EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[bramling]

Money laundering? Any service in which the value added is mainly labour is worth looking at.

City centres are full of nail bars where the girls spend most of the day sitting around polishing their own nails. However, an examination of the books will show they never stopped working and were run off their feet.

Yes, the owner will have to pay appropriate taxes etc on the made up profits, but if the operation has turned dirty drugs money into clean, but taxed, business profits, it is worth it.

Interesting and I don’t doubt you’re right. My town has sprung a massive number of barber shops in the last couple of years, which always seem to be pretty empty, and in some cases are open very late into the evening (2200 Monday to Saturday) seemingly doing little or no business. As a creature of habit I still go to the place I always have used, in the next town!

 

[HSTEd]

When I was living in the dodgy student area of Fallowfield in Manchester, we were in the corner shop, when suddenly this massive man in a puffer jacket comes in, sticks his bank card in the till's card terminal.

He then passed a giant wad of cash to the person at the till, pulled his card out and walked out, having not touched the keypad.

 

[Intercity 225]

Sorry I missed this before (it sounds like we actually agree on quite a bit, politically, from the rest of your post).

No worries! And yes, it appears we do, aside from very differing views on Brexit.

I suppose I see the Irish border issue as a small bump in the road to the wider Brexit process which has been blown out of all proportion. It’s being talked up by remainers who are desperate to exaggerate anything they think is a disadvantage of leaving the EU.

With respect, I don’t think it’s something that’s being talked up by remainers – it’s a problem that requires a solution if the UK wants to leave the customs union. If anything it’s Brexiters who are underestimating the importance of it.

It’s no secret that I’m fully against Brexit but I’m very cautious to ensure that my remain position doesn’t cloud my judgement of reality. I’m now most interested in the practicalities of Brexit and when it comes to the Irish border, outside of remaining in the EU there are three options that I can see:

• Leave the EU but remain in the single market and customs union – the soft Brexit option.

• Apply a hard border with both UK and Irish customs checks. It’s likely that cars could just be waved through with freight stopped and checked. This is possible, but it would require significant infrastructure to be built and it’s likely to stir up dissident republican activity which would be highly undesirable. It’s also highly unlikely that the infrastructure would be in place before the 2022 general election and until it is completed we’d need to continue to follow EU regulations without any say in making them.

• Have an internal customs border between NI and the rest of the UK. There is zero chance of this happening whilst the DUP hold the balance of power at Westminster, but it could potentially be applied by a future majority UK government. That’s easier said than done though and it’s likely to stir up dissident unionist activity which again would be highly undesirable.

It’s an important issue for the region but it relates to one small corner of the UK. My prefered way of dealing with it would be to cede NI back to the ROI. Absent that I’m sure something can be thrashed out.

I appreciate that ceding NI to the ROI would be your preference but that isn’t going to happen any time soon and certainly not before Brexit. Therefore, the reality is that there is a major land border that the UK, ROI and EU are going to need to find a solution to before the UK can diverge from EU regulations.

Not for me to say what as I’m not a political expert, nor an expert in the history of NI/ROI, but it shouldn’t be beyond the wit of man for those who experts in these matters to work something out?!

Well it’s one thing that I was hoping the leading Brexiters would have developed a plan for! This is the first time in over 200 years we’ll require some form of managed border between the UK and ROI and none of the main Brexiters have come up with any form of realistic solution:

Johnson, Gove, Davis, Cash and Redwood all believe that a technical solution is possible. I’m very sceptical of that being the case but even if it is, it’s going to be at the R&D stage and realistically probably over a decade away from being implemented. And until it’s ready, we’d need to continue following EU regulations.

Bone and Hoey believe that if the Irish/EU want to install a border then let them and we’ll just keep our side open. That’s utterly ludicrous and we’d be a laughing stock on the international stage, the complete antithesis of “taking back control”.

Stuart and Carswell haven’t stated any kind of solution.

Rees-Mogg does at least admit that some form of checks would be necessary but hasn’t provided any concrete plans on how they’d be undertaken.

And Farage has the most insane idea of all:

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/present...farage-simple-response-irish-border-question/

There are so many flaws in that plan I could be typing all night but in a nutshell his solution would be catastrophic for the UK economy but brilliant for the Irish. Basically, any manufacturing firm that wanted to trade with both the UK and EU markets could move to Ireland and have a best of both world’s solution. The Irish government who have a history of enticing corporations to be based there would even likely encourage it with special corporation tax rates, capital assistance and relocation support for both industry and employees.

