Forum menu
Labour leadership out UKIPing UKIP again.
TJ if EU ask (demand - cough cough) for payments into the EU budget in order to allow financial services access I STRONGLY suspect May will just pass that cost onto the banks directly. At that point the banks will say they don’t want / need such access.
Only 30% of our services are financial. Much is being made of passporting etc but IMO it’s a total red herring.
If the EU lost access to London’s financial services they’d be in a big mess very quickly and the higher costs would be passed onto them immediately at a time they can least afford it.
@Kelvin they are not blind to how the North voted and Corbyn is a eurosceptic anyway. IMO they are well aware frustrating Brexit is not a vote winner for them. Yes by all means make trouble for the Govt (remember Labour voted against Maastricht) but focus on other things NHS, “inequality” etc
Much is being made of passporting etc but IMO it’s a total red herring.
I'd love to agree with you, Jambs, but then we'd both be wrong.
And
[b]Only [/b]30% of our services are financial.
That's alright then...
^^ 🙂
TwoDogs if we had to fill some extra forms, setup / expand an EU subsidiary it’s really not a big deal. I suspect a lot of firms wouldn’t bother they’d either sign a JV with an EU entity or just withdraw from their European business in the way Barclays didnway before the referendum
Oh good grief.
Only 30% of our services are financial. Much is being made of passporting etc but IMO it’s a total red herring.
It isn’t a red herring
But it is fair to say that most UK banks are prepared for the likely/different outcomes (two are still setting up subsidiaries but one of those is pretty domestic anyway). But that’s not to conclude that the issue is a red herring
jambalaya - Member^^
TwoDogs if we had to fill some extra forms, setup / expand an EU subsidiary it’s really not a big deal.
And that has been categorically ruled out. Firms working with EU finance must have the main operation in the EU including all senior staff and all computer systems so they fall under EU law. Shell operations are not going to be allowed. Luxembourg is being softer on this hoping to pick up some crumbs but the big players are staying firm.
Why do you keep on posting that things will happen that have been ruled out?
Not true sorry
Its nice that so many different EU politicians are making it clear that Brexit can be reversed if we like
belies the brexies on here & elsewhere that like to say it cant
not say it will, the appetite for self-harm doesnt seem to be diminishing from the hardcore
Take that, snowflakes.
Why kimbers?
(Budget?)
Why kimbers?(Budget?)
Is it not obvious?
Hint we all know
Very
Plus other lose:lose issues INCLUDING financial services
Hence the position is very different to how it is normally presented - is that a card on the floor?!!!
Interesting presentation from PRA yesterday plus the Swissies questioning FoM (?) and how this will affect their deal in financial services
Nothing is black or white
No but the EU are happy to have the UK back along with an increasing proportion of the UK (some would call it a majority soon) when May gives in on another red line the come back option will be floated, especially as MP's can enact it. How bad does it have to get for it to be worth stopping?
As the saying goes when your only tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail. Brexit is not the only solution or option.
Both Swiss and Norway threatening to redraw their own arrangements if UK/rEU deal threatens their own positions. Dominos…
Its nice that so many different EU politicians are making it clear that Brexit can be reversed if we like
Good to hear key rEU players keeping open the possibility that the UK can change its collective mind. Unfortunately, the leading lights of both main parties (have to) stay deaf to this idea, for their own (or their own party) reasons.
I would be nice to imagine that their motives were altruistic
Why? We all know that the UK staying in is best not only for the UK but also for the rest of the EU.
canadian who helped Canada get their CETA deal on Brexit
A free trade agreement is like two parties are on either side of a river and are considering building a bridge across that river because they think it will be in their economic benefit. And that’s what the Ceta does. And I think it does provide for Canada and the EU real economic benefits.What the UK situation with the EU right now is that that bridge has been there for 45 years. Communities have been built up on either side of it. There are buildings on the bridge. And [b]you are deciding what part of it you want to blow up without bankrupting yoursel[/b]f.
teamhurtmore - Member
I would be nice to imagine that their motives were altruistic
Your desire to show everything the eu does as bad or only in their interests is moving you into the fanatical blind brexit camp there. Hint its important to both sides and the rest of the world still doesn't get why the UK is insisting on amputation to cure an ingrown toe nail.
I know it’s in the interest of both sides - a major reason why I reject the more fanciful projections of doom that have characterised the past few hundred pages of this thread. What we are seeing now is that the EU is slowly adjusting itself to this reality too.
Are you claiming that RoW do not understand democracy either? Blimey, that’s more that I imagined
No we have just established you don't repeatedly.
You have to remember the Tories can do no wrong. So their approach to leaving the EU must be right.
Are you claiming that RoW do not understand democracy either?
No he is saying they dont understand why we democratically decided this. Everyone understands democracy is a state where decisions are debated and opposition is protected , enshrined even.
HTH
You have to remember the Tories can do no wrong. So their approach to leaving the EU must be right.
In cougars spirit !!!
Mike no I simply recall that we have exercised the democratic process in two ways - a referendum and our representatives voted too. The latter more definitive than the former. There is no insistence, merely the exercise of a democratic mandate/decision that an undemocrstic minority cannot accept.
Our two major parties* who dominated the vote at the GE also BOTH advocate respecting the decision “repeatedly”. Odd that
* can be ignored if a member of the political myopia club. But that’s a minority I would imagibe
Our two major parties* who dominated the vote at the GE also BOTH advocate respecting the decision “repeatedly”. Odd that
There's nothing odd about it, the EU is as good as we can hope for a decent blend of capitalism and socialism.
