leak. IMO that's a genuine danger. But
this paragraph is all assumption on my part.
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
The Brexit department under Davis does NOT believe in producing impact
assessments of the kind requested.
Yet that comment above talks about both assessment and impact...
Please see above. And Davis did say something today which backs up my
understanding: information which can be used to estimate an impact is
not in itself a formal projection of impact.

He did give an example: the recent OBR forecast is, if you like, an
assessment of the impact of Treasury policy. And that's true. But I can
give you reasons as to why I don't believe it's worth the paper it is
written on. The OBR forecast is an ideal example of a document which
would satisfy those who want to see impact assessments but which is
practically useless. And that's a cause of frustration. ISTM the
government's opponents and the media are looking for something showy and
meaningless.
Post by James Hammerton
I have to say I completely agree.
Post by James Harris
Such forecasts are a sop - a security blanket which managers might
produce so they can say they have produced them, but they are next to
useless. Instead, Davis believes in making judgements based on the
aforementioned analyses. Again, I think he is right.
I'm inclined to agree that forecasts are problematic, but then what are
these "sectoral analyses" doing if they're not indicating issues that
might need to be addressed if we leave the EU under the possible likely
scenarios? What is the point of them?
As above, I gather they are documentation about the UK to ensure the
government understands British needs. I would /hope/ that they were used
to inform May's decision to leave the single market and customs union
but I don't know that they were.
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
He did say, however, that as part of this process the government would
* When facing specific upcoming aspects of negotiation. The impact
assessments would relate to the issues they were about to negotiate and
would be confidential.
* When considering the WTO option.
* When laying a new bill before parliament. It would be normal to
produce such assessments to go with bills.
He has been completely consistent for months in the way that he
described his approach.
Would you say that consistency extends not just to his committee/HoC
appearances but his interviews in the media?
Off the top of my head I don't remember a conflict. Do you have a
specific interview in mind?
Post by James Hammerton
So have other ministers like Robin Walker. Each
Post by James Harris
time I have seen them comment on stuff like this they have said that
there are no formal impact assessments but that they have gathered
studies on the UK's economic needs. And that has turned out to be
accurate. It is a great pity that the media are reporting them as though
Davis has "admitted that he has done no assessments of the impact of
Brexit". That suggests that they have no idea and that an idea is
haveable(!).
Are you suggesting that they have some idea but that an idea is not
"haveable"?!
No, I was saying the media are suggesting that it's possible to predict
the impact but that the government hasn't bothered to predict it; they
are implying that the government could have worked out the impact of
Brexit but have not done so. That is nonsense. IMO it's not possible to
work out the impact in the form the media imagine. Therefore, it would
be a waste of time to produce such forecasts. It's another example of
where signalling is put above substance.
Post by James Hammerton
It gives a completely false picture.
Post by James Harris
In summary, a sectoral analysis is a working document which looks at the
subject NOW, at a point in time, whereas an impact assessment is an
estimate or projection of the FUTURE - and may be no more than a guess.
The two are not the same at all. I suspect that in an effort to be
reassuring the department may have given the impression that the
documents they had produced were more prognosticatory(!) than they are.
But ISTM that's normal human speech, open to varying interpretations; I
don't see a contradiction. Do you?
I see a disconnect between some of the quotations and the statement that
no impact assessments have been done. I note that he does say the
sectoral analyses have been done.
I grant that looking at what he says overall in each of the meetings in
detail and looking at that over time may give a different impression
from taking specific comments out of context. But I think even allowing
for that he has oversold things in some of his pronouncements.
Agreed.
--
James Harris
James Hammerton
2017-12-09 12:11:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
       'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
I watched the evidence session. Davis doesn't do himself any favours as
far as his PR goes but at the end of the day I thought his comments were
consistent.
Government departments have produced sectoral analyses which document
information about sectors as they stand at a point in time. These are
working documents and get updated from time to time.
What is the purpose of these sectoral analyses?
I'll have a go at explaining them but Davis is best to answer that and
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/887635ea-6bb5-4b0a-8bf7-3875507a319b
Thanks- I hope to get a chance to look at that today, I've seen some
clips otherwise.
Post by James Harris
AIUI from Davis' various appearances the analyses are to document each
sector's state and needs - both qualitatively and quantitatively; the
government is to use them to understand the UK and its economy. They are
NOT impact assessments as such but the government does intend to use
them to inform policy. I remember Davis saying he asked businesses to
quantify their needs so you could regard those numbers as helping assess
the impact of a loss >
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
The government was perhaps a little unwise in overselling such
documents, overclaiming what they represented.
ISTM comments such as the following are difficult to square with the
claim that no impact assessments have been made - i.e. ISTM they are at
"We currently have in place an assessment of 51 sectors of the economy.
Yes, the assessments document the economy as it exist now. They are not
forecasts.
Post by James Hammerton
"We are looking at those one by one, but the aim at the end is that this
will inform the negotiating approach so that no one gets hurt.
That sounds good to me.
Post by James Hammerton
"I should mention that we are also doing that assessment in a way that
will throw up whether something has an impact on the individual nations
of the United Kingdom, as well as on the UK as a whole."  - David Davis
to the HoC on 20th Oct 2016.
Again, that fits in with what I expected.
ISTM you are interpreting the statements above in line with your
understanding of what Davis is saying, but ISTM quite clear why people
reading those statements would think he's talking about impact
assessments. ISTM he could have been talking about impact assessments
and still said exactly what he said above.

