[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

Except new trade will be at worse terms than the eu for a long time and trade with the eu will now be on worse terms. Doesn't really add up.

jambalaya - Member
We are going to be much better off outside the EU.

No, on just so many levels, no.

Don't forget that Jambalaya uses the word 'we' as in the royal 'we' as with all of his ilk.

We as in once I've retired to the eu we?

@sr basically we are in the “high” scenario in return for transition period and “guaranteed” future free trade deal. Of course no deal = no money. In the graphic you can see sums paid vs received

[img] [/img]

Also we will have distanced ourselves from the EU / eurozone time bomb

“guaranteed”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42674567

Nicola Sturgeon has said she will be able to make a judgment on whether to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence by the end of this year.

The first minister said her decision would be made when the shape of a deal between Britain and the European Union became clear in the autumn.

Her comments come ahead of the publication of a Scottish government assessment on the impact of Brexit.

The UK government has accused the SNP of trying to undermine the Brexit vote.

As Marr pointed out however, this proposed timing makes the whole strategy irrelevant. Far too late to have another vote then. More noise.

Interesting that the new Curtice poll shows 59% back an end to FoM

Messy old business !!!

As Marr pointed out however, this proposed timing makes the whole strategy irrelevant. Far too late to have another vote then. More noise.

Interesting that the new Curtice poll shows 59% back an end to FoM

Messy Eh Bro not the time for black and white definitions

[img] [/img]

Right then lets get some [u]REPORT-POST[/u] clicking going.

Just checking everyone’s had a lovely day/weekend and that the thread’s still open. Seems so, so [s] thank the Lord[/s] that’s good news. 😉 Train journeys would never be the same.

Have a very pleasant evening and a wonderful week ahead everyone. Swim and McMafia....

With Scotland there is also a couple of awkward facts. May has conceded that Holyrood needs to give consent for leaving the EU via a legislative consent motion ( as does the welsh parliament. Some folk think this significant the others do not. There is no chance at all of there being a LCM passed in holyrood

the other is the european convention on human rights is incorporated into scottish law and that cannot be changed by westminster. so a scottish resident will still be able to sue the Westminster government under its provisions and any UK wide organisation will still have to adhere to it

Except new trade will be at worse terms than the eu for a long time and trade with the eu will now be on worse terms. Doesn't really add up.

New trade with US, Canada, Australia, NZ, Japan, South Korea and all the other countries the EU has trade deals with could be on same / better terms immediately we leave (eg within days or a few months as deals are agreed in short order - they NEED NOT be complicated)

Our trade with the EU can be on terms as good as we have for the areas we care about, thats part of the negotiation.

The EU is in a dreadful mess as it is very much in their member states interests to agree a broad free trade deal, however in their narrow bureaucratic career preservation interests its all aboit keep “the project” together even if the 27 are worse off.

As I have said many times, I have a more agressive and expansionist stance. WTO with EU and a focus on free trade globally. Replace much of our food imports with local prodiction and global import. My “Italian”olive oil seems to come from Tunisia these days (careful label checking and google). If subsequently the EU want a deal they can come and ask, if not then no bother. Every day they wait is another day we are forging new relationships elsewhere and another day where the EU has become less important

Our trade with the EU can be on terms as good as we have for the areas we care about, thats part of the negotiation.

categorically ruled out by all major players. its simply not possible for a host of reasons

very much in their member states interests to agree a broad free trade deal,

No it is not. Its in their interests to grab as much as they can from the UK and give as little as they can in return. financial services based in Frankfurt would be much better for the German economy that iuf it remains based in London

As for the trade deals - most take many years to do.

(eg within days or a few months as deals are agreed in short order - they NEED NOT be complicated)

If the UK asks for the same or better terms then the other side gets to ask for something in return. Let me know when you find a good deal that has been negotiated in days.

As I have said many times, I have a more agressive and expansionist stance. WTO with EU and a focus on free trade globally. Replace much of our food imports with local prodiction and global import.

the other is the european convention on human rights is incorporated into scottish law and that cannot be changed by westminster.

Good morning everyone.

Two things of interest re financial services

1. While EU govs would love a slice of the tax revenue that accrues to the UK gov from fin services they are also aware that the relocation of activities away from London to EU and the subsequent fragmentation of wholesale markets would come at a clear cost. Source - EU briefing papers linked before

2. Interesting news over weekend that France’s BNP Paribas has announced major new investment in London to follow other recent investments involving new hiring and etc. Allez Yannick et bonne chance! What do they know on the inside re French approach to future deal negotiations in FS?!?

A side story I know, but Bolton (you might not know but he is the current leader of UKIP, LOL) has dumped the 25 year old model in a "party or partner" scenario.