Tory.. We hate socialism so will exit.
Corbyn.. We hate capitalism so will exit.
Both parties want the same result for completely incompatible reasons.
Complete pig headed logical fallacy.
I know it was a joke but there are some who don’t like winks. 😉
But you might see if the youth in the periphery of Europe agree with such a profound assumption.....
There is no insistence, merely the exercise of a democratic mandate/decision that an undemocrstic minority cannot accept.
Let them present the deal, let us approach that with an ability to accept it, refuse is and jump off the cliff or to accept that remain is an option and if it is the one most support go with that.
The version where you go for a deal offered vs complete isolationism means the deal doesn't have to be very good to make it more attractive - a stupid negotiating position.
If you were offered the choice to vote on the deal with 3 options Stay/Leave/Jump would you vote leave regardless or would you engage your brain?
Remember more Brexites shuffle off every day, more remainers live and have to live through it all.
We have voted on remain already, if you recall.
But I see the hidden tactic there. Nice one. Do you think people might miss the sleight of hand there?
No "sleight of hand". Present a choice of membership or an alternative to the public and let them choose. They'll pick the alternative if they prefer it to membership. It should be possible to present a proposed alternative that would be voted for, shouldn't it?
It might be written in grown up though, as a summary something like tick here for unicorns.
Indeed Kelvin
“After we end our membership of the EU would you prefer to have:1. On going access under the terms of a unique FTA
2. On going access under the terms of an existing deal
3. No deal - prefer to trade under WTO[please note this is for advisory purposes only - in case we don’t get the result we want]”
Should be quite easy to vote for the sensible alternative. There is only one.
Why are we getting an extra option there? Is the EU going to offer us 2 options to stay?
Unique is the problem word here, DD losing it dropping his pants and shitting on the table would be a unique FTA.
The government is negotiation (accepting) with the EU for a deal. That is the deal they will present to parliament, in detail, none of the unique, bespoke BS the actual words and details giving parliament enough time to scrutinise it and make a decision.
It's already been sorted that there are 3 options at the end Stay, Leave, Swan Dive. If the Leave light is bad then the swan dive is worse. This is not a decision for a minority government to make.
[please note this is for advisory purposes only - in case we don’t get the result we want]
Well, If it's advisory, then a 50% threshold is fine. The options you provide would need "some" fleshing out. Not sure why you're ruling out our democracy changing its mind about membership though… can you explain why?
We have voted on remain already, if you recall
Have we really decided on leave though?
If I go out for drinks and get completely pished and slur to my mates I want to leave, and ask if they can they negotiate my pubexit, then to find myself slapped awake in the back of a cab in Siberia by a Bulgarian taxi driver looking for approx £350m for the fare, have I got what I wanted?
No! What I really wished for, but could not convey in my drunken stupor, was for a clean cab, not driven by a foreigner to take me to my comfortably safe home for the same it would have cost me if I walked.
the only option that would make it undemocratic would be for there to be no dissent allowed including protest.the exercise of a democratic mandate/decision that an undemocrstic minority cannot accept
Its not difficult to grasp that both supporting it and opposing it are perfectly acceptable, and required options, within a democracy.
And what all this talk of mandates and final decisions?
Do I really need to post this picture, again? it seems so..
[img] 
[/img]
Do I really need to post this picture, again? it seems so..
No point really, I was just wasting time over breakfast while I waited for someone to pick up some wheels, THM has his reasons for wanting it all to go ahead, not sure what they are but they are deeply held.
Democracy is a funny beast, perhaps we should wait for a fully costed and detailed breakdown of the impact of the options, a WTO style one is easy to do and I'm sure the government already has (though the inner circles of the Cult of Brexit will dismiss it all as not enough unicorn) but doesn't want to publish.
A detailed explanation of what changes under a deal proposed is one of the key components of democracy, informing people and decision makers fully so that they can make informed decisions.
We all know that the UK staying in is best not only for the UK but also for the rest of the EU.
Best for the EU most certainly
Not for the UK when you factor in lost global opportunities, overly expensive food imports (protective tariffs on products we don’t grow), overly burdensome irrelevant regulations, fully costed immigration, fully costed and transparent budget payments inc pensions and loans (paying the EU for their ability to sell us more than they sell us) ...
@tmh Swiss voted in a referendum to end FoM and the outgoing President has been very frustrated with the EU playing politics trying to link increased budget payments (they do like the money the EU) with technical issues like recognition of stock exchanges.
They also voted quite clearly to NEVER join the EU - if it was such a good thing surely they’d be champing at the bit to sign up for the whole thing ?
Not for the UK when you factor in lost global opportunities, overly expensive food imports (protective tariffs on products we don’t grow), overly burdensome irrelevant regulations, fully costed immigration, fully costed and transparent budget payments inc pensions and loans (paying the EU for their ability to sell us more than they sell us) ...
Dare we ask for some evidence again? Or can we file this under personal opinions again.
THM has his reasons for wanting it all to go ahead, not sure what they are but they are deeply held.
He respects the result (not the one he wanted)
He knows its not going to be reversed
He has a job to do and is paid to get on with dealing with what’s ahead
He does not “want it” to go ahead but he accepts that IS what is going to happen so he is dealing with it
Why is our democratic country not allowed to change its mind? I can understand why you'd be against that Jamba, but still don't get THM's reasons.