To be sure, ISTM that the statement is compatible with both
interpretations...
Post by James Harris
If the "impact" part seem incongruous, I don't believe it is. Davis said
today that he was distinguishing between information and formal impact
assessments - though I thought it strange that he looked uncomfortable
as he said so.
Has he made the distinction before? I have seen people linking to the
full video of the committee proceedings and claiming he's falling back
on a narrow interpretation of 'impact assessment' to try and get out of
a hole. Looking uncomfortable doesn't help him...

I got the impression that he was being disingenuous and
Post by James Harris
was deliberately choosing to use a formal definition of "impact
assessment" rather than a looser definition of the term which might
encompass the sectoral studies.
Which is pretty much my point.

Of course he may be uncomfortable because he's aware how it looks even
though he may believe he has been straight with everyone all along.

[snip]
Post by James Harris
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
He has been completely consistent for months in the way that he
described his approach.
Would you say that consistency extends not just to his committee/HoC
appearances but his interviews in the media?
Off the top of my head I don't remember a conflict. Do you have a
specific interview in mind?
No - it's more that the interview clips and quotations going around
don't sit very well with the admission that no impact assessments have
been done and I was wondering if Davis had been more careful or had more
chance to clarify his statements in the committee meetings than in the
interviews.
Post by James Harris
Post by James Hammerton
   So have other ministers like Robin Walker. Each
Post by James Harris
time I have seen them comment on stuff like this they have said that
there are no formal impact assessments but that they have gathered
studies on the UK's economic needs. And that has turned out to be
accurate. It is a great pity that the media are reporting them as though
Davis has "admitted that he has done no assessments of the impact of
Brexit". That suggests that they have no idea and that an idea is
haveable(!).
Are you suggesting that they have some idea but that an idea is not
"haveable"?!
No, I was saying the media are suggesting that it's possible to predict
the impact but that the government hasn't bothered to predict it; they
are implying that the government could have worked out the impact of
Brexit but have not done so. That is nonsense. IMO it's not possible to
work out the impact in the form the media imagine. Therefore, it would
be a waste of time to produce such forecasts. It's another example of
where signalling is put above substance.
OK.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
James Harris
2017-12-09 13:21:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
...
Post by James Hammerton
Post by James Harris
If the "impact" part seem incongruous, I don't believe it is. Davis said
today that he was distinguishing between information and formal impact
assessments - though I thought it strange that he looked uncomfortable
as he said so.
Has he made the distinction before?
I don't remember the specific topic of formal impact assessments coming
up before but Davis' dismissal of forecasts has been consistent when he
has appeared before select committees. For example, you may remember him
being slated once before because he had not produced forecasts for No
Deal. What he said then was that the government would work up a No Deal
model which included mitigation measures shortly before they had to make
a deal/no-deal decision but that making one at that time would be
meaningless. And what he is saying now is comparable: broad "impacts of
Brexit" are a nonsense but he will assess individual impacts as he comes
to negotiate individual issues.
Post by James Hammerton
I have seen people linking to the
full video of the committee proceedings and claiming he's falling back
on a narrow interpretation of 'impact assessment' to try and get out of
a hole. Looking uncomfortable doesn't help him...
Indeed - looking uncomfortable makes him look guilty.
Post by James Hammerton
I got the impression that he was being disingenuous and
Post by James Harris
was deliberately choosing to use a formal definition of "impact
assessment" rather than a looser definition of the term which might
encompass the sectoral studies.
Which is pretty much my point.
Of course he may be uncomfortable because he's aware how it looks even
though he may believe he has been straight with everyone all along.
True. I would have expected someone of his experience to have dealt with
it with more aplomb. All he needed to do was to go on the offensive and
explain what I have heard him explain before. I don't know why he didn't.
--
James Harris
MM
2017-12-07 17:19:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
Regards,
James
I watched the entire session with Davis yesterday on Parliament TV. It
was mostly excrutiating, the ill-informed nonsense he was coming out
with. The final straw was in the closing few minutes when he glibly
responded to Hilary Benn that no impact assessments had been made at
all, to which the committee to a man and woman responded with utter
astonishment.

