Various bits re Brexit and Economics

Started by seafoid, February 26, 2019, 11:07:01 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

seafoid

https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/04/james-kanagasooriam-the-left-right-age-gap-is-even-worse-for-the-conservatives-than-you-think.html

It might not feel like it this week, but the Conservatives' problem with younger voters is a bigger problem for them than Brexit. This morning, Onward publishes a big new report on the age gap in British politics – now the most important indicator of vote intention. The stark reality in the data is that the Conservative Party's age curve is not only extreme – you now need to be 51 years old before you become more likely to vote Conservative than Labour – but worse than the age curve for Leave. This is often missed because support for Leave is higher amongst older voters than voting Conservative.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

haranguerer

In the graphics I've seen shared re this and the accompanying commentary, there seems to be a notion that the future will see a much more left wing slant. Fact is, every generation has been like that, as people age they move to the right. Also, longer life expectancy with every generation is more likely to mean it has even less effect. The only things that will really make a difference is young people voting in the same numbers as older people, and whether the birth rate continues to increase or not.

Jell 0 Biafra

Quote from: haranguerer on April 09, 2019, 08:51:50 AM
In the graphics I've seen shared re this and the accompanying commentary, there seems to be a notion that the future will see a much more left wing slant. Fact is, every generation has been like that, as people age they move to the right. Also, longer life expectancy with every generation is more likely to mean it has even less effect. The only things that will really make a difference is young people voting in the same numbers as older people, and whether the birth rate continues to increase or not.

People say this a lot, but is it actually a fact?

haranguerer

#78
It can't be a fact as it predicts future behaviour, but there is certainly a lot of evidence that it has been the case and will continue to be for some time. The below attempts to isolate the effect of age v later generations being more socially aware.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/03/do-we-become-more-conservative-with-age-young-old-politics