Do you agree that it should be the leading Brexiters who should be coming up with realistic solutions?

What a pity that, thanks to Theresa May’s political incompetence, we are lumbered with a weak and divided government in coalition with the DUP, so the issue is loomimg far larger than it should.

If a case study on how not to run a general election campaign was ever required, then May’s 2017 campaign would fit the bill perfectly – a true shambles. It doesn’t negate the fact that the Irish border is a major barrier that needs resolving if Brexit is going to happen in the fashion hard-line Brexiters wish though.


Probably an even bigger issue than the Irish border is the one between our southern seaports/the Channel Tunnel and France. Analysis has shown that at Dover alone they’ll be permanent tailbacks of 25-30 miles if each freight vehicle is held up by an extra two minutes – a conservative estimate considering that although the border is already “hard” it’s about to get a damn sight “harder” as a result of Brexit.

Under the Le Touquet treaty the French carry out immigration/customs checks on British soil so it’s not as though we can just wave them through either. We could pull out of the Le Touquet agreement but if we were to do that it’d seriously impact our ability to crack down on illegal immigration because the British checks on French soil would cease to exist. In that event a future “jungle” forming in the south east of England would become a very realistic possibility.

Again, there’s no leading Brexiter who has come up with a workable solution to this other major problem.

 

[bramling]

This might happen organically if Sinn Fein get enough of the vote in NI, which in time they may well do if people in NI feel increasingly abandoned by Westminster.

Out of interest, does anyone have any idea what the current feeling is in NI?

One presumes, like the SNP, SF wouldn't push for a referendum they didn't think they had a chance of winning.

I remember even as far back as the 90s it was seen that demographics would likely tip the scales at some point in the future, albeit some way off then.

Perhaps it's a case of good times creating weak leaders? If Brexit goes badly, those who were in charge of sorting it out will be able to quietly end their political careers (a bit like Cameron) and live fairly comfortably one way or another. Brexit is a real mess but it's self-inflicted and it's not anywhere near as dire as the threat of invasion from a foreign country. If that was to happen I would expect minds to be focussed pretty quickly and petty party politics would go out the window at that point. Such a "keep calm and carry on" approach is what I think some of the older generations wanted to see in Brexit; a difficult situation that would bring out the best of British: everyone stoically pulling together for the good of the nation. In fact it seems to have brought out the worst: political division and time wasting whilst the deadline approaches.

My increasing perception / feeling is that it's not just a case of political bitching, but a fundamental lack of competence. I hope you're right that in a national emergency the system would someone pull together and work, but do we actually think that would happen? What would happen if, for example, a decision had to be made that involved using deploying Trident?

In some ways it would be for the best for both the Conservative party to split (centrist vs eurosceptics) and also labour (hard left vs Blairites), because at the moment both sides are riddled with petty in-fighting, as well as continuing to slag each other off. Instead we could have a coalition government. People slag off the libdems but the coalition government they formed with the conservatives was actually half decent, because it created a government that had to get along. If we end up with a bad deal or no deal with the EU it will be mostly the fault of this kind of political division, which is apparently "too hard" to fix.

Both parties have had internal issues since the early 1990s, to varying degrees. The Conservatives have always had the EU issue, whilst within Labour there's always been an unease between what I would call the electorally-aware left (e.g. Blair) and the ideological left (e.g. Corbyn). I agree the coalition government actually wasn't at all bad, and in my view history has been a little unkind in its verdict on Nick Clegg. He compromised, and both himself and party got severely punished for it. Perhaps the political system is just reflecting the attitudes of the population - deeply polarised and unwilling to accept that sometimes we have to accept what others want.

 

[bramling]

• Apply a hard border with both UK and Irish customs checks. It’s likely that cars could just be waved through with freight stopped and checked. This is possible, but it would require significant infrastructure to be built and it’s likely to stir up dissident republican activity which would be highly undesirable. It’s also highly unlikely that the infrastructure would be in place before the 2022 general election and until it is completed we’d need to continue to follow EU regulations without any say in making them.

Why does it seem such an inevitability that a hard border should stir up trouble?

I'm rather uncomfortable with the idea that we can't do something eminently sensible (a border between two separate countries) because of a threat of violence.

