Brexit , the negatives

Kosovo

Well-known member
Do any of you think we would’ve had over 31m first doses by now if we were still in the EU. We got our orders in early and started the rollout earlier. Maybe we could’ve done all that when still in the EU but personally I don’t think we would’ve.
 
Last edited:

FatCat

Well-known member
It isn't though. Some EU countries exercised their sovereignty and ordered more or different vaccines than what the EU was recommending. What we did is entirely unconnected to Brexit and we could have done exactly the same were we in the EU.
There is no way of proving that ST - moreover we would likely have been involved in some joint enterprise with the EU. Furthermore the recent situation with the EU shortages would not have been allowed. You spend your FMTTM life demanding benefits of brexit, admittedly there doesn’t seem many at this stage but when you are given one have the good grace to accept it.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
There is no way of proving that ST - moreover we would likely have been involved in some joint enterprise with the EU. Furthermore the recent situation with the EU shortages would not have been allowed. You spend your FMTTM life demanding benefits of brexit, admittedly there doesn’t seem many at this stage but when you are given one have the good grace to accept it.
There's no way of disproving it either. Thing is we carried out the vaccine rollout we did, explain to me what in the EU rules would have prevented us doing exactly the same thing had we been members. We had sovereignty and could have done exactly as we have down so there is no reason to assume we would have done things differently unless it wasn't possible. It was possible though
 

Adi_Dem

Well-known member
There is no way of proving that ST - moreover we would likely have been involved in some joint enterprise with the EU. Furthermore the recent situation with the EU shortages would not have been allowed. You spend your FMTTM life demanding benefits of brexit, admittedly there doesn’t seem many at this stage but when you are given one have the good grace to accept it.

When we are I’m sure we will. This simply isn’t one though. What we may or may not have done is pure conjecture and as you’ve conceded impossible to prove.

There is however one indisputable fact though: our vaccine policy and roll out was carried out whilst we were effectively a member of the EU. It is really simple: we did something we could have done as an EU member. It therefore cannot be a benefit of Brexit. That’s just very basic logic.
 

NYboro

Well-known member
Do any of you think we would’ve had over 31m first doses by now if we were still in the EU. We got our orders in early and started the rollout earlier. Maybe we could’ve done all that when still in the EU but personally I don’t think we would’ve.
Yes. You don't?
 

jam69

Well-known member
Do any of you think we would’ve had over 31m first doses by now if we were still in the EU. We got our orders in early and started the rollout earlier. Maybe we could’ve done all that when still in the EU but personally I don’t think we would’ve.
Yes, why wouldn't we if we thought it was the right thing to do ,?
 

Lefty

Well-known member
Do any of you think we would’ve had over 31m first doses by now if we were still in the EU.

We can't know for sure of course. Some people have answered the question 'could we have done exactly what we have done now while still part of the EU?'

I'm happy to accept their answer of 'yes' to that.

The relevant question though is 'would we'. This requires a probability assessment.

The degree of certainty they have when answering 'yes' to that dumbfounds me and to me betrays a level of bias they probably don't realise has crept in, but really should be careful of. It is the sort of blinding level of bias Remainers see in Brexiters all the time.
 

Lefty

Well-known member
Because the Tories are useless and only by trying to get one over the EU they somehow may have got this right.

I think there is quite a lot in this.

Overall, our covid response has been pretty mixed and I see repercussions of Brexit throughout.


Throughout it there has been nationalism within the UK and it has been seen as a competition with the EU to show we are better. Some, much, much less mind you, has come in the other direction.

The biggest repercussion of Brexit has been the people it has put in power. Here we have in charge a homogeneous group of incompetent liars, people who think they know best and will ignore opinions, even majority expert opinion, when it contradicts a hunch or ideology of their own. Ingrained throughout their childhood and education, it was reinforced by the referendum and the 2019 election. It led to poor decision after poor decision and disastrous outcomes in terms of cases and deaths. Then, like a gambler backing wrong horse after wrong horse, unable to walk away, everything got lumped on the vaccine roll out to avoid an irrevocable break up with the voters in the same way everything would be lumped on the last race of the day in the hope they had something to put back in the pot before the wife noticed too much had gone out of the coffers.
 

Adi_Dem

Well-known member
The relevant question though is 'would we'. This requires a probability assessment.

I don’t see how that is the relevant question. This has been put forward with certainty that it is a Brexit benefit. The only thing that is certain is that we could have done exactly what we did as a full member of the EU. On that basis it simply cannot follow that this was a benefit of Brexit as to draw that conclusion requires us to be certain as to what would have happened in an alternate universe which, at best, is conjecture. By way of analogy, had we started this year by implementing the precise controls over EU immigration that we have always had the right to would that have been a benefit of Brexit? Of course not.
 

Ziggy

Well-known member
“While members of the EU of course the United Kingdom remained sovereign. It was just sometimes it didn’t ‘FEEL’ like it”
T May.
 

HolgateCorner

Well-known member
I think there is quite a lot in this.

Overall, our covid response has been pretty mixed and I see repercussions of Brexit throughout.


Throughout it there has been nationalism within the UK and it has been seen as a competition with the EU to show we are better. Some, much, much less mind you, has come in the other direction.