The "party" (past tense) that got us into this mess, initially anyway*, is dissolving in front of our very eyes.

*Real blame is still with the Tory party trying to reduce the EU paradox within the Tory party of course. And failing badly.

A side story I know, but Bolton (you might not know but he is the current leader of UKIP, LOL) has dumped the 25 year old model in a "party or partner" scenario.

Because she stated on Twitter Megan Markle has "tainted" the Royal Blood and "...paved the way to a Black King...".

Hateful racist creature obvs. I don't know much about politics but I do know UKIP try to be under the banner of "whats best for Britian" and separate themselves from racial bias as shown in other groups e.g. Britain First.

gordimhor

NOpe Westminster cannot alter the Scotland act without the consent of holyrood. Westminster retains primacy and could legislate to close holyrood but they do not have the power to alter it

Yres, how did she get so cynical and head hard right at the age of 25?

Your supposed to go right wing as you get older! Ffs!

It's a shame UKIP only post ref being exposed for what they are,

Actually they were always were, kippers & Vote Leave always quietly happy to accept racists with a nod and a wink as long as they got their vote!

Ironic that the royal family more progressive than many of these patriots

Scotland does an assessment on the impact of Brexit and dares to publish it!

You will never guess what happened next!!

A UK government spokeswoman said: "We are seeking a deal that works for the whole of the UK, that delivers on the result of the EU referendum.

"Rather than trying to undermine the result of a democratic referendum, we urge the Scottish government to work with us to ensure, as we leave the EU, we protect the UK's vital internal market.

"Scotland trades four times as much with the rest of the UK as it does with the EU, so it is vital that we ensure that market continues unimpeded."

Some highlights

The key findings are:
? On average each additional EU citizen working in
Scotland contributes a further £34,400 in GDP.
? The total contribution by EU citizens working in
Scotland is approximately £4.42 billion per year.
? On average each additional EU citizen working
in Scotland contributes £10,400 in government
revenue.

ALL OF THE INCREASE IN SCOTLAND’S POPULATION OVER
THE NEXT DECADE IS EXPECTED TO COME FROM PEOPLE
MOVING HERE. WITHOUT IMMIGRATION THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE OF WORKING AGE, WORKING AND PAYING TOWARDS
PUBLIC SERVICES IN SCOTLAND IS LIKELY TO FALL.

[url= https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-most-important-brexit-detail-youve-never-heard-of ]Did I already post this?[/url]
Worth a read....

Yeah it's been referenced (the concept and principles not the link) whenever somebody posts the fantasy WTO option.

No deal is better than a bad deal.

Or as BoJo is now putting it...

Not leaving is better than a bad leaving.

“I’d rather us stay in than leave like that”.

PS - Hi everyone. Anything changed over the last couple of weeks? Jamba still Brextremist? THM still saying it’s a bad idea, but we’re going to do it anyway, and his company is prepared and will be fine? Everyone else sticking to their own dogmatic positions too? Occasional borderline racist outbursts from folk we’d forgotten existed?

As I understand it it takes time to challenge this under WTO, so we could get away with it in the short term, but it wouldn't be good for negotiating new FTAs, if we are already in dispute.

It's why no one trades under WTO alone, despite the brexiteers fantasies.

It also puts paid to desperately naive fallacies like this

EU has trade deals with could be on same / better terms immediately we leave (eg within days or a few months as deals are agreed in short order - they NEED NOT be complicated)

As the schedules we already have negotiated as part of EU bloc, No longer applicable eg https://www.politico.eu/article/us-rounds-on-britain-over-food-quotas-as-post-brexit-trade-woes-deepen/

Also as WTO schedules require consensus from all members they are very very slow.

Even 'friends' like America will be out to stiff is like ^^^^ and bombardier tarrifs etc

Westminster cannot alter the Scotland act without the consent of holyrood

gordimhor

Its written into the act that it cannot be changed without holyrood consent. Sewel convention iirc is for the legislative consent motion which as I said some folk including the scottish secretary thik is important and binding and others do not

I have to cook dinner now but I'll look it up later

Further good news today

Both JPM and UBS arguing that likelihood of no deal is falling sharply and the former revising up GDP growth for full year 2017 and then higher growth in 2018. They even included a deal with a service element 😉

Sense is prevailing

Let's hope the prediction of these experts is close to what we finally get … but would that kind of outcome (and the compromises and arrangements that will enable it) satisfy those that voted for Brexit? Or will a third of the country feel let down, a third annoyed at what we've given up, and only a small minority be happy with the fudged replacement for our unique membership arrangement we currently have?