As the Guardian pointed out, Davis's three minions sitting behind him
looked at times as if they hoped the ground beneath them would open up
in a giant sinkhole.

As for Davis, he couldn't get out of there fast enough.

MM
James Harris
2017-12-07 17:27:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
Regards,
James
I watched the entire session with Davis yesterday on Parliament TV. It
was mostly excrutiating, the ill-informed nonsense he was coming out
with. The final straw was in the closing few minutes when he glibly
responded to Hilary Benn that no impact assessments had been made at
all, to which the committee to a man and woman responded with utter
astonishment.
As the Guardian pointed out, Davis's three minions sitting behind him
looked at times as if they hoped the ground beneath them would open up
in a giant sinkhole.
As for Davis, he couldn't get out of there fast enough.
MM
You must be a very happy person. Whatever happens in reality, when you
see it it looks just the way you want it to.... ;-)
--
James Harris
MM
2017-12-11 08:07:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 17:27:18 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
Regards,
James
I watched the entire session with Davis yesterday on Parliament TV. It
was mostly excrutiating, the ill-informed nonsense he was coming out
with. The final straw was in the closing few minutes when he glibly
responded to Hilary Benn that no impact assessments had been made at
all, to which the committee to a man and woman responded with utter
astonishment.
As the Guardian pointed out, Davis's three minions sitting behind him
looked at times as if they hoped the ground beneath them would open up
in a giant sinkhole.
As for Davis, he couldn't get out of there fast enough.
MM
You must be a very happy person. Whatever happens in reality, when you
see it it looks just the way you want it to.... ;-)
It wasn't just me. People were calling for him to be done for contempt
of Parliament.