seafoid

https://www.ft.com/content/683d5212-5ad3-11e9-9dde-7aedca0a081a

   Britain and EU wrestle with Boris Johnson question
      
               Cross-party talks and bloc focus on proofing deal against hard-Brexit government
Deep disdain for Boris Johnson among many European governmentswhich see him as leader of a Brexit campaign built on false promises, is offset by growing impatience with Theresa  May's government © PA
Sebastian Payne in London and Alex Barker in Brussels
In London and Brussels, in talks that could determine Britain's future, negotiators are homing in on a common goal: how to rein in the actions of a future pro-hard Brexit British government.The focus in discussions between the UK's Conservative and Labour parties is on providing assurances that a new Tory prime minister does not rip up any cross-party accord on future relations with the EU.Diplomats in Brussels are concerned with a similar issue, as the EU's 27 other member states consider Britain's request to delay its departure from the bloc. A big preoccupation ahead of a crucial summit on Wednesday is how to prevent a more Eurosceptic UK government from disrupting the bloc's affairs from within.Both sets of concerns are personified by one politician in particular: Boris Johnson, the former UK foreign secretary who led the triumphant Leave campaign in the 2016 EU referendum and who hopes to succeed Theresa May as prime minister in the near future.Labour is worried that a prime minister Johnson could discard any agreement by Mrs May that commits the UK to closer post-Brexit relations with the EU than the UK government currently seeks. Other EU governments — notably France — fret that if the UK is granted a lengthy delay to its Brexit date, the country could wreak havoc with decisions in the European Commission, the European Council of member states and the European Parliament, particularly if a full-blooded Eurosceptic is in Downing Street.But the problem for the Labour-Conservative talks, perhaps also for the deliberations in Brussels, is that restricting the conduct of a future British government is far more easily said than done, particularly if the UK decides to go down a more antagonistic path."The idea of a 'Boris lock' is ridiculous," said a senior Conservative MP. "Parliament can't bind its successors, no matter what the prime minister might agree with Labour or the EU."
The British government cannot give the EU a nod and a wink to promise good behaviour . . . If we are stuck in we must use the remaining powers we have to be difficult
Labour remains agitated about Mr Johnson as Westminster is absorbed by speculation that Mrs May's last days as prime minister are approaching.Although Mrs May has said she would only resign once her Brexit deal is passed by parliament, most Conservative MPs believe she will leave office in the autumn. Others believe she will have been pushed out by the summerMr Johnson is the favoured candidate of the party's grassroots, according to surveys by the ConservativeHome website. He is also the favourite in the betting markets — followed by former Brexit secretary Dominic Raab and environment secretary Michael Gove. All three are strong Brexit proponents, and Mr Johnson and Mr Raab are fierce critics of Mrs May's exit deal with the EU, although they voted for it in the House of Commons at the third time of asking. Hence Labour's fear that, without strong guarantees, any deal with Mrs May might fail to last out the year.While Labour's negotiating team acknowledges that a future parliament could renegotiate any agreement, it wishes to ensure that the next Conservative prime minister cannot change the deal before an election.
Rebecca Long-Bailey, Labour's spokesperson on business, told the BBC at the weekend that any deal with the Conservatives must be "entrenched so that a future Conservative leader wouldn't be able to rip up the changes that have been agreed": in other words, "Boris-proofed". John McDonnell, Labour's shadow chancellor, added on Tuesday that any protections to stop a deal being unpicked also had to be in a treaty. "It's more than it being in legislation, it's about the agreement we have with the EU," he said.Meanwhile there is deep disdain for Mr Johnson among many European governments, which see him as the wayward leader of a Brexit campaign built on false promises. But that is offset by growing impatience with Mrs May's government, which lacks the authority in Westminster to see through on agreements made in Brussels. "Give us anyone who has a majority," said one senior EU diplomat, who hoped for a quick resolution to the Brexit saga, one way or another. The EU has moved to shield itself against a change of guard in London by making clear that the withdrawal agreement negotiated with Mrs May is now in effect untouchable, regardless of who is in Downing Street.
Fear over a "rogue" Brexiter government subverting EU business has played a big role in raising concerns about the costs to the EU of approving a long delay to Britain's departure date. Eurosceptic MPs have already urged the UK to act as a wrecker from within, especially if restrictions are attached to a Brexit delay.At a meeting of Europe ministers on Tuesday, Greece noted that, while no deal might be damaging, it might be no worse than "being held hostage" to a war within the Tory party while Britain remained a member state. One EU diplomat suggested that the terms of an extension also needed to be "Bojo proof" — to allow the bloc to cut short UK membership if Mr Johnson "or anyone irresponsible is prime minister one day and threatens to wreak havoc within the EU". Senior French officials have privately suggested review clauses — potentially at intervals of two or three months.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

seafoid

Quote from: haranguerer on April 10, 2019, 08:16:53 AM
It can't be a fact as it predicts future behaviour, but there is certainly a lot of evidence that it has been the case and will continue to be for some time. The below attempts to isolate the effect of age v later generations being more socially aware.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/03/do-we-become-more-conservative-with-age-young-old-politics
Usually that is reliable but I think the Tories are looking like they are going to collapse. People are not happy. It reminds me of FF in 2010.
Parties can collapse too. It also happened to the SDLP
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

seafoid

"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

Aaron Boone


Jell 0 Biafra

Quote from: haranguerer on April 10, 2019, 08:16:53 AM
It can't be a fact as it predicts future behaviour, but there is certainly a lot of evidence that it has been the case and will continue to be for some time. The below attempts to isolate the effect of age v later generations being more socially aware.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/03/do-we-become-more-conservative-with-age-young-old-politics

I was asking whether it was factual that there is a historical tendency for voters to vote more conservatively as they age.  Thanks for the link.  Very interesting.

armaghniac

If at first you don't succeed, then goto Plan B

seafoid

https://www.ft.com/content/c68a235e-5ba5-11e9-939a-341f5ada9d40

Britain can now change its mind about Brexit
Macron's emergence as a latter-day de Gaulle should not stop a second referendum

