? He was replying to a post from a Brit (trying to get citizenship of an EU country)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Political relations between UK-EU
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 7,019
Doesn’t matter if you have the best change management processes in the world if you set off with a vision that has incompatible requirements. At some point you either have to face into that, highlight that you’ve delivered what you consider the priority requirements or lie about it and hope no one notices.
That or, and this is very common in the business world, you move onto the next role or company before the consequences and the true benefits or return on investment play out. The cv looks great as you can focus on the delivery and blag the consequences. Harder to do in a five year term of parliament though...
That or, and this is very common in the business world, you move onto the next role or company before the consequences and the true benefits or return on investment play out. The cv looks great as you can focus on the delivery and blag the consequences. Harder to do in a five year term of parliament though...
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
Fairly sure Eamonn is Irish vic, check and come back to me? He was replying to a post from a Brit (trying to get citizenship of an EU country)
You can convince yourself and your acolytesCorrect, but the point you fail to appreciate is that the issues that emerge are a feature of Brexit, not a bug because of lack of planning or incompetence.
If you raise trade barriers and introduce friction where previously there was none you will have issues because management of these issues is now in the hands of Govt officials and management of an issue will never be as efficient as eliminating the issue.
The referendum could only be won by falsely pretending that we would have no issues if we left, indeed the claim was things would be better. As soon as we raised a trade barrier, built a lorry park or introduced an internal customs border, Brexit was lost.
Even worse, the UK then signed a deal where seeking mitigation of the effects of Brexit hands power to the EU, and this on top of leaving one sovereign UK nation still under the EU economic writ.
Our choice is stark, seek to diverge in an attempt to make Brexit ‘worth’ four years of division and pain and we will have more pain. Tack closely to EU rules and regulations to ease the pain and we become rule takers with no ability to shape the rules.
Reality is a woman.
But, people that understand the reality of these matters can just disregard the extent to which your glee is just exaggerated nonsense
Yes - of course there will be issues arising from friction being introduced to trade - that hardly makes you some sort of guru.
But - if you are really seeking to suggest that had Brexit been managed by professionals as a major change programme then a lot of the policies, requirements and actions needed to address a host of problems would not have been dealt with - then you really are just utterly blinkered
Last edited:
Spot onI think the point has got lost in the telling. The simple truth is that some of these frictions could have been eased by better planning and implementation. In effect that is what the Scottish Salmon producer accused the government of yesterday. He wasn’t railing against Brexit. He was simply asking for clarity of process so he and his delivery line could comply.
as I said to vic yesterday, take the piss all you like but despite all the additional frictions, this would have been better with a semi competent government planning and implementing the bloody thing properly.
I started slagging the government off for the lack of planning and professional management in 2016 - and ever since
I am not claiming there would not be frictions and major issues
But it is just commonsense that things could and should have been managed a lot more professionally - and mitigations implemented
Anyway - I have no interest in trying to persuade Bob and his entourage - I was asked questions and answered them - that's all
Last edited:
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,304
You can convince yourself and your acolytes
People that understand the reality of these matters can just disregard the extent to which your glee is just exaggerated nonsense
Yes - of course there will be issues arising from friction being introduced to trade - that hardly makes you some sort of guru.
But - if you are really seeking to suggest that had Brexit been managed by professionals as a major change programme then a lot of the policies, requirements and actions needed to address a host of problems would not have been dealt with - then you really are just utterly blinkered
It makes me more prescient than the Govt, the Leave Campaigns, and Brexiteers in general.
And we could not have Brexit managed by professionals as a major change program because that would imply there would be major changes and that was not how Brexit was packaged and sold.
Politically we couldn’t even admit there would be major changes, the last election was won on ‘getting Brexit done and over with’ and after that we wouldn’t have to mention it again.
We were trapped by our own rhetoric, major change would show project fear as project reality and you guys denied that reality.
Brexit is a net loser, no matter how well it is managed, which is something you guys cannot accept. You can’t even see that the deal along with the WA cedes control and power to the EU.
Now you are conflating thingsI don’t disagree that proper management would have mitigated some of the consequences. What I don’t agree is that it is purely an issue of poor management. If the unnecessary obstacles hadn’t been introduced there wouldn’t be a need for careful management of the issues. If there were some tangible benefits to make it worth having to manage a whole load of issues then I am yet to see what they are - not even one. In the meantime I will continue to take the piss out of anyone who thinks problems are just down to bad planning.
Or just outright muddled in your thinking
And nobody has said that there would not still be a whole bunch of issues
They are taking turns in searching for the apocalyseIs it just you three in here now?
Whilst it is stubbornly refusing to put in an appearance they are trying to take comfort in bigging up any issue they can find - they are locked in their desperate need to be proven right
You and I, along with other Leavers, are apparently behaving badly by refusing to admit we are disappointed - they insist we must be.
The 3 amigos have started to go back to the campaign and the same old tired claims - you will not be shocked to hear
TBF - some are starting to move on and look to the future
Fully agreeIt will never be as friction free as the friction free we had. Thats for sure. The lack of effort around services is stunning.
And nobody will persuade me that had Brexit been managed as a comprehensive change programme then FS wouldn't have either been included or there would be at least evidence of the governance decision to exclude and alternative plans.
It is just true and daft for people to suggest otherwise
Shadz69
Well-Known Member
Haha Is change management the new political will / use it?