BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
And Dexit for that matter. I also reckon Frexit is pretty unlikley.ddraver wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Nervous times ahead for the EU...
http://fortune.com/2016/08/24/austria-italy-france-eu-exit/
...well at least they ve stopped harping on about that Nexit nonsense.....
Italy and Austria however are feasible scenarios given the political situation in those countries. I doubt the UK will be the only departure in the foreseeable future. If another big country goes than the EU project is in real danger, in particular as all the remaining big players have the Euro as their currency."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Hard to say as it depends on what scenario plays out in which country. UK bank exposure should be limited by the fact that we are not obliged to bail out Eurozone banking basket cases.mamba80 wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Nervous times ahead for the EU...
http://fortune.com/2016/08/24/austria-italy-france-eu-exit/
whats our banks exposure to this?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Any Sunderland Brexiters want to come and defend their vote?
JLR said something similar, if hard Brexit they won't be competitive.
Shame really as they're 10-15% of our business at the moment...0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Any Sunderland Brexiters want to come and defend their vote?
JLR said something similar, if hard Brexit they won't be competitive.
Shame really as they're 10-15% of our business at the moment...
Multiply that across all sorts of business sectors, add the companies who would've been setting up here over the next few years who choose to go elsewhere. A really positive outlook.
This whole thing is totally nonsensical.0 -
Joelsim wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Any Sunderland Brexiters want to come and defend their vote?
JLR said something similar, if hard Brexit they won't be competitive.
Shame really as they're 10-15% of our business at the moment...
Multiply that across all sorts of business sectors, add the companies who would've been setting up here over the next few years who choose to go elsewhere. A really positive outlook.
This whole thing is totally nonsensical.
These are all small bumps in the road that can be overcome by us all being more positive and playing less golf.
Why does Boris endlessly say "we are leaving the EU not Europe"0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:being more positive and playing less golf.
That has to be good advice generally.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:being more positive and playing less golf.
That has to be good advice generally.
If it can overcome the disadvantages of exiting the world's largest trading bloc then curing cancer should be child's play.0 -
Tariffs on cars are amongst the highest of all major goods categories so you would expect the customs duty impact to be highest in this sector if there is no deal. It also explains why the car companies with operations on both sides of the channel are lobbying very hard as I mentioned previously.Joelsim wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Any Sunderland Brexiters want to come and defend their vote?
JLR said something similar, if hard Brexit they won't be competitive.
Shame really as they're 10-15% of our business at the moment...
Multiply that across all sorts of business sectors, add the companies who would've been setting up here over the next few years who choose to go elsewhere. A really positive outlook.
This whole thing is totally nonsensical."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Tariffs on cars are amongst the highest of all major goods categories so you would expect the customs duty impact to be highest in this sector if there is no deal. It also explains why the car companies with operations on both sides of the channel are lobbying very hard as I mentioned previously.Joelsim wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Any Sunderland Brexiters want to come and defend their vote?
JLR said something similar, if hard Brexit they won't be competitive.
Shame really as they're 10-15% of our business at the moment...
Multiply that across all sorts of business sectors, add the companies who would've been setting up here over the next few years who choose to go elsewhere. A really positive outlook.
This whole thing is totally nonsensical.
Of course they are, as many industries are. That still doesn't change the fact that the UK can't be given as good a deal as the other members, and if they say cars are exempt then all the other industries will say "What about us?"0 -
This pretty much sums up the situation.
Cake and eat it. Not going to happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -diplomats0 -
Joelsim wrote:This pretty much sums up the situation.
Cake and eat it. Not going to happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -diplomats
I tend to ignore any article that mentions passports, but fails to mention MiFID 2.0 -
Joelsim wrote:This pretty much sums up the situation.
Cake and eat it. Not going to happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -diplomats
The paper that is quoted on there by Andre Sapir makes a lot of sense.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:Joelsim wrote:This pretty much sums up the situation.
Cake and eat it. Not going to happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -diplomats
I tend to ignore any article that mentions passports, but fails to mention MiFID 2.
I've not heard anyone else mention it and when I looked into it the other day it didn't appear to bear much relevance. But, please post a summary of why you think it's important please fella.0 -
0
-
Some industries will not be too worried if they are already at a very low rate or exempt. But tariffs are not the whole story.Joelsim wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Tariffs on cars are amongst the highest of all major goods categories so you would expect the customs duty impact to be highest in this sector if there is no deal. It also explains why the car companies with operations on both sides of the channel are lobbying very hard as I mentioned previously.Joelsim wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Any Sunderland Brexiters want to come and defend their vote?
JLR said something similar, if hard Brexit they won't be competitive.
Shame really as they're 10-15% of our business at the moment...
Multiply that across all sorts of business sectors, add the companies who would've been setting up here over the next few years who choose to go elsewhere. A really positive outlook.
This whole thing is totally nonsensical.