Or will a third of the country feel let down, a third annoyed at what we've given up, and only a small minority be happy with the fudged replacement for our unique membership arrangement we currently have?

It was always going to be like that as Brexit was never defined so even leavers wanted different things that they were never going to get.

gordimhor

I will get back to you on this - needs a bit of time to look at - I'm still bashing away at te keyboard in between cooking stuff

Here in Australia there's a new range of premium popcorn that is red chilli flavour. it's just the stuff for reading this.

oh, and don't hold your breath for a trade deal, you got nothing we want, we got nothing you can afford.

Official trade data suggests an alternative view

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Gordimhor
From the act:

(1)The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are a permanent part of the United Kingdom's constitutional arrangements.

(2)The purpose of this section is, with due regard to the other provisions of this Act, to signify the commitment of the Parliament and Government of the United Kingdom to the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government.

(3)In view of that commitment it is declared that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are not to be abolished except on the basis of a decision of the people of Scotland voting in a referendum.

But

This section does not affect the power of the Parliament of the United Kingdom to make laws for Scotland.

[F1(8)But it is recognised that the Parliament of the United Kingdom will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Scottish Parliament

Can';t find the bit about human rights in the act

From the scottish government site

Background

Human rights is a subject devolved to Scotland by the Scotland Act 1998. The Scottish Parliament also has competence to observe and implement international human rights treaties. We work within that legal framework.

In Scotland, civil and political rights are protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 and provisions in the Scotland Act 1998. These rights come from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law. It means that public organisations, such as the government, councils and the police, must protect and abide by human rights. If human rights have been breached, cases can be taken to UK courts.

The Scotland Act 1998 ensures that laws passed by the Scottish Parliament can be challenged and overturned by the courts if they are not compatible with rights identified in the ECHR. Scottish Government Ministers have 'no power to act' in a way that breaches these ECHR rights.

The Scottish Commission for Human Rights Act 2006 created the Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC). The SHRC is an independent public body that promotes and protects the human rights of everyone in Scotland.

Scotland's approach to human rights is also governed by international law. This has developed since the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Seven major UN human rights treaties, along with eight Council of Europe human rights treaties, currently apply to Scotland.

[quote=bigrich ]Here in Australia ...................

we got nothing you can afford.

Not quite true. You can still produce lamb and beef more cheaply than we can and ship it half way round the world and still make a profit. That would appeal to those in the UK really pushing for Brexit (i.e. those with enough money to benefit from very lax tax rules once out of the EU) as it would put our marginal hill farmers out of business and free up all those lovely properties in the countryside for 2nd homes.

On the UK oz trade as they will have a deal with the eu first will the UK have a strong bargaining position one of out major imports is pharmaceuticals, if there is a shift of production to the eu that could have a big impact, then automotive well if jag etc move production that's another one gone.

The current $ rate here certainly makes importing from the UK/eu good for us but the eu will probably cover most things.

The UK is a good in to the eu for a lot of Australian comanedue to the shared language and culture but they a looking to Dublin now. Even though a big proportion of dual citizenship is with the UK, combined eu will beat that. Heaps more ties across Europe than the UK now.

Theresa May has been hit with a double Brexit blow as the EU toughened up its terms for a transition period and Norway privately warned Brussels that giving in to the UK’s demands for a “special” trade deal could force it to rip up its own agreements with the bloc.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/15/norway-may-rip-up-eu-deal-over-uk-brexit-demands

A paper on Michel Barnier’s demands for the transition period, leaked to the Guardian, reveals that the EU plans to insist on the free movement of people throughout the transition period and the inclusion of people moving to the UK before 31 December 2020 in the terms of an agreement on rights for nationals from the rest of Europe post-Brexit.

The UK had at one time wanted the agreement on citizens to be limited to people who moved to the UK before 29 March 2017, when Theresa May triggered article 50.

Downing Street’s Brexit adviser, Olly Robbins, suggested in a recent cabinet meeting that the UK would operate on three levels post-Brexit with the EU, with some sectors being entirely free from Brussels regulation while others were fully converged to allow frictionless trade. In a third “basket” of sectors, the two sides could share the same goals but “achieve them through different means”.

One senior EU official said: “It’s what we always thought the UK would be going for and that’s why we have been quite clear that we don’t think that it is on.”

One of Theresa May’s new ministers has claimed the UK’s plan to drop the EU charter of fundamental rights after Brexit would help avoid an “extra layer” of human rights, contradicting the government’s assurance that no protections would be lost.

Thanks for the background research TJ. It provides some reassurance.

Its not as clear cut as I thought tho in that Westminster has reserved powers to make law in devolved areas but with the human rights being incorporated into scots law I really cannot see how they could get rid of it