MM
James Harris
2017-12-11 08:55:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 17:27:18 +0000, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:36:35 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by abelard
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:16:26 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have been
done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
'impact assessment' = forecasts?
That's one interpretation.
Is an estimate, or range of estimates, of what impact a particular
change may have, with assumptions clearly stated, amoiunt to a forecast
of what would happen if the change went ahead?
It's not unusual to conduct such exercises when planning work...
Post by abelard
i don't like that word...
you mean 'forecasts'?
Post by abelard
i don't like it when phrases like 'impact assessments' and
'regulatory alignment' start to replace plain english
it makes me nervous
What do you think about terms Davis himself has been using such as
'carrying out programme of sectoral analysis and regulatory analysis',
'building a detailed understanding of how the withdrawal from the EU
will affect domestic policies, to seize opportunities and ensure a
smooth process of exit',
'doing that assessment in a way that will throw up whether something has
an impact on the individual nations of the United Kingdom, as well as on
the UK as a whole.' or 'We are conducting a broad range of analysis at
the macroeconomic and sectoral level to understand the impact of leaving
the EU on all aspects of the UK, including the agriculture sector.'?
ISTM his admission that there are no impact assessments (though he does
say there is sectoral analysis, what does he mean by that?) does not
sit easily with those phrases/statements...
Post by abelard
Post by James Hammerton
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
Regards,
James
I watched the entire session with Davis yesterday on Parliament TV. It
was mostly excrutiating, the ill-informed nonsense he was coming out
with. The final straw was in the closing few minutes when he glibly
responded to Hilary Benn that no impact assessments had been made at
all, to which the committee to a man and woman responded with utter
astonishment.
As the Guardian pointed out, Davis's three minions sitting behind him
looked at times as if they hoped the ground beneath them would open up
in a giant sinkhole.
As for Davis, he couldn't get out of there fast enough.
MM
You must be a very happy person. Whatever happens in reality, when you
see it it looks just the way you want it to.... ;-)
It wasn't just me. People were calling for him to be done for contempt
of Parliament.
So I hear. I am not sure what has led to all this nonsense in the
Commons but I've never heard Davis say he had any impact assessments to
produce. Have you?

In fact, he has said he doesn't believe in high-level forecasts so I
don't know why anyone would think he had produced them.
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 19:47:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assess
ments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have
been done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
His duplicity is absolutely breathtaking.
--
Ian
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 20:02:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assess
ments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done
but then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments
have been done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific
where other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
His duplicity is absolutely breathtaking.
I certainly think he's given an impression of detailed analyses of the
probable impact (a word he himself has used in this context) of Brexit
(in various flavours) being done in the 50 odd sectoral analyses he's
referenced on various occasions, yet when asked this week if impact
assessments have been done he now says 'no', but again makes reference
to the sectoral analyses.

I'm confused as to WTF has been done now... after all the government did
provide a document to the select committee based on these analyses,
albeit one leaving things out deemed likely to harm the negotiations or
to be commercially sensitive.

He also makes comments about contingency planning being done, but does
he mean the same thing by 'contingency planning' as others do?

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
MM
2017-12-07 17:22:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:47:40 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assess
ments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
He's certainly given the impression of a lot of analysis being done but
then how does that square the claim that no impact assessments have
been done?
Is he taking 'impact assessment' to mean something verty specific where
other commentators are putting another inerpretation on it?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/7-times-tory-david-davis-11649452
Regards,
James
His duplicity is absolutely breathtaking.
And his associated arrogance.

It's the smirk that annoys me, as if he treats the entire Brexit
process as a joke. He also appears unable to concentrate, constantly
removing his glasses, then putting them back on as he flounders around
for some more of his doublespeak.

MM
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-06 20:47:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
How can he tell porkies about something that nobody knows anything about?

We are bock to the same old bugbear.

Nobody knows what conditions will prevail after Brexit or even whether there will be an agreement or not? How can anyone make predictions around a scenario like that? Why is everyone in such a state of ignorance ? Because for reasons of playing politics refuses to commence trade talks.

Tell them negotiations are over and that from March 30th 2019 the UK will start imposing appropriate WTO tariffs on UK imports. The "enemy" have been cut far too much slack. Stop calling them neighbours and certainly not partners and start calling them competitors which is what they are.

Our world is changing! Don't expect it to remain the same. That's the very reason we voted as we did!
James Hammerton
2017-12-06 21:08:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
How can he tell porkies about something that nobody knows anything about?
Well one interpretation of his comments over the last year is that he
was claiming the govt have done extensive assessment of the impact of
Brexit, but has now said no impact assessments exist. If that is
accurate, then he has lied about assessing the impact of Brexit.

The comments provided in the videos and the article I linked to aren't
easy to square up and many people are coming to the conclusion he has
been telling porkies as a result.