Philip Stephens

The workaday leader fashions every sound bite to immediate advantage. Seizing the microphone is what matters. The statesman plays a longer game. The strategic gain often lies in a quiet show of generosity. French president Emmanuel Macron by a margin is Europe's most interesting politician. He has some way to go before claiming statesmanship.Mr Macron casts himself a leader of Europeans. British Europeans battling to overturn Brexit are apparently excluded from this definition. Much as the president styles himself as General de Gaulle, he was never going to wield the veto against perfidious Albion at this week's Brussels summit. Instead of insisting an Article 50 extension be limited to six months, he would have done better to have been magnanimous. As it was, Germany's Angela Merkel and Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, were the grown-ups.It is self-evident that the EU owes Britain nothing.
The narrow opportunism that led the then prime minister David Cameron to call the Brexit referendum was arrogantly blind to the possible consequences. The failure of Theresa May's government to win domestic support for her half-baked Brexit plan has imposed another unreasonable cost. Throw in former foreign secretary Boris Johnson's Dad's Army of little Englanders, forever re-fighting the second world war, and you see why Europe's reservoir of goodwill has drained.
Exasperation is not a strategy, even when it is justified. Brexiters may be blind to the facts of geography, economics and geopolitical interest, but these realities demand that Britain and its neighbours eventually find a new point of co-operative balance. Expelling the Brits now would needlessly sour relations for years to come. It would also impose immediate costs on other EU members such as Ireland, Belgium and the Netherlands. Mr Tusk put it well: "We should treat the UK with the highest respect, as we want to remain friends and close partners, and as we will still need to agree on our future relations."Mr Macron has big bold ideas for the EU27. He wants an economic union to buttress the single currency, an EU-wide immigration and asylum policy and common European defence. These are laudable aims. It is more than faintly absurd, however, to claim that his grand plan is a hostage to Brexit. Berlin's objections to debt mutualisation and joint defence exports are unconnected to the shenanigans at Westminster.A politician looking to claim leadership beyond France might also have noticed — as did Mr Tusk — the small shaft of light that has lately pierced the Stygian gloom at Westminster. For the first time since its (twice-vetoed) applications to join the common market during the 1960s, Britain has a pro-European movement. Nostalgists and nativists on the reactionary right face real opposition from those who see themselves as Europeans as well as Brits.
Last month hundreds of thousands — the organisers say a million — of British citizens gathered in London to say they want to hold on to their citizenship of Europe. At a minimum they want a second referendum before Britain leaves the EU. The 6m people who have signed an official petition have gone further — they are calling for the straightforward revocation of Article 50 so that Britain can stay in the union.Elections for the European Parliament offer these pro-Europeans an opportunity to solidify rising support for an entirely fresh assessment. If the past two miserable years have served any purpose it has been to expose the fraudulent choice presented in 2016. The cake-and-eat-it fantasies of Mr Johnson and we-hold-all-the-cards delusions of cabinet Brexiters have turned to dust. The trade-off between theoretical sovereignty and real jobs has been exposed. The billions promised for the National Health Service have turned into a massive exit bill. Xenophobic scaremongering about migrants has been shown to be just that. The economic costs of Brexit are already obvious in slower growth and tumbling investment. Big overseas investors make no secret of the threat to jobs.
Anyone following the tortuous and thus far inconclusive debates in parliament can see they were offered a wholly false prospectus by the Leavers.Mrs May does not admit this, of course. She still wants to get her deal through parliament before calling an end to her dismal premiership. Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, is concerned only with the electoral impact of any cross-party deal to break the parliamentary deadlock.Extra time, however, presents parliament — and the country — with an opportunity. Britain can change its mind about Brexit. MPs can and should agree to put any proposed settlement with the EU27 to a confirmatory referendum. The country could then be presented with the vote it was denied in 2016 — a choice between Remain and the best deal that parliament considers available to Britain outside the union.The trade-offs between prosperity and security and notional sovereignty would be there for all to see. The Kamikaze Brexiters who complain this would flout what they call "the will of the people" mistake democracy for the majoritarianism beloved of despots and demagogues. True democracy embeds the right of citizens to change their minds. As for Mr Macron, he would surely join Ms Merkel and Mr Tusk in applauding a victory for Britain's Europeans.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

seafoid

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/this-will-be-the-year-of-three-prime-ministers

It is highly likely that we shall have three prime ministers this year, and that by the end of it the Conservative Party as we've known it will have ceased to exist. It is also likely that by year's-end we shall have either revoked our notification to leave the European Union or committed ourselves to a fresh referendum. None of these outcomes is certain but each is more likely than not.

I reach what may sound like three wild conclusions by the application of logic to the situation we're now in. When logic produces weird predictions they should face rigorous scrutiny; so let me set out my reasoning.