The biggest repercussion of Brexit has been the people it has put in power. Here we have in charge a homogeneous group of incompetent liars, people who think they know best and will ignore opinions, even majority expert opinion, when it contradicts a hunch or ideology of their own. Ingrained throughout their childhood and education, it was reinforced by the referendum and the 2019 election. It led to poor decision after poor decision and disastrous outcomes in terms of cases and deaths. Then, like a gambler backing wrong horse after wrong horse, unable to walk away, everything got lumped on the vaccine roll out to avoid an irrevocable break up with the voters in the same way everything would be lumped on the last race of the day in the hope they had something to put back in the pot before the wife noticed too much had gone out of the coffers.
I’m not convinced they care at all what the wife thinks...
 

Lefty

Well-known member
I don’t see how that is the relevant question. This has been put forward with certainty that it is a Brexit benefit. The only thing that is certain is that we could have done exactly what we did as a full member of the EU. On that basis it simply cannot follow that this was a benefit of Brexit as to draw that conclusion requires us to be certain as to what would have happened in an alternate universe which, at best, is conjecture. By way of analogy, had we started this year by implementing the precise controls over EU immigration that we have always had the right to would that have been a benefit of Brexit? Of course not.

It is relevant because the answer to the question 'could' we have acted the same way is not the same as whether we must have acted the same way. You accept there have been differing responses by the EU and ourselves, so it is possible we could have chosen a different response. This means each can be assigned a probability.

The variable is Brexit even if for no other reason than had Leave not won, it would have been a more europhile Cameron cabinet in charge in March-May 2020, possibly longer, possibly a government of national unity, or a new inexperienced PM. I suggest any of those scenario's make it more likely we would have taken the safer route of falling in to line with the 'wisdom' of the crowd, rather than a bolder more independent strategy born out of desperation. I don't know how much we would have influenced the EU from within to adopt a different strategy, but I think it very likely that once a strategy had been agreed, we would have gone with it.
 

bear66

Well-known member
It is relevant because the answer to the question 'could' we have acted the same way is not the same as whether we must have acted the same way. You accept there have been differing responses by the EU and ourselves, so it is possible we could have chosen a different response. This means each can be assigned a probability.

The variable is Brexit even if for no other reason than had Leave not won, it would have been a more europhile Cameron cabinet in charge in March-May 2020, possibly longer, possibly a government of national unity, or a new inexperienced PM. I suggest any of those scenario's make it more likely we would have taken the safer route of falling in to line with the 'wisdom' of the crowd, rather than a bolder more independent strategy born out of desperation. I don't know how much we would have influenced the EU from within to adopt a different strategy, but I think it very likely that once a strategy had been agreed, we would have gone with it.
Germany bought their own supply of vaccine outside the EU contract. A sovereign country just as we were in the EU.
 

Adi_Dem

Well-known member
It is relevant because the answer to the question 'could' we have acted the same way is not the same as whether we must have acted the same way. You accept there have been differing responses by the EU and ourselves, so it is possible we could have chosen a different response. This means each can be assigned a probability.

The variable is Brexit even if for no other reason than had Leave not won, it would have been a more europhile Cameron cabinet in charge in March-May 2020, possibly longer, possibly a government of national unity, or a new inexperienced PM. I suggest any of those scenario's make it more likely we would have taken the safer route of falling in to line with the 'wisdom' of the crowd, rather than a bolder more independent strategy born out of desperation. I don't know how much we would have influenced the EU from within to adopt a different strategy, but I think it very likely that once a strategy had been agreed, we would have gone with it.

And I still don’t think that is relevant. Boiled down the argument remains that something we were entitled to do as a member of the EU is a benefit of not being in the EU. My analogy refers. It’s illogical and cannot be characterised in that way ie this thing we were always entitled to do is a benefit of not being a member especially given that current member did deviate from the ‘party line’ as it were. It’s simply not a benefit of Brexit. Tenuous and a massive straw clutch.
 

Lefty

Well-known member
And I still don’t think that is relevant. Boiled down the argument remains that something we were entitled to do as a member of the EU is a benefit of not being in the EU. My analogy refers. It’s illogical and cannot be characterised in that way ie this thing we were always entitled to do is a benefit of not being a member especially given that current member did deviate from the ‘party line’ as it were. It’s simply not a benefit of Brexit. Tenuous and a massive straw clutch.

Don't boil it down, then. Taking things to a logical conclusion isn't always the right thing to do, it goes further than an opposing position is intended.

Germany bought their own supply of vaccine outside the EU contract. A sovereign country just as we were in the EU.

This 👆 is the better argument.

I think this 👇, from a recent interview with UK Vaccine supremo Kate Bingham in the FT, is relevant. Warning, you won't like it. Neither did I. It has taken some effort to fight a massive Remainer instinct of mine not to ignore it. The question is, can you?

EyDCdeKXIAMsRS7.jpg

Brexit definitely was relevant to us not joining the EU vaccine procurement scheme. The question is whether, had we not left, having that seat at the table and the other flexibility would have led us to do everything as successfully as now. Theoretically it could have, realistically, I don't think it would.
 
Last edited:

Trug

Well-known member
Don't boil it down, then. Taking things to a logical conclusion isn't always the right thing to do, it goes further than an opposing position is intended.



This 👆 is the better argument.

I think this 👇, from a recent interview with UK Vaccine supremo Kate Bingham in the FT, is relevant. Warning, you won't like it. Neither did I. It has taken some effort to fight a massive Remainer instinct of mine not to ignore it. The question is, can you?

View attachment 16567

Brexit definitely was relevant to us not joining the EU vaccine procurement scheme. The question is whether, had we not left, whether having that seat at the table and the other flexibility would have led us to do everything as successfully as now. Theoretically it could have, realistically, I don't think it would.
Yes but 120,000 deaths later.......................... What were the EU doing that we weren't?-
 
Top
X