Having just read James Harris's post in this thread, I'm less certain
that he has been telling porkies, and rather I'm willing to consider
that a complex message Davis and his dept have been consistent about has
been garbled by the media's focussing on specific statements/soundbites
they can make a story out of, where such statements are often made in
response to specific questions or comments, without looking at the
surrounding context.

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
m***@btopenworld.com
2017-12-07 08:24:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
How can he tell porkies about something that nobody knows anything about?
Well one interpretation of his comments over the last year is that he
was claiming the govt have done extensive assessment of the impact of
Brexit, but has now said no impact assessments exist. If that is
accurate, then he has lied about assessing the impact of Brexit.
The comments provided in the videos and the article I linked to aren't
easy to square up and many people are coming to the conclusion he has
been telling porkies as a result.
Having just read James Harris's post in this thread, I'm less certain
that he has been telling porkies, and rather I'm willing to consider
that a complex message Davis and his dept have been consistent about has
been garbled by the media's focussing on specific statements/soundbites
they can make a story out of, where such statements are often made in
response to specific questions or comments, without looking at the
surrounding context.
I reiterate.

How can anyone make plans or Brexit when we don't know what Brexit will look like and why have discussions regarding Brexit not proceeded?

Of course, we could assume that the trade deficit with Europe will cease to be and begin resourcing goods and products that come from Europe.

That might move things along a bit.
James Hammerton
2017-12-09 11:46:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Post by James Hammerton
http://youtu.be/0XR-FwfdOos
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42254438/have-any-impact-assessments-been-done-david-davis-is-asked
Has Davis been telling porkies?
How can he tell porkies about something that nobody knows anything about?
Well one interpretation of his comments over the last year is that he
was claiming the govt have done extensive assessment of the impact of
Brexit, but has now said no impact assessments exist. If that is
accurate, then he has lied about assessing the impact of Brexit.
The comments provided in the videos and the article I linked to aren't
easy to square up and many people are coming to the conclusion he has
been telling porkies as a result.
Having just read James Harris's post in this thread, I'm less certain
that he has been telling porkies, and rather I'm willing to consider
that a complex message Davis and his dept have been consistent about has
been garbled by the media's focussing on specific statements/soundbites
they can make a story out of, where such statements are often made in
response to specific questions or comments, without looking at the
surrounding context.
I reiterate.
How can anyone make plans or Brexit when we don't know what Brexit will look like
Regarding this question: we do know the broad range of possibilities
ranging from 'no deal' to Canada style FTA to the Norway/EEA option, and
plausible variations thereof.

We also know what demands the EU are making of us and vice versa in the
negotiations and can make estimates of the impact of those, either
qualitatively (giving on some demands of the EU may mean we remain in
hoc to the ECJ) or quantitatively (agreeing to fund certain items will
come with a price tag estimate to fall in a certain range).

We can ask specific questions such as what changes to the processes of
exporting certain to the EU would occur if we are treated by them as a
'third country' post Brexit (as implied by the decision to leave the
single market)?

We can estimate the impact of the EU imposing their existing
tariffs/quotas on our trade if we ended up with no deal.

We can estimate the amount we might raise from imposing tariffs on EU
imports in the same scenario.

As the negotiations start to narrow options down we can estimate answers
to questions related to specific proposals and rule out certain
possibilities.

It's not that we can do nothing to prepare for Brexit...

But I agree that a full blown impact assessment would be guesswork, and
any limited impact assessments should probably only be done where we
have reasonable certainty around the changes involved or to aid in
assessing proposals.
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
and why have discussions regarding Brexit not proceeded?
Do you mean why did the negotiations not get further?
Post by m***@btopenworld.com
Of course, we could assume that the trade deficit with Europe will cease to be and begin resourcing goods and products that come from Europe.
That might move things along a bit.
:-)

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
Mark, Devon
2017-12-07 03:44:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course, they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
James Harris
2017-12-07 09:08:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos!
To an extent, I agree, Mark. The government's approach appears to be
more casual than I expected. I actually quite liked the approach of Ivan
Rogers: fastidious, fussy, pessimistic. I'd prefer that to casual and
cheerful. Though it's best to have cheery optimists fronting
negotiations, one also needs the fastidious pessimists in the back
office making sure the details are thought of and planned for.