Of course they are, as many industries are. That still doesn't change the fact that the UK can't be given as good a deal as the other members, and if they say cars are exempt then all the other industries will say "What about us?"
The Group I work for falls into the non-EU headquartered manufacturer with manufacturing base in UK and the EU as well as several Far East locations. Over 95% of our sales by value are already exempt under WTO rules as they are classed as 'technology'. We have no plans to leave the UK as there is no real driver, but even if the old pre-WTO rates applied (or even higher) we would still not shift as the other commercial and regulatory factors still make the UK a competitive base. Those other factors include taxes, labour law flexibility, business friendly environment etc and those advantages are not about to change materially.
Based on this logic we expect to see be a fair bit of huffing and puffing from interested parties to try and optimise their situation (such as the letter from the Japanese govt), but when push comes to shove, they will need to weigh up all the factors.
Even your Nissan example was not a case of them potentially packing their bags and shutting up shop. It was more about where the next incremental investment goes and even then, the CEO said that the UK would very likely figure in their future plans."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Joelsim wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Joelsim wrote:This pretty much sums up the situation.
Cake and eat it. Not going to happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -diplomats
I tend to ignore any article that mentions passports, but fails to mention MiFID 2.
I've not heard anyone else mention it and when I looked into it the other day it didn't appear to bear much relevance. But, please post a summary of why you think it's important please fella.
It removes a lot of the need for passporting. Its implementation has been delayed, but nonetheless it should come in before the UK leaves the EU. It is not without issues e.g. it relies on acceptance of equivalence and means the UK will have to comply with regulations it has no influence over, but it is still not bad. It also doesn't apply to retail, but I imagine that is a quite small export from the UK.
e.g. http://www.linklaters.com/Insights/EU-R ... ID-II.aspx
Meanwhile, one of the German banks is alarmed that it will lose passport rights into the UK and thus cut off its access to capital.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:Joelsim wrote:TheBigBean wrote:Joelsim wrote:This pretty much sums up the situation.
Cake and eat it. Not going to happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -diplomats
I tend to ignore any article that mentions passports, but fails to mention MiFID 2.
I've not heard anyone else mention it and when I looked into it the other day it didn't appear to bear much relevance. But, please post a summary of why you think it's important please fella.
It removes a lot of the need for passporting. Its implementation has been delayed, but nonetheless it should come in before the UK leaves the EU. It is not without issues e.g. it relies on acceptance of equivalence and means the UK will have to comply with regulations it has no influence over, but it is still not bad. It also doesn't apply to retail, but I imagine that is a quite small export from the UK.
e.g. http://www.linklaters.com/Insights/EU-R ... ID-II.aspx
Meanwhile, one of the German banks is alarmed that it will lose passport rights into the UK and thus cut off its access to capital.
Other reports suggest the deadline is slipping and we could end up in limbo.
If you want to be positive and seize the opportunity then move to DUBLIN or buy land/proprty there. It seems surprisingly popular in many people's contingency planning. Or shares in Irish builders.0 -
I said above it has been delayed. The point being that it should be discussed in the context of any passport discussion, but isn't. It is characteristic of the entire midleading Brexit debate.
Supposedly well informed intelligent people mutter on about Euro clearing, the City and passports without the slightest clue about any of them. It's usually followed by pouring scorn on the intelligence of voters in Sunderland.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:being more positive and playing less golf.
That has to be good advice generally.
I don't think you can play negative golf?!?
Although they say cycling is the new golf, so should I be doing less cycling??0 -
TheBigBean wrote:I said above it has been delayed. The point being that it should be discussed in the context of any passport discussion, but isn't. It is characteristic of the entire midleading Brexit debate.
Supposedly well informed intelligent people mutter on about Euro clearing, the City and passports without the slightest clue about any of them. It's usually followed by pouring scorn on the intelligence of voters in Sunderland.
In the same vein I do not understand the supposed importance of leaving before we elect new MEPs0 -
Decent potted summary here - relevant section titled 'third country firms'TheBigBean wrote:I said above it has been delayed. The point being that it should be discussed in the context of any passport discussion, but isn't. It is characteristic of the entire midleading Brexit debate.
Supposedly well informed intelligent people mutter on about Euro clearing, the City and passports without the slightest clue about any of them. It's usually followed by pouring scorn on the intelligence of voters in Sunderland.
http://www.cms-lawnow.com/regzone/articles/2015/february/mifid-ii--an-overview-of-the-new-regime
This, plus judicious use of a branch somewhere in the EU should cover most of the bases. Use of an EU subsidiary or branch is something that most financial institutions either have or will be able to create.
