I believe it would be fair for all parties to clarify the position on the brexit. Tories - hard or soft brexit? The document presented by TM gives a clue towards softer,but changes on nearly daily basis. Labour - just mumbling. Them position is cloudier than a bottle of Guinness Lib. dem - soft brexit. Parliament majority - soft brexit. People that bothered to vote, majority decided for- hard brexit. It seem TM's time is spent negotiating with her own party and DUP instead of the EU. How will this lead to an agreement?
I would like that, Scotland is a lovely country and for those who have not toured, you're missing out.
Here is a fact.. 1 GBP = 1.1169 EUR 1 EUR = 0.8947 GBP GBP vs EUR 1.117 Todays rate. Slipping down further each time it looks like a hard Brexit. You have to wonder at hidden agendas tbh. Most in the UK were aghast at the idea of joining the Euro. Very close to parity now. Each day the farce continues, the wealth of the UK reduces. That Peter Hitchens footage on post 3432 (lightning 650). Interesting view point on the EU. But nothing that makes me think are anything but weaker by leaving. Rich selling you down the river?https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2018/02/08/2198570/jacob-rees-moggs-huge-personal-windfall-after-brexit/
I think it is different, not surprisingy For those of us looking at deal 2 , wto and free trade, just like the rest of the eorlds countries who are NOT in the eu, we knew the eu comission would do this and we said, go straight to wto on the article 50 launch so in march 2019, everyone would have had 2 and a half years and would be ready on march to go The hint was from day 1 the eu said, 4 pillars or nothing and since then they have been consistent Now, instead, the remaining side of the government ignored that, in the same way merkel ignored people with common sense saying, do not open the doors and 2 years later, chaos. The negotiations have been little more than an attempt to placate business and the 48% but to be successfull at that you would have had to have had a partner willing to work and the eu point blank are not budging, 4 pillars or nothing. There was a deal suggestion from us that D davies was working on that has been simply thrown in the bin by May, he basically went through every trade agreement in modern times that the eu had made with non eu countries so was able to put a deal forward based on actual precedents that the eu could not refuse. For some reason May binned them as they were not submissive enough to the eu. What I have appreciated is that the eu have now told the eu countries to start preparing. I hope that the other 27 will now start taking part, as the eu comission is their representative body and have largely been putting the eu commission before the other 27 and I hope they will now start to step up.
Re this, https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2018/02/08/2198570/jacob-rees-moggs-huge-personal-windfall-after-brexit/ Surely when someone has such a potential personal financial gain, then they should not be involved in the process. Just looks like the rich getting richer.
..OR, Mays strings are being pulled by hard Brexit Tories, who do not want that kind of deal? That is much more likely.
When reposting an article from the times it doesn't allow you to see the item unless you subscribe. But again your item is a divert. Should you look at all those on the eu comission, the other 27 and the U.K. side you will find people and in quite some numbers, people who earn more than the common man.
Which if you think it through, you kill your own argument. If those who chose to leave were in charge, Davie's proposal would be in Brussels, it isn't as may appointed a remaining civil servant to undermine Davies the whole way through
A divert, in what way? Seems very relevant that one of the richest men in the Tory party stands to gain from Brexit. Sorry about the link btw
Well, let me put this too you, If you type into the guggle, "richest people in U.K. politics", do you think the only people who will appear on that list will be brexiteers? If you were to type in "the richest people in German politics", or French, the Dutch or even the richest people in the eu commission do you think there would not be any? My point is, to say as you have with Mogg, look he shouldn't be involved because he is rich, then if you carried that standard through, you would remove far more from the eu 27 and the commission than the U.K. so the richness of a participant is a red herring Just as an example, Lord Heseltine, a fervent europhile and keen anti brexiteer has an estimated £278 miilion wealth, should he be removed from the house because he is a rich remainer? Or Lord Sainsbury a die hard Labour Lord and remianer with a wealth of estimated £540 million or on Labours Front bench look at Sir Kier Starmers or even Lady Nugee's (Emily Thornberrys) wealth and arch remainers, should they be exempted too So to say Mogg is a brexiteer is rich and should therefore be removed whilst we leave the other millionaires on the remain side in both houses and on all parties, is simply a red herring
You said.... I said.... You said.... I said.... You said.... So, in summary. We both agree that Ford is American. Thanks for clarifying what we already know, that we do like and buy American cars in Europe.
Interesting development within the last hour When May appointed David Davies it was to show a brexiteer was in charge of the process to stave off that she as a remainer would try and sacrifice it. What Davies did, knowing the eu, was to go through every recent free trade/wto deal the eu did with a non eu country, he collated all of those so the eu could not refuse them as they had already been accepted before, he termed this the Canada plus plus deal. May had also appointed a civil service mandarin Olly Robins, himself a remainer to carry out the overview of all Brexit matters. Upon hearing the Canada plus plus deal, Davies admitted he was sidelined by the PM and Robins largely took over so remained in name only whilst the pm insisted brexit meant brexit When Davies stepped down they Brought in Dominic raab to be Brexit secratary and within days started to stand up for the U.K. insisting this is a two way deal and the eu needs to understand that, this weekend past he said, if we do not get a deal, the eu does not get the £39 billion leaving fee (which still has never been explained) 2 days later, today, May has announced that she will now be taking over Brexit negotiations aided by Olly Robins of the cabinet office and that Raab and the Brexit department will now be assisting and not taking the lead. I don't think you can get a clearer indication that May as a remainer, has every intent of Brexit in name only https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-poorer-families-says-thinktank-politics-live
She's signed her political death warrant (I hope). Davis's team did in fact come up with a complete trade deal proposal of the so-called Canada+++ kind, but this was suppressed by Whitehall mandarins and the no. 10 team on May's orders, which is essentially why Davis resigned. It wasn't so much that the the Chequers dog's breakfast white paper was a total farce, which it is, it was her claim that represented the only viable option, which was totally false. There is a detailed alternative fully drawn up that would have represented a clean Brexit and made a basis for proper hard negotiations but May made sure it never saw the light of day.
Have a read of the letter printed in the Times today by the retiring chairman of Lloyd’s. Everything he says is impossible to argue with. MPs frightened to give their viewpoint because of hard line right wing media. Britain will not be financially, economically or culturally better off outside the EU. It might well even cease to exist in its current form. If that is really what the people of this country want, then I would be utterly amazed.
The media in this country is hard right in general, no doubt about it. Also acts with absolute venom trying to 'create' stories especially after the Carillion saga. You would not believe the phone calls I overhear at times. (my wife works in PR for some big UK companies). BBC and many well known news papers might behave like the gestapo. Yet during Brexit they gave Leave such an easy time of it, no 'real' reporting and questioning went on. Unreal. Hope the hard right leave brigade dont do too much damage to the country but they seem to have the Government on the back foot and in the corner. TBH May should be taking a tougher stance against the hard right, would be of more benefit than total isolation from Europe. Even the nutty section of the Tory party know they will not survive another election. Nuts. As to May and the soft/hard Brexit, depending which day of the week it is, I am honestly puzzled why leavers think we should not work towards a deal.
Now as usual, duke is selective and rather leaving some key information out. He also hasn't posted a link so you can (1) check the full story and (2) check out the man saying it. So as the times operates a subscription you can get around it by typing into google, the headline, in this case The ex Chairman of Lloyds of London makes brexit statement into google should bypass the subscription and allow the story. I'm hoping the copy and paste of the full article works Never in over 50 years of working life have I seen the UK facing such an abject future, caused by the complete failure of our political establishment to govern, to communicate clearly with the public and, most importantly, to be honest with the electorate. We have many senior politicians who are seemingly consumed with their own ambition and vanity, with little regard for the best interests of the country. It is clear that either a negotiated settlement along the lines of the Chequers agreement or an exit from the EU with no deal are both going to result in the UK becoming a much poorer and less influential country than anybody was led to believe during the appallingly conducted referendum campaign. As a businessman, recently retired as chairman of Lloyd’s of London, I can see all too clearly the consequences for the economy, for employment and for the provision of basic services. Apart from the effect on manufacturing industry and the services sector (the latter being sacrificed by the government on the altar of Brexit), there will be disruption to the provision of basic public services such as agriculture, healthcare and air transport. We are constantly being told by the Brexiters it will all be fine. We will keep our sovereignty and we will be able to negotiate our own trade deals with ease. This is fanciful. Lloyd’s is the most global of all British institutions. Personal experience tells me that negotiating overseas rights is a long and painful process. If we are trying to do it as a small economy, the leverage we have is limited and far less than operating as a trade bloc, which is the EU. We would lose all the EU trading rights with third countries. It is also worth remembering that 44 per cent of our trade is with the EU. The great majority of UK economy is in the services sector — financial services alone contribute 12 per cent of gross domestic product. I agree with many of the warning comments made in recent weeks by many business leaders. But almost all of these comments are coming from overseas businesses. It is high time that UK business spoke up and galvanised the public to understand the true realities of what the country is facing. There also appears to be a silent majority of MPs from each of the major parties who seem terrified of putting their head above the parapet. They need to co-operate, or even coalesce, to provide the public with sensible government. The case for remaining in the EU needs to be restated and contrasted with the now much clearer alternative. Membership of the EU has drawbacks, but overall the benefits in terms of trade, security and fellowship overwhelm the narrow shortsighted nationalism espoused by those who wish to return to an Edwardian age Of course there needs to be a second referendum once the route we are pursuing becomes clear. That route will bear no resemblance to the picture painted by our politicians at the time of the first one. John Nelson Chairman, Lloyd’s of London 2011-17 Now based on the full article and dukes points and some history of the man himself Nope he retired early last year Oh I don't know, he's on the record for wanting a second referendum if we can't stop brexit. I think most would agree the chequers deal was fooling no one Perhaps if you read the left wing press and the treatment given to those who stand upto Corbyn? It is not unique to the right side, even more so since social media Which of course is bolloxs, every large change the U.K. has had, as with most countries, there has always been a period of retaining stability and often then moving forward for a benefit, this the U.K. has a great record of. I fail to see how culturally we will be worse off, we are simply moving from a european management company to the U.K. being run by the U.K. no one is stopping travel or trade from either side As to John Nelson, Duke I find hard to decide which face has told your story. You often rage (poorly at best) about how governments need to fall (you mostly mean tory) multinationals and bankers need to be dealt with and the 5% need to be chased to pay more, and how we shouldn't be turned into a low tax low wage country like singapore Then to promote your point on Brexit . you use John Nelson's article as voice that needs to be listened too whilst forgetting he spent most of his banking life in european banks such as credit suisse, Lazard SpA and has been a non executive director of jp morgan. He has also been a member of the UK Prime Minister’s Business Advisory group, and a member of the International Advisory Panel of the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Is a passionate remainer and advocates a second vote So you see duke, I'm perplexed, should we listen to chase the rich, stop the multinationals, get rid of governments and no to a singapore style country or should we listen to and believe the rich, believe the multinational, the government advisor and a singapore style country advisor because they are the very same person, care to clarify?
I would say mostly popularist as sales drives the sustainability of any business, being right doesn't mean it's wrong I assure you if you were watching question time , there was very little bias towards leave from the BBc no matter what programme it was and that remains the case, but yes many media companies both tv and press have lost the plot as they seek to create news rather than just reporting it because they are loosing so many customers to social media You say things as hard right, but is it hard right to insist on what was voted for, promised almost weekly that leave meant leave. May does know, and I know this from my own mp, that many mp's on the tory side have had people who have never seen their mp but always voted tory, turning up at mp's surgeries telling they they have sold out democracy and the democratic vote and unless they correct it, then they will not vote labour in the next election but will not vote tory either, such is the disgust with our mp's that democratic majorities are now a pick and choose democracy I think most leavers would prefer an amicable deal but we also know the eu. Many of us said, the eu will fuck us about, does not want a deal and would rather we went to wto so the eu comission looked strong with the mantra, you are with us or against us. We warned our politicians in the way many warned Merkel, don't open the effin doors, 2 years later europe is tearing itself apart. Knowing the eu, under barnier would also play silly buggers, that is why it was said, we'd like an amicable deal, the commision will not allow it to protect the union, so lets go to wto and free trade when we launch article 50. May ignored that and 2 years later, we are still in limbo, rather proving the leavers point.