That said, it's not possible to do "an impact assessment on Brexit", as
you seem to want. That is far too broad a topic. You might as well ask
for an impact assessment of the next ten years of your life.

Where you can get an impact assessment is on something more specific -
such as if you, in your personal life, wanted to get a pet for your
children or if you, as a country, planned to allow the EU some fishing
rights.
Post by Mark, Devon
Of course, they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
I really don't think they have done impact assessments. At this stage,
they would not be useful so why should they have done them already?
--
James Harris
JNugent
2017-12-07 10:06:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course, they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?

We are not considering whether to leave the EU.

The decision to leave has *already* been made.
Ian Jackson
2017-12-07 10:30:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event
such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course, they
have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable
they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before the
referendum.

Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU would
be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the conclusion
Theresa May came to), the obvious thing to do is to call a halt to the
proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a re-think about what
really is in our best interests.
--
Ian
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-12-07 10:38:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event
such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course, they
have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable
they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before the
referendum.
I'm going to assume that the government knew it would have revealed its
predictions of doom to be somewhat hyperbolic, and that that is the
reason it was not done :-) Perhaps they couldn't risk having people
think 'well, that doesn't sound too bad.'
Post by Ian Jackson
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU would
be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the conclusion
Theresa May came to), the obvious thing to do is to call a halt to the
proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a re-think about what
really is in our best interests.
James Harris
2017-12-07 10:56:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event
such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course, they
have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable
they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before the
referendum.
They were! Don't you remember the IMF: Brexit would be "pretty bad to
very, very bad"?
Post by Ian Jackson
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU would
be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the conclusion
Theresa May came to), the obvious thing to do is to call a halt to the
proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a re-think about what
really is in our best interests.
We already know. Didn't everyone tell us?

http://pensites.com/politics/article-1152/Brexit-economic-forecasts
--
James Harris
Joe
2017-12-07 11:36:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:30:48 +0000
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event
such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course,
they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and
reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a
twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before
the referendum.
It was. Many times. Insofar as some of the predictions have been tested
against reality, they have fared poorly. I'm glad I didn't place any
bets on the basis of those predictions.
Post by Ian Jackson
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU
would be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the
conclusion Theresa May came to),
In what contexts? In other words, how are you defining bad? Are you
thinking solely of short-term economics, or is there more to life?
Post by Ian Jackson
the obvious thing to do is to call a
halt to the proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a
re-think about what really is in our best interests.
And what might they be?

I'll ask particularly what I once asked MM: even more water has passed
under the bridge since then, and of course I never got a reply. Given
the words which have been spoken and cannot be unspoken, do you honestly
believe we can just pretend nothing happened, and resume relations of
two-ish years ago?

Can the real hostility which has appeared, which I believe always
covertly existed, really just be forgotten and cooperation with our
'friends' and 'partners' re-started? Would *you* like to be a UK
negotiator with the EU in, say, a year's time? How much attention would
the EU pay to a country whose population is on record as not wanting to
be in the EU, but are being forcibly kept in only by politicians, and
not even their own country's politicians?
--
Joe
MM
2017-12-07 17:30:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:30:48 +0000
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event
such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course,
they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and
reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a
twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before
the referendum.
It was. Many times. Insofar as some of the predictions have been tested
against reality, they have fared poorly. I'm glad I didn't place any
bets on the basis of those predictions.
Post by Ian Jackson
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU
would be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the
conclusion Theresa May came to),
In what contexts? In other words, how are you defining bad? Are you
thinking solely of short-term economics, or is there more to life?
Post by Ian Jackson
the obvious thing to do is to call a
halt to the proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a
re-think about what really is in our best interests.
And what might they be?
I'll ask particularly what I once asked MM: even more water has passed
under the bridge since then, and of course I never got a reply. Given
the words which have been spoken and cannot be unspoken, do you honestly
believe we can just pretend nothing happened, and resume relations of
two-ish years ago?
Can the real hostility which has appeared, which I believe always
covertly existed, really just be forgotten and cooperation with our
'friends' and 'partners' re-started?
Of course it can! If Britain can resume fairly normal relations with
Germany only a few months after the end of the war, then the Brexit
debacle will all be forgotten about PDQ.
Post by Joe
Would *you* like to be a UK
negotiator with the EU in, say, a year's time? How much attention would
the EU pay to a country whose population
17 million only of its population*
Post by Joe
is on record as not wanting to
be in the EU, but are being forcibly kept in only by politicians, and
not even their own country's politicians?
* The UK electorate amounts to around 46 million voters. The only
people you can rely on in YOUR army is the 17 million Brexiters. Do
the sums to work out how many are going to be opposing you.