I start from three premises. First, a clear majority of this (or probably the next) House of Commons is resolved to avoid a no-deal Brexit.

Second, no majority can be found for any deal that leaves Britain as "rule-taker, not rule-maker". Jacob Rees-Mogg calls this "vassalage"; I call it satellite status; others call it Brino (Brexit in name only). All agree, though, that by comparison with our present full membership of the EU, Brino offers many disadvantages and no advantage other than greater control over immigration, an issue of diminishing salience. The argument for Theresa May's deal is about the will of the British people, not about the merits of the deal itself, for which no enthusiasm can be found in any quarter.

Third, a substantial minority of the parliamentary Conservative Party and the overwhelming majority of its grassroots members are opposed to anything other than a total "clean" exit from the EU, and are ready to break the government on the issue.


Such, then, are my three premises: no no-deal exit; no satellite status; no alternative to Tory disunity.

A (probably) dreadful result in next Thursday's local elections will be followed (assuming Mrs May cannot reach any EU withdrawal deal with Jeremy Corbyn that her own MPs could accept) by the Tories going through with a European parliamentary election they don't want, to an institution they're pledged to get us out of. This is grotesque, as the Electoral Commission pointed out yesterday.

In such an election the Tories face, expect and deserve a massive bloody nose and they'll get it. Many, perhaps most, Tory MPs know that the party has let the country down and are profoundly embarrassed, braced for the punch they know they've invited: third place at best, with Conservative MEPs down from 18 to single figures.

Can Mrs May survive that? The safest prediction about her has always been that she'll carry on, but this time? Really? And with the party reeling, Nigel Farage crowing, a paralysed prime minister and her impotent administration floundering, cabinet discipline in tatters and a Brexit cliff edge approaching, the men (and women) in suits must surely come for her.

So: a leadership election before the autumn. Who would make it through the MPs' hustings and on to the shortlist of two? Of course the Tories' best hope of survival would be with a cleanskin: someone youngish, perhaps new to the public, as-yet untarnished and not too ideological, because voters would want to feel the party had turned a page.

Hard owever, I expect the candidates will be the usual suspects. Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt: hooligan versus hologram. Dominic Raab: rabid with an extra a. Sajid Javid: a too-eager Uncle Fester. Michael Gove: Professor Branestawm . . . oh dear, it will probably be Boris, distrusted as he is by colleagues, and perhaps Hunt or Gove. But Mr Hunt is a deserter from Remain and deserters are not loved by those they join or those they leave. Mr Gove, head and shoulders above the others intellectually, will struggle with the Tory rank and file.

I never expected to write this, but Mr Johnson has a good chance with the Tories' tiny, elderly selectorate. And if he wins he would have to call an immediate general election because a dozen or more of his outraged colleagues would resign the Tory whip, leaving him unable to assemble a working Commons majority. Mr Johnson would then lose the general election because he's a shambles. His character, reputation and party would be torn apart during the campaign. Floating voters would want a good reason to like the Tories better than they did in 2017. I rest my case.

So, Mr Corbyn would become prime minister but probably without a working majority; the Brexit Party would still be strutting; the Tories would be broken and bleeding; and the Brexit deadline of October 31 would be thundering down the track towards us. What, by then, are we hearing from France and Germany? "Aw, shucks, give them a few months more?" I don't think so.

Did President Macron ever really mean to push through his "revoke Article 50, have a second referendum or get out" ultimatum to Mrs May last month? I doubt it. He was putting down a marker of France's intentions. Assuming we don't get our act together by the end of October, we'll be facing no-deal or asking for another extension. France, which has given everyone fair warning, would then bring Germany on board and confront us with revoke, referendum or get out. Whatever government we have by then, parliament's answer would be the first or second option, and not the third. I believe Paris and Berlin will gamble on that and they'll be proved right.

By Christmas, then, we could be on our third prime minister this year and still be in the EU. And the Tory party? The European Research Group's Jacob Rees-Mogg (say), Steve Baker and Mark Francois are not in any meaningful way in the same party as liberal, pro-European centrists like (say) Alistair Burt, David Lidington, Sir Alan Duncan or Amber Rudd.

