[Politics] Brexit

[ManOfSussex]

Both sides have said the phase one agreement isn't binding and is subject to change during phase two ..... don't let reality get in the way of your propaganda lie though.

Really?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...ent-binding-says-british-government-1.3323715

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

I work in Financial services, for a large European bank (from Germany), and I previously worked for a large European Bank (Swiss). I know from discussions internally, and also with ex-colleagues at the Swiss Bank that both companies (and many others) are pressing ahead with Brexit projects to move large chunks of their business and roles associated with this to European Union locations; Dublin, Paris and Frankfurt being the main beneficiaries of our decision. IMHO, this could trim off a good 10-15% of the UK FS business at a stroke, and this is only the stuff they are OBLIGED to move (as it's Euro aligned business such as Euroclear, which MUST be in an EU country). I'd expect more cuts to be in the pipeline when the full impact is understood.

So, for me, for soooo many reasons, this is a foolish move.

You clearly know what you are talking about, it is part of what the remain voters actually thought about before voting, unfortunately leave voters did not think at all, rushing to the ballot box to get rid of johnny foreigner.
We must have another vote on the final outcome of negociations.
If it is leave again then fair enough but how was anybody expected to know what it really meant for this country and the lies from both sides will be seen to be true or false.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-stuff-video-ukip-maybe-leader-a8153106.html

 

[Titanic]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-stuff-video-ukip-maybe-leader-a8153106.html

That Farage is a very naughty boy

 

[ManOfSussex]

He's reiterated it on Twitter.

[tweet]951400764697653248[/tweet]

 

[Baldseagull]

and it might be agreeable if properly structured (put a empowered parliament at the head) and presented to us openly. however the French and Dutch rejected the Treaty of Lisbon, a pathway to a having a European constitution, so its not as popular among europeans citizens as it is the leaders. it also demands acceptance of Euro and central taxation and fiscal policy, items other northern Europeans are not so keen on (because they'll be paying the bills).

I agree, but I think it is worth working towards.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

He's reiterated it on Twitter.

[tweet]951400764697653248[/tweet]

Traitor, hang him

 

[Two Professors]

I work in Financial services, for a large European bank (from Germany), and I previously worked for a large European Bank (Swiss). I know from discussions internally, and also with ex-colleagues at the Swiss Bank that both companies (and many others) are pressing ahead with Brexit projects to move large chunks of their business and roles associated with this to European Union locations; Dublin, Paris and Frankfurt being the main beneficiaries of our decision. IMHO, this could trim off a good 10-15% of the UK FS business at a stroke, and this is only the stuff they are OBLIGED to move (as it's Euro aligned business such as Euroclear, which MUST be in an EU country). I'd expect more cuts to be in the pipeline when the full impact is understood.

So, for me, for soooo many reasons, this is a foolish move.

That is a marvellous illustration of how tolerant and understand NSC is.That somebody can come on here and freely admit they are a banker,and a long term one at that,without suffering a torrent of hostility for the colossal fkup they made of our economy,is truly remarkable.

 

[Baldseagull]

Umm it was always going to be a “soft” border, we told you it would be. Secretary of state for N.I. at the time Theresa Villiers said it would be,Boris told you as well before the referendum it would be.
Just because you believed the likes of Major and Blair scare stories when they trotted out hand in hand together and said leave would result in a hard border, or when you believed Osborne when he warned it could only result in a hard border,or Bertie Ahern or remainer Amber Rudd or the Irish commissioner who forecast a hard border and predicted “Dundalk becoming the new Calais”, or even May herself who predicted a hard border. ALL wrong.
You should have listened to Boris and leavers. You wouldn’t be so angry now your predictions havnt come true and leavers were correct.

The issue is how does a soft border square with being outside the customs union and single market? If we are not out of those, we are told by JCFG and yourself that it will not really be Brexit, because we will be paying fees and subject to EU law.
If we get all the access we want, but end up with less sovereignty by virtue of being subject to law we have no input in creating or amending, and paying fees in the region of current contributions, it will be brexiteers asking for a second referendum.

 

[Baldseagull]

Of course you would so would plenty of others, thankfully we have scuppered any notion of that happening to our great country.
Must have been heartbreaking for you, considering that’s what you want to sign up to, when Cameron came back from his super mega deal talks and said he had secured that we would never be a part of ever closer union, putting to bed any notion of us ever being part of any United states of Europe……..….oh wait, no you weren’t, you were joyous,you said he had secured a brilliant deal and we should all now vote to stay IN. So No “ever closer union” was brilliant, but you really want ever closer union.
And you don’t think people see through how much of a untrustworthy weasel you are and by extension the whole EU lying shit show you aspire to.

His deal was we would not be forced in to closer Union, we would be free to choose to do so though. We would not get closer without a referendum on whether we wanted to or not, I know how much you respect the will of the people, so I would have thought that would be good for you too.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

That is a marvellous illustration of how tolerant and understand NSC is.That somebody can come on here and freely admit they are a banker,and a long term one at that,without suffering a torrent of hostility for the colossal fkup they made of our economy,is truly remarkable.