On your point about people not understanding the issues, it is all too easy to take some hand wringing newspaper article about trade or business risks of BREXIT in a specific sector or company, assume a worst case outcome and extrapolate that across the whole economy without thinking it through and conclude that we are doomed. (I say conclude, more use it to justify their preconceived ideas)."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Of course the Nissan position could be more about extracting cash from the government than any real prospect of not investing:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand
Unless of course you take what the CEO of a large multinational says at face value?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Joelsim wrote:
Joel, just for a moment lets consider the case is won and there has to be an Act of Parliament passes through both chambers. What do you expect to happen? MPs disregard the referendum as it was only advisory and the whole business fade away? What an insult to democracy that would be. Mind you, the French had a referendum in 2005 which was ignored and the poor Irish had to keep voting until they came up with the "right" answer didn't they? So the EU isn't without previous is it? Do you expect the Brexit stance to soften? On the contrary. People feel, rightly or wrongly, that the EU is remote and unaccountable and ignoring the referendum result would only reinforce that view.
It would only be prolonging the inevitable.0 -
I thought brexiters believed in the primacy of parliament over being dictated to?
The reason we want the debate as opposed to the current approach is not so much about Brexit happening or not, both labour and the Tories agree to respect the result, but how the UK exits and what it decides to negotiate must be open for discussion.
It was never discussed and it's too important not to.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:Of course the Nissan position could be more about extracting cash from the government than any real prospect of not investing:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand
Unless of course you take what the CEO of a large multinational says at face value?
Well yes. Brexit is a useful opportunity to exact demands out of gov't because the UK is in a weak negotiating position.
No sh!t Sherlock.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:I thought brexiters believed in the primacy of parliament over being dictated to?
The reason we want the debate as opposed to the current approach is not so much about Brexit happening or not, both labour and the Tories agree to respect the result, but how the UK exits and what it decides to negotiate must be open for discussion.
It was never discussed and it's too important not to.
Can't really see the point of having an open debate on what outcome we want before we start any negotiations. Surely that weakens further any bargaining position? How could our negotiators ask for X, with the EU knowing that we would settle for Y?
Negotiations can't start before A50 is triggered and there is no going back. A fact that seems lost on the likes of Tim Farron, who would like a second referendum on the acceptance of any deal. Whatever deal we get is the deal we get. There is no going back and saying we have changed our minds.0 -
I doubt there will be any negotiation over the big picture. They hold all the aces so if we try and cherry pick and they say no then we have a hard exit. Or we can pretend to leave and have a Norway style deal, in which they will dictate the terms. So why not have a vote on hard or soft?
About a quarter of the UK population were not entitled to vote, about a quarter did not bother to vote, another quarter voted in and a quarter voted out.
There is a chance that only 10% of the population want a hard exit.0 -
Ballysmate wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:I thought brexiters believed in the primacy of parliament over being dictated to?
The reason we want the debate as opposed to the current approach is not so much about Brexit happening or not, both labour and the Tories agree to respect the result, but how the UK exits and what it decides to negotiate must be open for discussion.
It was never discussed and it's too important not to.
Can't really see the point of having an open debate on what outcome we want before we start any negotiations. Surely that weakens further any bargaining position? How could our negotiators ask for X, with the EU knowing that we would settle for Y?
Negotiations can't start before A50 is triggered and there is no going back. A fact that seems lost on the likes of Tim Farron, who would like a second referendum on the acceptance of any deal. Whatever deal we get is the deal we get. There is no going back and saying we have changed our minds.
So how d'ya think all these political parties over the centuries have campaigned and debated in public how they ought to negotiate things?
Given the vast array of possible options and outcomes for Brexit, you're happy for a cabinet to decide without drbate or discussion which option to go for, even when the cabinet which was elected was firmly part of the remain campaign?
If anything these are the more important decisions. There's not even unity amongst those who voted Brexit.
The reason for the secrecy isn't around negotiating tactics (the red line on immigration being drawn and the general behaviour of Davis is not conducive to advantageous negotiating) is to hide the fact there is a huge divide within the Tory party on what Brexit ought to look like, and with such a slender commons majority, they'd get annihilated.
With the Tories in particular, the obvious answer is always to do with party politics.
Your obsession with parliament possibly renaging on Brexit is a red herring. Both big parties have committed to Brexit.
It's a diversionary argument to make an otherwise weak case.0 -
Well the ref wasn't legally binding.
And quite frankly I'd hope the MPs actually did what would be of most benefit to their constituents.
With regard to companies moving, if we don't have free access to the single market then many companies have alsready suggested that they will consider their options. By the law of averages, some will leave, some won't invest as much here, some won't come in the first place, some won't trust a government who's shown its stupidity and lack of judgement...as well as the private investors who may think twice, they of course prop up our considerable balance of trade deficit.
That's not just reading things and coming up with a worst case scenario, that's a pretty realistic view.0 -
So after telling us that we have no hope of negotiating with the much larger EU trading bloc, you're now telling us that the UK will be pushed around by a car company that has a plant near Sunderland?Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:Of course the Nissan position could be more about extracting cash from the government than any real prospect of not investing:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand
Unless of course you take what the CEO of a large multinational says at face value?
Well yes. Brexit is a useful opportunity to exact demands out of gov't because the UK is in a weak negotiating position.
No sh!t Sherlock."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