And then there are the 2 million British ex-pats who are none too
happy with Brexiters either...

MM
JNugent
2017-12-07 22:50:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an event
such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of course, they
have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate, and reliable
they are will be another question. But Davis has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before the
referendum.
Says whom?

Nothing of the sort was done before the 1975 referendum.
Post by Ian Jackson
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU would
be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the conclusion
Theresa May came to), the obvious thing to do is to call a halt to the
proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a re-think about what
really is in our best interests.
Come into my parlour, said the spider to the fly...
Ian Jackson
2017-12-08 08:28:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by JNugent
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an
event such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of
course, they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful,
accurate, and reliable they are will be another question. But Davis
has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before
the referendum.
Says whom?
Sez I. [It's 'who', BTW.]
Post by JNugent
Nothing of the sort was done before the 1975 referendum.
So?
Post by JNugent
Post by Ian Jackson
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU
would be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the
conclusion Theresa May came to), the obvious thing to do is to call a
halt to the proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a
re-think about what really is in our best interests.
Come into my parlour, said the spider to the fly...
I don't see the relevance.
--
Ian
JNugent
2017-12-08 13:24:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an
event  such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of
course, they  have done impact analysis.....how meaningful,
accurate, and reliable  they are will be another question. But
Davis has been a twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
 The impact assessment should have been done and made public before
the  referendum.
Says whom?
Sez I. [It's 'who', BTW.]
So no-one of any importance or relevance.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Nothing of the sort was done before the 1975 referendum.
So?
So there is no precedent for what you ask, but plenty of precedent for
what actually happened.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Nevertheless, even at this stage, if it showed that leaving the EU
would  be bad for the UK (which, before the referendum, is the
conclusion  Theresa May came to), the obvious thing to do is to call
a halt to the  proceedings (possibly only temporarily), and have a
re-think about what  really is in our best interests.
Come into my parlour, said the spider to the fly...
I don't see the relevance.
Of course you don't.
James Hammerton
2017-12-09 11:22:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by JNugent
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an
event such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of
course, they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate,
and reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a
twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before the
referendum.
Says whom?
Nothing of the sort was done before the 1975 referendum.
Was anything of the sort done before we actually joined the EEC in 1973?

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
MM
2017-12-11 08:13:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 11:22:55 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by JNugent
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by JNugent
Post by Mark, Devon
A government that claims to have not done impact analysis on an
event such as Brexit is a government of unimaginable chaos! Of
course, they have done impact analysis.....how meaningful, accurate,
and reliable they are will be another question. But Davis has been a
twaddle-head.
What difference would it make?
We are not considering whether to leave the EU.
The decision to leave has *already* been made.
The impact assessment should have been done and made public before the
referendum.
Says whom?
Nothing of the sort was done before the 1975 referendum.
Was anything of the sort done before we actually joined the EEC in 1973?
Completely different era. There was no internet. People still retained
a sense of deference towards government and the authorities. There
were many more mass circulation newspapers giving different opinions.

The governments since the war would have kept a close eye on what was
happening in Europe and they would have known at any time what the
ramifications might be for Britain becoming part of the general trend
towards political and economic unification for the sake of peace. On
the other hand, we were still in full empire mode, despite losing
India. That mode continued for several decades more, and still
persists to day in some quarters.

MM
Loading...