Something has to give. There was a time when a strong prime minister could have made an example of a couple of Brexiteer renegades by withdrawing the whip and scaring their comrades back into the fold but it's too late for that; there are just too many of them.

Nor are they unrepresentative of millions of voters: about 20 per cent of the electorate. Britain (or England, anyway) needs a nationalist, nativist, reactionary party to represent these voters. So I would like to see Mr Farage's new Brexit Party do well enough, and promise well enough, to attract a sizeable number of defectors from the Conservative Party. Otherwise it's the moderate, liberal, 21st-century generation Conservatives who will have to start quitting and regrouping.

How, with whom, and as what, it is too early to say. One thing, however, it is not too early to say. The rabble in government who now call themselves the Tories are over, and must be put out of their misery.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

seafoid

Independent News & Media  was sold for 10.5 cent per share.
The shares were worth almost 4 euro in 2008

https://www.inmplc.com/investor-relations/share-price-information

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/mediahuis-to-buy-independent-news-media-for-145-6m-1.3876014

Mediahuis to buy Independent News & Media for €145.6m

INM says shareholders would be entitled to receive 10.5 cent in cash for each of its shares



Eoin Burke-Kennedy
Belgian media group Mediahuis has agreed to buy Independent News and Media (INM) for €145.6 million.

Under the terms of the deal, announced this morning, INM said shareholders will be entitled to receive 10.5 cent in cash for each of its shares.

The deal is conditional on INM's largest shareholders, Denis O'Brien and Dermot Desmond, committing to the terms by 5pm today. Between them, they hold just under 45 per cent of the group's shareholding.

The acquisition represents a premium of approximately of 44 per cent on INM's closing share price of 7.28 cent on April 3rd.

"Mediahuis and Independent News & Media are pleased to announce that they have reached agreement on the terms of a cash offer by Mediahuis, unanimously recommended by the board of INM, pursuant to which Mediahuis will acquire the entire issued and to be issued share capital of INM," the companies said in a joint statement ahead of INM's annual general meeting this morning.

INM, Ireland's largest newspaper group, publishes the Irish Independent, Sunday Independent, Sunday World, the Herald, Belfast Telegraph and several regional newspapers.

Founded in 2013, Mediahuis is a private European media group with a strong portfolio of news media and digital brands. Its titles include De Telegraaf and NRC Handelsblad in the Netherlands and De Standaard and Het Nieuwsblad in Belgium.

It has grown rapidly through acquisitions to become a leading media player in Belgium and the Netherlands and currently employs more than 3,200 people. Last year it reported a turnover of €819 million.

INM chairman Murdoch MacLennan said: "We are pleased to be announcing this transaction today and believe it represents an excellent outcome for both the company and its shareholders.

"The offer from Mediahuis represents a compelling opportunity for shareholders to realise cash for their shareholding in INM, at a price which fairly reflects the company's performance and standalone prospects.


"INM has a proud and illustrious history stretching back to the start of the twentieth century and the INM board believes that this offer from Mediahuis, if approved, will herald an exciting new chapter for our employees, readership and customers," he said.

INM had hired US investment bank Lazard to advise it on a potential sale for the company, which had attracted the interest of at least two unnamed potential bidders, according to reports.
"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU

Rossfan

Davy's given us a dream to cling to
We're going to bring home the SAM

seafoid

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/cliff-taylor-bombardier-destroys-bluster-of-brexiteers-1.3880043

Cliff Taylor: Bombardier destroys bluster of Brexiteers
Fantasy world meets reality of a UK industry deeply embedded in EU economy
Sat, May 4, 2019, 04:00

Cliff Taylor

   
 


