Writing in that repository of all left wing and globalist idiocies The Guardian, writer Amelia Hill makes the nonsensical assertion UK cannot simply trade on WTO terms after no-deal Brexit, offering only the opinions of left wing and globalist ‘experts’ in support of her case. Here’s a sample:
The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.
The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU. Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true, Hill claims
“No deal means leaving with nothing, Sir Ivan Rogers former UK Premanent Representative to the the European Institute said in a lecture that the anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiteers agree it could be decades.”
Nobody involved with The Daily Stirrer has seen or heard any Brexiteers hysterical predictions of a thirty years recession, but Remainers are not known for their honesty or level headedness. However Hill was not done with the anti – Brexit hyperbole.
The government cannot simply cut and paste the 120,000 EU statutes into UK law and then make changes to them gradually, she said. “The UK will need to set up new enforcement bodies and transfer new powers to regulators to create our own domestic regimes,” she said.
She’s talking through her posterior orifice again. Those laws are alread in British law and can be undone gradually. That has already been clarified by constitutional lawyers.
Effects Felt for 30 Years
Hill made five references to Anneli Howard, whose CV describes her as a leading junior lawyer in telecommunications law, in the article but the alleged expert’s professional status as a junior lawyer hardly qualifies her opinion as authoritative.
Hill’s moans about a 1930s recession and claims even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades, in the same paragraph. Again she does not name these Brexiteers. In an linked-to article by The Guardian, titled: Two, 50 or 100 years: when do leavers think Brexit will pay off? writer Emine Saner employs that old trick of a very misleading headline.
This is what Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Brexiteer alluded to actually said: “We won’t know the full economic consequences for a very long time.” That is quite accurate. Benefits accrue every year.
Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said “There is no reason why many of these cannot be achieved within two years.”
Hill managed to take an already purposely-overhyped headline title and turn it into a complete fabricated lie, fake news that links recessions to a 30-year wait for the full benefits to be known.
After 16 paragraphs of total scaremongering and attempted scattering of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, Hill mentions the counter-claims.
Economists for Free Trade, a group with links to Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Davis, claims there is “nothing to fear” from leaving the EU without reaching an agreement.
David Collins, a professor of international economic law at City University of London, said: “The UK can trade quite easily on an uncertified schedule.”
However, Collins conceded that an uncertified schedule “might be an indication of that complaining member’s intention to initiate a dispute against the member,” and that “the WTO dispute settlement process can take several years to resolve”.
Thus two correctly cited experts say no problem. Two law experts, not economic experts makes the opposing claim.
Collins, an international economics professor, is certainly correct, but notice the slant of the article and the title.
The idea of a 30-year recession wins first prize for the most stupid statement ever about Brexit, and that is saying quite a lot.
Hill deserves an award herself (for bad journalism of fake news maybe,) for producing an absurd article full of politically biased nonsense, without even properly referencing who one her alleged “experts” is.
The Guardian frequently presents fake news articles with left-wing progressive and anti – Brexit slants. Hill and Saner provide today’s examples.
As for that predicted 30-year recession:
Short-term, the EU will get hit much harder than the UK. Germany will get hit the hardest. At that point the EU, if it survives, will be ready for serious trade agreement negotiations with the UK.