I hate banks with a passion, but on this occasion its is a solid example of the effects of leaving and like them or hate them you cannot get away from the fact that financial services are vital to our economy, and they know it, thats why they got away with what they done lock stock and barrel and plumetted the country into debt, 2 trillion quid if i remember correctly.
But rather than see the post as a reason not to leave you divert away from facts, why cant you see that it is for the reason above and many others, let alone our useless in fighting politicians, that leaving is the wrong decision, give up now and come and join the intelligent side.

 

[beorhthelm]

I agree, but I think it is worth working towards.

theres the problem, they are working towards an an unacceptable fudge, rather than start from scratch, designing, present and selling a complete future vision. lay it all out on the table, what the USE will look like and mean - centralised bank, taxation, policy, loss of sovereignty, democracy through a properly empowered parliament after making the council and commission secondary. they dont/wont do this, they want the centralisation without the true democractic accountability, and do so in this creeping fashion to avoid upsetting too many citizens.

 

[beorhthelm]

The issue is how does a soft border square with being outside the customs union and single market?

begin by accepting that its a special scenario due to geography and history. its possible to do, only the proposed solution is dismissed out of hand rather than discussed to work through to a workable solution. parts of the solution are already in place in Norway and Switzerland so the legal technicalities are solvable, technology makes the scale of the problem manageable, its only politics in the way.

 

[Simster]

Both sides have said the phase one agreement isn't binding and is subject to change during phase two ..... don't let reality get in the way of your propaganda lie though.

But can you honestly see a way where this aspect can be changed? The fact is, an open border with the Republic is non-negotiable. To change that is to rip up the GFA and that is never going to happen. Equally non-negotiable is to put the border in the sea, the DUP propping up the government has seen to that.

Regardless of the bluster from anyone on here on both sides and just looking at these facts, where exactly is the wriggle room? I honestly can't see any.

 

[beorhthelm]

But can you honestly see a way where this aspect can be changed? The fact is, an open border with the Republic is non-negotiable. To change that is to rip up the GFA and that is never going to happen. Equally non-negotiable is to put the border in the sea, the DUP propping up the government has seen to that.

Regardless of the bluster from anyone on here on both sides and just looking at these facts, where exactly is the wriggle room? I honestly can't see any.

the fact is an open border is undefined. do we mean a physically open border, one open to trade or one open to legal matters. we currently have a border where the first two apply but not the third. why cant we wriggle towards one where trade occurs physically but subject to addition regulation? as already case when you apply VAT for example.

 

[Baldseagull]

theres the problem, they are working towards an an unacceptable fudge, rather than start from scratch, designing, present and selling a complete future vision. lay it all out on the table, what the USE will look like and mean - centralised bank, taxation, policy, loss of sovereignty, democracy through a properly empowered parliament after making the council and commission secondary. they dont/wont do this, they want the centralisation without the true democractic accountability, and do so in this creeping fashion to avoid upsetting too many citizens.

I agree largely, but I don't think the EU wants to avoid being a fully democratic body, it wants to avoid national self interest being at play at the highest level. There are lots of difficulties to be overcome in getting there, but for me it is a forward move so worth doing, Brexit is equally difficult, but a backwards step in my opinion, and ultimately is very likely to be reversed.

 

[pasty]

He's reiterated it on Twitter.

[tweet]951400764697653248[/tweet]

Final proof, as if needed, he is an idiot. I truly believe a second vote would deliver a remain win. Which, although I voted remain, is why there should not be one. If there was, and and remain won it, the leave camp would go into meltdown demanding a "best of three", and in fairness,would be quite justified in doing so.

I voted remain, and am gutted leave won, but that's democracy. Leave won, so lets just get on with it and get the best deal we possibly can.

 

[Baldseagull]

begin by accepting that its a special scenario due to geography and history. its possible to do, only the proposed solution is dismissed out of hand rather than discussed to work through to a workable solution. parts of the solution are already in place in Norway and Switzerland so the legal technicalities are solvable, technology makes the scale of the problem manageable, its only politics in the way.

The DUP say that they do not want special rules for NI, they want to be just like the rest of the UK, which adds some complexity to an already complex problem. You are right though, only politics is the issue, stop brexit, and all is well.

 

[Two Professors]

I hate banks with a passion, but on this occasion its is a solid example of the effects of leaving and like them or hate them you cannot get away from the fact that financial services are vital to our economy, and they know it, thats why they got away with what they done lock stock and barrel and plumetted the country into debt, 2 trillion quid if i remember correctly.
But rather than see the post as a reason not to leave you divert away from facts, why cant you see that it is for the reason above and many others, let alone our useless in fighting politicians, that leaving is the wrong decision, give up now and come and join the intelligent side.

Au contraire.I see the background of the poster making his post utterly meaningless,as bankers have time and again proven how they only do things in their self-interest,and the rest of us can go hang.An industry so useless and corrupt will only ever be trusted again when taken over by algorithms and AI.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Final proof, as if needed, he is an idiot. I truly believe a second vote would deliver a remain win. Which, although I voted remain, is why there should not be one. If there was, and and remain won it, the leave camp would go into meltdown demanding a "best of three", and in fairness,would be quite justified in doing so.

I voted remain, and am gutted leave won, but that's democracy. Leave won, so lets just get on with it and get the best deal we possibly can.

He did of course talk about second referendums before the first had happened, so I suppose at least he's being consistent with his idiocy:

In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017