Bombardier has put its Belfast plant up for sale, in the process putting a question mark against the 3,600 jobs in the North's largest private-sector employer. It is difficult to know the extent to which Brexit influenced the Bombardier decision – the company said it didn't. But it is certainly a vital factor in the efforts to find a new owner.
Airbus, the company's main customer and one of only a few prospective buyers, has warned repeatedly about the risks of a no-deal Brexit and how it would force the company to make decisions to cut future investment in the UK.
Look at the market for aircraft parts and maintenance and you realise, yet again, the nonsense surrounding the free-trade delusions of the Brexiteers. Their case is that the UK can set its own standards and rules after Brexit and sail off to do profitable trade deals around the world. While still retaining access to EU markets.
This all takes place in the EU single market and so it is seamless – no bureaucracy and no delays. The Beluga opens its giant snout, and the wings enter in Wales and exit in France
The aviation industry shows how this is simply impossible. It is where the fantasy world of the Brexiteers meets the reality of a big UK industry deeply embedded in the EU economy and its regulatory processes and operating freely across Borders. It is where bluff and bluster meets thousands of pages of regulation, years of custom and practice and a web of international research funding and co-operation. And there is only one winner.
An Airbus A300-600ST, known as the Beluga – after the whale – lands regularly at the company's plant in Broughton in north Wales to bring wings and other components manufactured there to its base in Toulouse. This all takes place in the EU single market and so it is seamless – no bureaucracy and no delays. The Beluga opens its giant snout, and the wings enter in Wales and exit in France.

Frictionless trade
After Brexit, no-one knows whether such frictionless trade can continue.If the UK leaves under a withdrawal agreement, then it will continue up to the end of 2020 at least. If the UK crashes out in a no-deal, the indications are that the EU may give a nine month leeway in terms of regulatory compliance – meaning it will continue to accept UK regulation in some areas for a period.
•   Cliff Taylor: the notion of 'pensions parity' in the public service is irresponsible
•   What next as Ireland's tax deal for investors runs out of road?
•   Why is Ireland such an expensive place to live?
Big manufacturers have been forced to apply for EU regulation and will in some cases require new EU bases. And as well as this uncertainty, there is the risk of new bureaucracy and delays.
Last year Airbus took a majority stake in the Bombardier C-series aircraft, for which the plant in Belfast manufactures wings using an advanced technology. It was seen as good news for Belfast. But while Airbus has acknowledged the Belfast plant as a " key supplier", it is not clear yet whether it will step in and seek to buy the plant.
This will all depend on its post-Brexit strategy for the UK. And with the risk of a no-deal Brexit in the autumn still very much on the table, huge uncertainty remains about the terms on which the UK industry will trade with the EU, the availability of future EU research funding and how the industry will be regulated.The aviation parts industry has its own specific peculiarities, but the story is repeated across the board. You can't put Humpty Dumpty together again after a no-deal Brexit.
Let's hope the Bombardier story works out and a buyer is found, for the sake of Belfast, the direct employees and those working in supply industries across the island. Some clarity on the UK's exit plan would help, of course, but this still looks elusive, with mixed signals emerging from talks between the Conservatives and Labour to try to find a way forward. And even if a deal does emerge, whether it could get support in the House of Commons remains open to question. More time wasted over the summer and a fresh panic ahead of another deadline at the end of October remains a real possibility.
EU single market
We've all learned a lot about borders as Brexit has rolled on. Trade experts and businesses themselves have been shouting since the Brexit referendum about just how complicated and deep the EU single market is – and how breaking the links even over a prolonged period will be costly and difficult. Trying to reintroduce trade borders overnight would be lunacy.
What has happened in aviation and aerospace is instructive. The UK has indicated that post-Brexit it wants to remain part of – or closely aligned to – the EU regulatory regime, meaning it will accept EU rules.
It wants to remain – effectively – part of the single market for this sector and is willing to play by the rules. Whether the EU would agree, if future negotiations do get under way, remains to be seen.
The story differs a bit from sector to sector across the UK economy, but the bottom line is the same. If you want access to the EU market on something like exiting terms, then you have to keep playing by the rules.
The DUP will surely have recognised this, but still seems to reckon that following a different regime to the UK – and taking rules from the EU – must be resisted, despite the threat to jobs.
The point of following rules set by someone else clearly has a political importance , though if Brexit shows us anything it is that the opportunities for economy autarky in today's world are small indeed.
Bombardier would be an easier sale if the North had committed to remain aligned to EU customs and regulatory rules post Brexit, as envisaged under the backstop plan in the withdrawal agreement. It illustrates clearly the choice faced by the North's politicians. In today's international economy, trying to write your own rules comes at a hefty cost.

"f**k it, just score"- Donaghy   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxG2WwVRjU