 

[Intercity 225]

I was having a lengthy discussion about exactly this with a (strongly remain leaning) friend this afternoon. Interestingly we both concluded that in the long-run it would probably be best for NI to leave the UK in one form or another. And even he agreed that an issue that affects a relatively minuscule number of people (compare the population of NI to that of any major English city to get a sense of proportion) should not be allowed to be a major roadblock.

The population of NI is c.1,870,800 whereas Leave won the referendum by 1,269,501 votes. Using your logic that's a relatively minuscule number of people and therefore shouldn't be allowed to conduct a major change to our constitutional or trading status. Bearing that in mind do you think that we should opt for the softest possible Brexit by leaving the EU institutions but remaining in the single market, customs union, Euratom etc?

 

[Intercity 225]

Why does it seem such an inevitability that a hard border should stir up trouble?

I'm rather uncomfortable with the idea that we can't do something eminently sensible (a border between two separate countries) because of a threat of violence.

Purely because that's what history would suggest, there is a form of peace in NI now but there's still some fractured communities over there and it wouldn't take too much for tensions to escalate. I don't think it's inevitable a hard border would necessarily equate to violence but it's naive to think that it's not likely to increase tensions.

 

[bramling]

The population of NI is c.1,870,800 whereas Leave won the referendum by 1,269,501 votes. Using your logic that's a relatively minuscule number of people and therefore shouldn't be allowed to conduct a major change to our constitutional or trading status. Bearing that in mind do you think that we should opt for the softest possible Brexit by leaving the EU institutions but remaining in the single market, customs union, Euratom etc?

If you add that 1,259,501 votes to the rest of the population who voted leave, that's something around ten times as many. I don't regard that as miniscule.

 

[AlterEgo]

Why does it seem such an inevitability that a hard border should stir up trouble?

I'm rather uncomfortable with the idea that we can't do something eminently sensible (a border between two separate countries) because of a threat of violence.

How about removing the border altogether then?

 

[bramling]

How about removing the border altogether then?

I'm increasingly coming to the view that may well be an inevitability at some point. Albeit with another border cropping up involving GB!

 

[Intercity 225]

If you add that 1,259,501 votes to the rest of the population who voted leave, that's something around ten times as many. I don't regard that as miniscule.

I'm not trying to help you make your point but it's actually closer to 14 times as many... I'm a numbers guy and I can't help myself!

With regard to that analogy though, you're essentially discounting the votes of the 16,141,241 who voted remain to zero, when in reality it's another huge number that can't be ignored.

 

[bramling]

I'm not trying to help you make your point but it's actually closer to 14 times as many... I'm a numbers guy and I can't help myself!

With regard to that analogy though, you're essentially discounting the votes of the 16,141,241 who voted remain to zero, when in reality it's another huge number that can't be ignored.

I meant 10x times as many as the population of NI. Perhaps I should just get a calculator out?!

 

[mmh]

I suppose I see the Irish border issue as a small bump in the road to the wider Brexit process which has been blown out of all proportion. It’s being talked up by remainers who are desperate to exaggerate anything they think is a disadvantage of leaving the EU.

Absolutely. I might be naiive, but I honestly don't understand how it's such an insurmountable problem, except for it being convenient for the EU to make it one, and remainers easy to latch onto.

As ever, people conflate freedom of movement of people, labour, goods and physical borders when talking about "borders".

Neither the UK or Ireland have any desire to stop the freedom of labour between the two, a long standing right granted long before the EU existed. Freedom to travel between the two without checks is via the Common Travel Agreement, not via both being in the EU as neither are in the Schengen area. Ireland will never want to be in Schengen while the UK isn't as it would stop check-free travel.

All of the CTA members are islands, there is no CTA land border. The channel islands are in the CTA, but not the EU. (They do however have special customs agreements with the EU, the sort that are somehow impossible to give the UK. That's an aside though, it's nothing to do with movement of people or labour)

So, travel's and labour aren't problems, they already happen outside of EU regulation.

What about goods? Well, the fact that these places are all islands is useful. It's impossible to transport goods to the UK or Ireland without going through a port. You would be able to drive something between Ireland in the EU and Northern Ireland outside the EU, but that's an irrelevance. In the scheme of things, nobody cares. The sea ports are the actual borders, just as now. That's where you're liable to be checked. Air cargo is far easier.

I don't see how it need fundamentally be any different to today, given the will to do it.

 

[EM2]

You would be able to drive something between Ireland in the EU and Northern Ireland outside the EU, but that's an irrelevance.

Why is it an irrelevance, and if it is, why were there border posts before both countries were in the EEC?

 

[mmh]

• Why is it an irrelevance, and if it is, why were there border posts before both countries were in the EEC?

Because nobody cares if an individual drives across the border because Tesco's a bit cheaper the other side and pays some VAT in a different county. Just like happens now, in Ireland and across the EU. Plus the UK, if you were stocking up on booze for a party in Gretna you might drive to Carlisle to buy it.

What an individual does is an irrelevance when talking about imports and exports.

 

[EM2]

What an individual does is an irrelevance when talking about imports and exports.

And what about when it isn't individuals, but companies trading with each other across the border?

 

[mmh]

And what about when it isn't individuals, but companies trading with each other across the border?

Umm, exactly the same as now. Regulation, taxes, accounts and auditing weren't abolished by the EU

 

[JonasB]

Perhaps the political system is just reflecting the attitudes of the population - deeply polarised and unwilling to accept that sometimes we have to accept what others want.

Or maybe the polarised parliament is a result of having "first past the post"-elections, and the country in general is a lot less polarised?

 

[Intercity 225]

Umm, exactly the same as now. Regulation, taxes, accounts and auditing weren't abolished by the EU

Regulations are the reasons why freight crossing the border in the future is going to be need to be checked. If we leave the single market, for the first time in over 200 years the UK and Ireland will have separate regulations. The British and Irish economies remained very closely linked with the Irish Punt pegged to the British Pound following Irish independence in the 1920s and we joined the Common Market together in 1973 - Brexit takes us into uncharted territory.

I agree with you in the sense that most traffic will be able to pass unhindered and I can't see the CTA coming to an end.

 

[EM2]

Umm, exactly the same as now. Regulation, taxes, accounts and auditing weren't abolished by the EU

Right.
So you're saying that all trade between the UK and EU will be completely unaffected by Brexit. Have you told both our Government and the European Union about this? Because they seem to currently be devoting quite a lot of time to it.

 

[eotw]

What about goods? Well, the fact that these places are all islands is useful. It's impossible to transport goods to the UK or Ireland without going through a port. You would be able to drive something between Ireland in the EU and Northern Ireland outside the EU, but that's an irrelevance. In the scheme of things, nobody cares. The sea ports are the actual borders, just as now. That's where you're liable to be checked. Air cargo is far easier.

Goods are the problem. A very simplistic scenario after: Brexit I import 10,000 watt vacuums from the USA, which are now allowed here following a UK-US trade agreement. I can't ship them to the EU via Dover as (once they have cleared the queues) they will be picked up by EU customs at the new border or more likely when I apply for an export licence. However what is to stop me driving a lorry load to Stranraer, taking a ferry to Belfast and then driving to Dublin and selling my vacuums? Unless we have a border in the Irish Sea but the DUP have said No to that.

Or following trade agreement with US, we agree to reduce tariff on widgets from 50% to 0% - effectively putting a 50% tariff on EU widgets. An EU supplier ships widgets to Dublin drives to Belfast.... you know the rest.

The NI Border problem was portrayed as part of Project Fear, reality is it is much more complicated.

 

[bnm]

The nearest decent one to me is 10 miles away, which I use on principle rather than pay EU citizens to wash my car by hand - plus it does a better job.

Vacuum's the inside of the car does it? Cleans the internal surfaces and glass too? That is an impressive better job.

 

[Bromley boy]

No worries! And yes, it appears we do, aside from very differing views on Brexit.

For what it’s worth I enjoy your reasoned and informed posts and find them a refreshing alternative to the usual simplistic dogma trotted out on here.

Keep it up.

Have an internal customs border between NI and the rest of the UK. There is zero chance of this happening whilst the DUP hold the balance of power at Westminster, but it could potentially be applied by a future majority UK government. That’s easier said than done though and it’s likely to stir up dissident unionist activity which again would be highly undesirable.

Of the three options you suggested, this is surely the most sensible one by a country mile. A border arrangement, not so different to what we currently in place, which replicates the CTA.

That should only ever be a temporary arrangement until sense is restored and NI is ceded back to ROI.

The DUP need to be told to go and do one - difficult to see how they can be done in the current political climate, I concede!

There are so many flaws in that plan I could be typing all night but in a nutshell his solution would be catastrophic for the UK economy but brilliant for the Irish. Basically, any manufacturing firm that wanted to trade with both the UK and EU markets could move to Ireland and have a best of both world’s solution. The Irish government who have a history of enticing corporations to be based there would even likely encourage it with special corporation tax rates, capital assistance and relocation support for both industry and employees.

The Irish government doesn’t have the best record on economic matters, hence positioning itself as a European tax haven. Reference the transition from “Celtic tiger” to “Celtic economic basket case” in 2009.

Do you agree that it should be the leading Brexiters who should be coming up with realistic solutions?

*cough* yes probably *cough*.

Although I also think the EU should be taking a more mature and positive approach to negotiations given that a positive outcome for both sides is aligned with its own interests as much as with ours.

If it isn’t prepared to do that we should simply default to crashing out: the option which saves us the most money (no divorce bill) and causes the greatest impact on them.

I don’t want to take a destructive approach but we shouldn’t be afraid of doing so if that’s the attitude we get from them. We are the EU’s second largest cash cow and our government needs to toughen up a bit: Boris Johnson’s comments yesterday about how we seem to be going into battle with a white flag draped over our lead tank were entirely correct.

Under the Le Touquet treaty the French carry out immigration/customs checks on British soil so it’s not as though we can just wave them through either. We could pull out of the Le Touquet agreement but if we were to do that it’d seriously impact our ability to crack down on illegal immigration because the British checks on French soil would cease to exist. In that event a future “jungle” forming in the south east of England would become a very realistic possibility.

The French “jungle” is entirely down to France’s inability to police its own borders. Illegal aliens in France wishing to enter the U.K. should be entirely the French government’s problem, in my view. We need to take an Australian approach to this issue.

In the end we are an island nation and there’s no reason why we shouldn’t beef up our own border controls: anyone coming through illicitly should simply be rooted out, arrested and promptly returned to the country they arrived from (France in this case). Motion sensors, barbed wire, patrols of the ports, whatever it takes!

I’m far more concerned about goods/gridlocked motorways - a much tougher question. I don’t profess to have a solution, but I’d ultimately favour a sensible arrangement with the EU which allows “waving through” - but that would clearly require the EU to become somewhat less intransigent when we are outside the common market.

*Waves*
Hello!

I don’t know you in real life.

Although given how you and I argue like cat and dog over every topic we discuss, I’d question whether you were an ex girlfriend of mine, if it wasn’t for the fact I’m pretty sure you’re a (much) older male from the gravesend area!

 

[EM2]

I don’t know you in real life.

Although given how you and I argue like cat and dog over every topic we discuss, I’d question whether you were an ex girlfriend of mine, if it wasn’t for the fact I’m pretty sure you’re a (much) older male from the gravesend area!

Ya got me!
This is an entirely fictional online persona, carefully cultivated with the express intention of winding you up

 

[Howardh]

The simplest solution to the Irish Border is to accept freedom of movement from the EU. No?

Well how does this headline sound in the Daily Brexpress/Mail/Sun?

BREXIT - WE CAN THROW THEM OUT!!! WIN!!!!

In other words, we do exactly what we (and other EU countries) can do today, everyone entering the UK has leave to stay for three months and if, after that time, they've no job and can't support themselves (so extended holidaymakers/students/retirees/filthy rich are just fine) we do exactly what we are supposed to do, send them "home". It's just that we haven't bothered. If we did the Euro courts would be on our side as this is enshrined in EU law (somewhere...don't ask).

So we can leave the EU, become a member of the customs union, single market, European Economic Area and life can go on just as before and we save a few bob in EU fees and we return the scroungers.

The solution is staring us all in the face.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

In other words, we do exactly what we (and other EU countries) can do today, everyone entering the UK has leave to stay for three months and if, after that time, they've no job and can't support themselves (so extended holidaymakers/students/retirees/filthy rich are just fine) we do exactly what we are supposed to do, send them "home". It's just that we haven't bothered. If we did the Euro courts would be on our side as this is enshrined in EU law (somewhere...don't ask).

So we can leave the EU, become a member of the customs union, single market, European Economic Area and life can go on just as before and we save a few bob in EU fees and we return the scroungers.

The solution is staring us all in the face.

That kind of leave would be pointless, and in fact it would be even worse because now we'd be forced to accept EU rules and legislation without any representation in the EU Parliament. It's not even a compromise, because nothing leave voters cared about would be addressed. Free movement remains, sovereignty is limited, trade deals cannot be struck independently. It's leaving in name only, and this would leave a lot on both sides unhappy.

 

[Groningen]

So the British fishers made real "friends" with their French collegues at Normandy. Forbidden by French law for French fishers the British fishers thought: come to the coast and fish for scallops, while the French can only do it after October 1.

 

[nidave]

There’s quite a difference between a finite number of expats and having a floodgate open to unlimited immigration from 27 countries.

As I have said a numebr of times but you seem to ignore.
1. There is more immagration in from NON EU Countries than EU Countries
2. As part of a trade deal Turkey, India, Australia, New Zeland will require freedom of movement with the UK

You really need to look at the UK birth rate to see who is going to pay for your pension. We are not having enough children in the UK to sustain the popualtion without immagration - therefore with an aging population and less people coming up fom the bottom of the system to contrubute towards your state pesnions and the NHS servies are and finances are going to be stretched. Dispite EU migrants paying mroe into the UK Tax system than they take out compared to non eu migrants - non eu immagration will increase by a siginifgant amount putting increased pressure on services.

 

[SHD]

If it isn’t prepared to do that we should simply default to crashing out: the option which saves us the most money (no divorce bill) and causes the greatest impact on them.

Crashing out certainly would have a significant impact on the EU, but orders of magnitude less than the impact on the United Kingdom. Crashing out means that at 23.01 on the 29th of March, the UK is no longer a party to EU treaties and agreements and that there is no provision whatsoever to have new treaties and agreements with (a) the EU and (b) third parties in place. I am afraid that your view of what it entails for the UK in terms of policy, trade flows, and operations in critical sectors is much too derisive.

 

[fowler9]

I think his point is simply that a lot of people are oblivious to the fact that workers in different industries often work at funny times of the day and night - clearly you may not be one of them since it sounds like you’ve done shift work (it also sounds like a scaffolder has rubbed you up the wrong way at some point ).

I also know what he means about the strange recurring argument that EU workers are a magic bullet needed to do jobs Brits “don’t want to do.” While ever we have a significant rump of unemployed people in this country surely we should be looking to get them working before we take workers in from abroad to do low skilled entry level jobs!?

I’m fully in favour of immigration where there’s a need due to skills shortages, for example, but I’m not in favour of open door free movement. It has distorted the Labour market and put a lot of pressure on British tradesmen who have to try to live life in the U.K. (with U.K. costs of living) and find themselves competing with Eastern European tradesmen who might live several to a room and send their earnings back home.

To be clear I don’t blame them for doing that as individuals at all - and I’m not saying we should be asking them all to leave! But the system that allows them to do it is a silly one.

Mate, am sorry I was so stroppy, was halfway through weekend late shifts. It's not just scaffolders, it's all tradespeople that hack me off some times and my job is dealing with them constantly. Understandably to an extent they will say absolutely anything to get out of a house without an argument. They'll tell people on a Saturday night that they will be back on a Monday morning to sort out a problem they can't do at that time. They know damn well they already have their work for Monday morning scheduled to them and they won't be back. We get the customer on the phone at Monday lunchtime asking why the bloke hasn't been back and why they said they would if they knew they wouldn't. We can't tell the customer "It was so they got out of your house without an argument". Had one customer told that someone would be back Wednesday just gone. The person who told her it was on leave for two weeks from the day after he told them. Worst of all is when the tell someone with a dodgy cooker that it needs condemning, they fix it, get it working again and don't bother condemning it. We get the blame because big mouth told them they needed a new cooker. People automatically assume if something is condemned it is not safe. Another big one is asbestos. You get an operative who has had a busy day, they have a small repair on a ceiling and cry asbestos and say they won't touch it. Had one woman sleeping on sofas for a week after a workie nailed her house shut saying it was dangerous. Never bothered telling us of course. When she finally phoned us to ask when she was allowed back in her house she was back in her house same day. No asbestos. We got the blame of course. Anyway, all very far of subject but I felt the need to respond. Housing repairs are a dark art and most of our better operatives are foreign.