They aren't as evidenced by this thread. Brexiters are glad, remainers don't like it.

We have seen time again consultancies give advice the client wants to hear, rather than the reality...as seen with BHS, they'll eagerly grease the palms of those willing to handsomely reward them.

Anything and everything they can to distract attention from the fact that the don't have a clue what they are doing.

So how did this experts negotiations on behalf of Cameron with the EU go last year pre Brexit? What was the super brexit busting deal he managed to get for the UK?

He didn't negotiate, Cameron did.

What he didn't advise Cameron? he was seen hanging out of Cameron's arse in every news clip during the negotiations.

He certainly was

"Unbiased" reporting of the resignation by the BBC

James Lansdale basically stood in front of the camera and read out the resignation letter as if it was fact and truthful. No attempt was made to report Ivan Rogers poor negotiating performance when he assisted Cameron prior to the Referendum.

Difficult to take you too seriously when you use language like "hanging out of Cameron's arse" but his job is to tell the Government what the EU will accept, what they won't accept and what areas there are which might be negotiable (and what they would want in return). It is then up to the Prime Minister to decide what is acceptable and what is not.

I'm not. The sooner we shake out these remainist 5th columnists from the system the better.

Surely his resignation is a matter of fact? It is what he wrote. As explained above, Cameron does the negotiating based on the advice received.

So he would have got even less of a deal than Cameron? As I said good riddance, he should have gone a lot lot earlier.

He is (was) a Civil Servant. His job is to advise, not negotiate.

Are you saying he didn't give Cameron advice? Was he just there to carry his lunch box?

So Cameron negotiated a p*ss poor deal for the UK based on his advice, as I said good riddance.

Seems people dont want the best people doing the job, they just want a bunch of yes men. And his email is the most damming of all the things that have come out in recent times. And it makes it very plain that that the government has no plans have not got a clue about things. Here is the governments plan ( brexit means brexit ) LOL

He told Cameron what he thought was possible, Cameron could choose to take the advice or ignore it.

Sorry I should have been more clear.
He obviously was not a Brexit yes person, therefore in the eyes of the government, dishonest and untrustworthy.

Obviously to make negotiations flow smoothly, this is not the type of person we need.

You have really misrepresented the Government's position here, they have actually provided significant detail on what Brexit will mean. Did you miss May's announcement we are going to have a red, white and blue Brexit?

So his "advice" wasn't very good, thanks for confirming that.

Good riddance.

I voted Remain and think this is an excellent development.

The more Brexiters that are in a position of power and actually having to make decisions in the real world the better. Just like the sooner Trump actually gets out from behind his sofa and twitter account and into the Oval Office and finds out what the real world of decision making and administration is like the sooner America will realise what they have on their hands.

Despite all the talk of 'Remoaners' it is hopelessly divided and unconvincing Brexiters (e.g. Johnson) who refuse to face the reality of our relationship with 27 other countries that will delay Brexit not Remain voters.

Of course we want the best people. But we definitely don't want people intent in undermining the process.

So when you go to the doctor, if you don't like the advice they give you do you listen to them or change doctor until you hear what you want to hear?

Politicisation of civil service is what Brexiteers want.

You seem to be assuming that the deal Cameron negotiated wasn't based on the advice the ambassador gave, why's that? Do you have inside info?