Quite so, let us continue with the Minford Plan

The essence – the true distillation – of the Patrick Minford Plan for Brexit is that we should simply do what is best for us here. All those things about trade and conforming to international standards and all that well, when they work for us here domestically then we’ll do them, sure. When those international structures impact upon our ability to do what’s right for us domestically then they can fuck off.

The Good Professor doesn’t quite use that language but then that’s because I’m a potty mouth.

So, our attitude to trade barriers. They’re – obviously and simply – a tax upon consumers. We don’t particularly desire to tax consumers in this manner so we won’t. Unilateral free trade it is then. How Johnny Foreigner decides to tax Johnny Foreign consumers is up to Mr. J. Foreigner.

Brussels-era laws governing the financial system are to be repealed and City watchdogs will be given the freedom to set their own rules in a sweeping post-Brexit shake-up intended to make the Square Mile more competitive.

Ministers have also vowed to expand the role of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), giving it a greater focus on growth and international competitiveness to help London rival the likes of New York and Hong Kong.

The Treasury is seeking to ditch the legalistic approach taken when Britain was in the European Union, where rules were set by Brussels and Whitehall through legislation and only enforced by regulators.

A raft of financial services law from before 2016 will be gradually scrapped in coming years under the proposals, which are subject to consultation.

It will be replaced with regulations drawn up by the watchdogs themselves.

Of course, we should never underestimate the ability of our own leech class to screw things up on their own. But this is indeed the Minford Plan. We’ll do things here to benefit us. How they interact with what those folks over there are doing is a secondary consideration. Even, it’s one that everyone just has to adapt to as we set policy for that 80% of the UK economy that is inside the UK and ruled by the UK.

This is sensible, just, appropriate and good. The only real question is whether we should call it Little Englandism or Great Britishism.

10 thoughts on “Quite so, let us continue with the Minford Plan”

  1. The main problem I see with this is our politicos. They love proving to the world that they are good cooperative internationalists. The same goes for the senior civil servants. Anything to show they are one of the good guys, anything to increase their chance of gaining a nice international job once the political or service career ends.

  2. Salamander

    When I think of the way ScoMo grovelled at the Glasgow conference, I’d have to agree that that’s how pollies act.

  3. BoganBoy

    I remember when Rishi cut the international aid budget in order to help pay for the pandemic. The howls of protest from the politicos. I could not work it out until I researched the situation and found just how many think tanks and charities receive money from the budget and employ ex politicos as consultants.

    Really it was just a protest at Rishi cutting one of their pensions. Anyone would think their main pension was crap.

  4. Jonathan

    When was the last time we had a Government that put the wellbeing of the British people first though?

    Possibly Mrs T but, just as possible, pre-WW1 (the Salisbury administration (1895-1902) and/or Balfour (1902-1905))

  5. Umbongo

    Not entirely sure about Mrs T, although she wasn’t actively anti-British – unlike most in the last 50 years.

  6. “we should simply do what is best for us here” Well, that’s a pretty stupid plan as it ignores thousands of years of civilisation which shows us that there are huge advantages to taking due account od what is best for us, and for larger groups we can belong to.

  7. Salamander.

    Thanks for pointing out that the pollies are simply securing their own sinecures when they shriek for more money for NGO’s.


    Must admit I’ve always liked the Salisbury administration. He attempted to stop the UK wasting lives and money on the Scramble for Africa. But the bit which sticks in my memory is him saying that the Germans make good neighbours when Billy Hughes bitched about their taking part of New Guinea. Billy made the appropriate reply by pointing out that we preferred to have no neighbours at all.

    Still his basic point, that the British taxpayer was paying for the administration of far too many jungles inhabited by savages, was perfectly correct. When we got our bit of New Guinea, we had to pay for it ourselves.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *