Politics, politics, politics

[SpurMeUp]

P&O is now a Cypriot company thanks to Brexit? 182 years its been a British company.

Sony has confirmed its moving its European head quarters from London to Amsterdam.

Dyson is moving its HQ to Singapore. Nothing to do with Brexit becuase Dyson himself campaigned for Brexit, just unfortunate timing!

It's a hidden Brexit effect, which doesn't instantly hit everyone right away. It slowely erodes the UK position in the world. What with ARM - the UKs only tech giant - sold to the Japanese post Brexit (lower pound), we are seeing the effects of Brexit. Short term, sure ARM has its company in cambridge and Dyson has researchers in the UK. But histroy shows that often these high value jobs dilute and follow the company's registration abroad for tax purposes and to save money.

But the worst is yet to come. If a no deal brexit does happen there will be far more fall out. Crazy that anyone still thinks this Brexit charade holds any value! Crazier that people and MPs aren't calling it out for the disaster that it is.

 

[the dza]

I'm not ignoring anything actually. The brick that the UK finds themselves in is of course very little to do with Labour but their opening position is something that already has been nixed so I don't see the point. It is self-serving politics that has got negotiations to the point they are now. More of the same is not the answer.

Yes it can be extended but it is not a switch to be flicked. The extension has to be accompanied by a viable plan. And what is that plan? Who can say. And if the deadline is looming close 1000 more businesses who made preparations to move will put those plans in motion. The March deadline is not arbitrary in any sense.

It is in the sense that there is nothing in the legislation to stop it being extended if the British Government and the EU agree to it. Any conditions that have to be met are political choices, they aren't set in stone (at least this is what one of the politicos on the BBC was saying earlier). And it seems now that there won't be a lot of choice left but to extend it, regardless of what happens from here. Grieve was on the news earlier saying that even if May's deal got through, they'd have to extend Article 50 because there isn't time for all the necessary legislation required to enter a transition period to get done. He might be talking sh1t, but I don't think he is.

The point of Labour's opening position is just that, it's an opening. Until they get to enter into negotiations and the EU say "ok, you want this, but we will give you this" then I don't really see what the problem is -- even if you think it's been nixed, it actually hasn't until they have said yes/no at the negotiating table. So Labour might be perfectly happy with a Norway+ deal. But surely it's ok for the starting point to aim for something better? Labour just doesn't have the red-lines that The Tories do and anybody who wants a soft-Brexit should want Labour to be talking to the EU. And for that, they are going to have to get into government. And to do that, they are going to have to let The Tories phuck themselves over Brexit.

The 2nd referendum might happen, but at the moment, there isn't a majority in Parliament for it (as far as I know). 70-odd Labour MPs attended the official launch of the PV campaign the other day, that's nowhere near enough. Some of Labour's front bench have said they'd rather resign than vote for a 2nd referendum. It doesn't have enough support amongst Tory Remainers, at least not at the moment.

Anyway, this is all just guesswork on my part, but it's fun to theorise as I'm a sad qunt. Reading between the lines, it seems to me like Labour are moving in the direction of Norway+/2nd ref and I would prefer the former as I think it's more of a sure thing.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

To those that think no deal hold promise - it is because it has not been fully defined. It’s the uncertainty that holds potential, ‘maybe it could be a fresh independent future!’ Otherwise no deal backers are simply Anarchists. Which I’d respect if they said they were. I’d be far more interested in their position then.

To those that don’t think no deal has any promise, it’s implications are clear, even if we don’t know exactly how the detail will shake down. In broad strokes we know the pain and disruption it would cause.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

Pain and disruption should never be a barrier to doing the right thing (I'm not saying 'no deal' is btw).

I would have loved someone (with clout and intelligence) to flesh it out and put some legwork into constructing a framework and roadmap of what it might look like.

It's just been left as the default 'f.ck up' option.

In a way it was an opportunity, but it doesn't surprise me that no-one was ballsy enough to stick their head above the parapet when you consider the performance of the Brexit ''leavers' during the referendum....probably a good thing given the names involved.

 

[Baleforce]

P&O is now a Cypriot company thanks to Brexit? 182 years its been a British company.

Sony has confirmed its moving its European head quarters from London to Amsterdam.

Dyson is moving its HQ to Singapore. Nothing to do with Brexit becuase Dyson himself campaigned for Brexit, just unfortunate timing!

It's a hidden Brexit effect, which doesn't instantly hit everyone right away. It slowely erodes the UK position in the world. What with ARM - the UKs only tech giant - sold to the Japanese post Brexit (lower pound), we are seeing the effects of Brexit. Short term, sure ARM has its company in cambridge and Dyson has researchers in the UK. But histroy shows that often these high value jobs dilute and follow the company's registration abroad for tax purposes and to save money.

But the worst is yet to come. If a no deal brexit does happen there will be far more fall out. Crazy that anyone still thinks this Brexit charade holds any value! Crazier that people and MPs aren't calling it out for the disaster that it is.

Thats just project fear, they’ll soon come crawling back when we are the only country where you can buy a BMW as Berlin will only ship them here to make use of the generous tariff’s from the trade deal the German govt have ready for us to sign on March 30th. Brilliant poker players the German car manufacturers.

 

[Rorschach]

It is in the sense that there is nothing in the legislation to stop it being extended if the British Government and the EU agree to it. Any conditions that have to be met are political choices, they aren't set in stone (at least this is what one of the politicos on the BBC was saying earlier). And it seems now that there won't be a lot of choice left but to extend it, regardless of what happens from here. Grieve was on the news earlier saying that even if May's deal got through, they'd have to extend Article 50 because there isn't time for all the necessary legislation required to enter a transition period to get done. He might be talking sh1t, but I don't think he is.

The point of Labour's opening position is just that, it's an opening. Until they get to enter into negotiations and the EU say "ok, you want this, but we will give you this" then I don't really see what the problem is -- even if you think it's been nixed, it actually hasn't until they have said yes/no at the negotiating table. So Labour might be perfectly happy with a Norway+ deal. But surely it's ok for the starting point to aim for something better? Labour just doesn't have the red-lines that The Tories do and anybody who wants a soft-Brexit should want Labour to be talking to the EU. And for that, they are going to have to get into government. And to do that, they are going to have to let The Tories phuck themselves over Brexit.

The 2nd referendum might happen, but at the moment, there isn't a majority in Parliament for it (as far as I know). 70-odd Labour MPs attended the official launch of the PV campaign the other day, that's nowhere near enough. Some of Labour's front bench have said they'd rather resign than vote for a 2nd referendum. It doesn't have enough support amongst Tory Remainers, at least not at the moment.

Anyway, this is all just guesswork on my part, but it's fun to theorise as I'm a sad qunt. Reading between the lines, it seems to me like Labour are moving in the direction of Norway+/2nd ref and I would prefer the former as I think it's more of a sure thing.

It is my understanding that the European Council will only grant an extension if is accompanied by a no deal plan. It is not an extension for no purpose or in this case a nebulous plan be decided at some later point. The intention would be to extend for future ratification and not renegotiation. If May's deal somehow squeaks through, the EU will be somewhat flexible on the ratification timetable I would guess. I could be wrong about this but I'm sure I read this somewhere.

As for whether the UK can influence future trade negotiations while being outside the EU, the answer is most definitely not. Labour can ask all they want but it is not going to happen. It will be a short negotiation on this point.

Anyway, I've decided to mostly switch off from this until they decided what they are doing. Too melty on the brain.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Pain and disruption should never be a barrier to doing the right thing (I'm not saying 'no deal' is btw).

I would have loved someone (with clout and intelligence) to flesh it out and put some legwork into constructing a framework and roadmap of what it might look like.

It's just been left as the default 'f.ck up' option.

In a way it was an opportunity, but it doesn't surprise me that no-one was ballsy enough to stick their head above the parapet when you consider the performance of the Brexit ''leavers' during the referendum....probably a good thing given the names involved.

I don't know if you think our Bank of England and Treasury have clout and intelligence? They have modeled no deal scenerios. The CBI, US based economic think tanks with no allegiances, and the IMF have too, but the BoE and HM Treasury have all the UKs data to hand so they should be the most respected. When people say hard brexit will significantly hit our economy - they are basing it on such models, and also their own simple logic. For example, uk car manufacturers export 80% of cars made to the EU, the profit margin on cars is less than the 10% WTO tarrifs that would have to be applied (not even going into the issues of getting parts over from the EU just in time to the production lines, with new customs checks at the ports, and massive queques).

Now I appreiate that economic types have never liked Brexit, and in any 'history' or 'his-story' - even a future one - there is always bias. You can't really tell history without bias. The only way to control for it, historians say, is to understand the bias. So maybe the economists are a tad biased. But the BoE will have tried to put any bias to one side to make their economic projections. The thing about numbers is they hold no bias, and if you choose fair ones, then you have to give these models credibility. It's not like most economists are saying a hard brexit is very bad and some are saying it is not. 99% are. Even Patrick Milfold who Leave turn to, as the exception, says hard exit will decimate UK manufacturing.

Okay the point remains, why hasn't a pro-Brexit group published a vision for Brexit? I think its telling that no one has. Why is that? This is one of the most seismic things in our life time. The ERG is setup solely to pursue Brexit. They have the word "research" in their name. Yet they have not put forward a manifesto, vision, road map. Why?

It's simple really. Brexit, especially their version, offers you fuk all. It might offer them something. In a low regulation, low worker rights, low company taxation, Singapore-like setup, but even that is highly debatable. Singapore is successful because of its locatoin next to China and swathes of cheap labour, as well as low biz intervention. So there is a lack of vision for Brexit because it doesn't change anything, it just harms our economy. It might make the UK less white, it might control EU migration, it might offer some small economic opotunities as the UK is more agile with trade regulation, but its not significant enough to make any difference, we'll lose a lot more in impaired trade with the 500m in europe where we used to have free trade.

I think the ethics and foundation of the Brexit vote are honerable. The people who backed it honest and simply want a shake up of the UK to make a better nation. Comendable. The sham of Brexit is it doesn't offer those things. Trading with the EU doesn't effect the issues we need to address in the UK to refresh politics, to represent people better, to train them better, to give them better communities etc. And it is highly upsetting that rather than politicans call this like it is, they are afriad. They'd rather fudge Brexit so they can engineer the least damage to the UK while pretending it wasn't them that ignored the will of the people.

 

[scaramanga]

Isn’t a flavour of Norway what Labour are pursuing? In practical terms something like we fax our input, concerns etc re. trade with X nation and the EU considers it during negotiations (that we are not party to).


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

No. Labour are suggesting that we stay in the customs union, which means we don't get to trade with the rest of the world.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

But you can't ignore that Labour want the Tories to own the pile of sh1t that they have created.

This is, IMHO, just pathetic. And is a perfect example of what is wrong with politics in this country.

"Lets make sure people are punished and embarrassed"

not

"Lets make sure the right/best outcome is reached for the UK"

It makes my blood boil.

And its not a Labour thing, its a politics thing. But if that really is Labours attitude then fudge them to hell.

Otherwise I think Rorschach has a much more measured, but right, response.

I'm not ignoring anything actually. The brick that the UK finds themselves in is of course very little to do with Labour but their opening position is something that already has been nixed so I don't see the point. It is self-serving politics that has got negotiations to the point they are now. More of the same is not the answer.

Yes it can be extended but it is not a switch to be flicked. The extension has to be accompanied by a viable plan. And what is that plan? Who can say. And if the deadline is looming close 1000 more businesses who made preparations to move will put those plans in motion. The March deadline is not arbitrary in any sense.

It is in the sense that there is nothing in the legislation to stop it being extended if the British Government and the EU agree to it.

At what cost?

The EU have nailed our balls in ever single step. Us needing an extension is because we fudged up. They are not in any way charitable and will no doubt seek to capitalise on our weakness (again).

You make it sound all chummy and get along gang, while we sort out our differences. I suspect that is little more than wishful thinking for a Labour outcome.

So, at what cost?

 

[Gutter Boy]

P&O is now a Cypriot company thanks to Brexit? 182 years its been a British company.

Sony has confirmed its moving its European head quarters from London to Amsterdam.

Dyson is moving its HQ to Singapore. Nothing to do with Brexit becuase Dyson himself campaigned for Brexit, just unfortunate timing!

It's a hidden Brexit effect, which doesn't instantly hit everyone right away. It slowely erodes the UK position in the world. What with ARM - the UKs only tech giant - sold to the Japanese post Brexit (lower pound), we are seeing the effects of Brexit. Short term, sure ARM has its company in cambridge and Dyson has researchers in the UK. But histroy shows that often these high value jobs dilute and follow the company's registration abroad for tax purposes and to save money.

But the worst is yet to come. If a no deal brexit does happen there will be far more fall out. Crazy that anyone still thinks this Brexit charade holds any value! Crazier that people and MPs aren't calling it out for the disaster that it is.

If a few flighty neo-liberal organisations are getting twitchy at the state reasserting some authority, I'd take that as a good sign

Before the EU we had our own manufactures, rather than being reliant of Japanese good favour (based on access to cheap eastern european labour) and being able to buy German. Imagine if we produced and owned our own stuff again.

 

[the dza]

This is, IMHO, just pathetic. And is a perfect example of what is wrong with politics in this country.

"Lets make sure people are punished and embarrassed"

not

"Lets make sure the right/best outcome is reached for the UK"

It makes my blood boil.

And its not a Labour thing, its a politics thing. But if that really is Labours attitude then fudge them to hell.

These things go together from the perspective of those of us who think The Tories hurt millions of people and want a left-wing government to replace them and to swing the pendulum back from the last 4 decades of Thatcher/Reagan/Neo-Liberalism/whatever you want to label it.

You want a Hard Brexit, as do the right of the Tory Party and a very small minority of people on the left (who are mistaken, imo). Labour oppose this position, but they are not going to do so in a way that lets The Tories off the hook for the mess they have created and why the phuck should they?

Extending Article 50 is nothing to do with being chummy or even a Labour outcome -- I was speaking about a Tory MP who said that even if May's deal passed, Parliament doesn't have time to do all the necessary legislation by the current deadline.

By the way, there is no "we" phucking up here -- the Tories phucked this up, particularly May. They are the ones negotiating and she is the one who has ignored Parliament through the entire process. The public were very wise to take her majority away from her when she asked for a bigger one.

You twice ask "at what cost?" and yet you are happy to leave with no deal and want to do so by the current deadline. Maybe you should ask yourself at what cost that would be.

 

[r-u-s-x]

If a few flighty neo-liberal organisations are getting twitchy at the state reasserting some authority, I'd take that as a good sign

Before the EU we had our own manufactures, rather than being reliant of Japanese good favour (based on access to cheap eastern european labour) and being able to buy German. Imagine if we produced and owned our own stuff again.

we didn't lose manufacturing because of the EU, correlation does not equal causation.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

These things go together from the perspective of those of us who think The Tories hurt millions of people and want a left-wing government to replace them and to swing the pendulum back from the last 4 decades of Thatcher/Reagan/Neo-Liberalism/whatever you want to label it.

You want a Hard Brexit, as do the right of the Tory Party and a very small minority of people on the left (who are mistaken, imo). Labour oppose this position, but they are not going to do so in a way that lets The Tories off the hook for the mess they have created and why the phuck should they?

Extending Article 50 is nothing to do with being chummy or even a Labour outcome -- I was speaking about a Tory MP who said that even if May's deal passed, Parliament doesn't have time to do all the necessary legislation by the current deadline.

By the way, there is no "we" phucking up here -- the Tories phucked this up, particularly May. They are the ones negotiating and she is the one who has ignored Parliament through the entire process. The public were very wise to take her majority away from her when she asked for a bigger one.

You twice ask "at what cost?" and yet you are happy to leave with no deal and want to do so by the current deadline. Maybe you should ask yourself at what cost that would be.

That you continue to be concerned about "letting the Tories off the hook" perfectly encapsulates my point.

Its not about letting them off, forgiving them, or letting them get away with anything. Its about the bigger picture - what is better for the UK?

At this point that really should be the sole focus of all and not petty PR and point scoring.

I still dont actually see how Labour stepping up and providing solutions would let the Tories off of anything either. People can see. If Labour really played the part of the bigger man and sorted this all out, how could they possibly lose out?

That sort of small minded point scoring petty flimflam really should be left behind.


As Rorschach said, the extension is to wrap things up, not start again - as Labour want to do. We are past opening positions and negotiation etc.

"We" fudging up - THE UK COLLECTIVE. I play no part in party politics, have no affiliation, but I do recognise there is a whole fudging country of people that need to be considered in these moves. Hence my firm belief party politics, spin, PR, and blame need to be put in its proper place. This is not the time for playing those games.

I would rather leave with no deal than be compromised into a bastard awful relationship with the EU where by we are completely neutered and powerless. Which is, by and large, where Corbyn and May are trying to put us.

At what cost? My concern is the EU leveraging our incompetence to bury us even deeper in that hole.

Im not so blind as to think a hard brexit is all sunshine and rainbows, but at least its a hole we can dig ourselves out of with the freedom to manouvre it would afford, as opposed to being left at the bottom of a well as a hostage of the EU.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

If a few flighty neo-liberal organisations are getting twitchy at the state reasserting some authority, I'd take that as a good sign

Before the EU we had our own manufactures, rather than being reliant of Japanese good favour (based on access to cheap eastern european labour) and being able to buy German. Imagine if we produced and owned our own stuff again.

He can't.....to much 'pain and disruption'

We'd all be speaking German if we were too scared of 'pain and disruption''

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Quick question?

If we agree to a deal then in 2/3 years we realise that we have f.cked up and feel trapped/cornered/neutered/marginalised etc etc ...can we still just walk away in a hard Brexit style.

ie....is the 'f.ck this we're off' option always there??

 

[the dza]

That you continue to be concerned about "letting the Tories off the hook" perfectly encapsulates my point.

Its not about letting them off, forgiving them, or letting them get away with anything. Its about the bigger picture - what is better for the UK?

At this point that really should be the sole focus of all and not petty PR and point scoring.

I still dont actually see how Labour stepping up and providing solutions would let the Tories off of anything either. People can see. If Labour really played the part of the bigger man and sorted this all out, how could they possibly lose out?

That sort of small minded point scoring petty flimflam really should be left behind.


As Rorschach said, the extension is to wrap things up, not start again - as Labour want to do. We are past opening positions and negotiation etc.

"We" fudging up - THE UK COLLECTIVE. I play no part in party politics, have no affiliation, but I do recognise there is a whole fudging country of people that need to be considered in these moves. Hence my firm belief party politics, spin, PR, and blame need to be put in its proper place. This is not the time for playing those games.

I would rather leave with no deal than be compromised into a bastard awful relationship with the EU where by we are completely neutered and powerless. Which is, by and large, where Corbyn and May are trying to put us.

At what cost? My concern is the EU leveraging our incompetence to bury us even deeper in that hole.

Im not so blind as to think a hard brexit is all sunshine and rainbows, but at least its a hole we can dig ourselves out of with the freedom to manouvre it would afford, as opposed to being left at the bottom of a well as a hostage of the EU.

You are asking me the same questions, I can only give the same answers. I have already said what is better for the UK from the perspective of those who want a left-wing government (the Labour Party), and it's both getting rid of the Tories and getting a soft-Brexit. The road to achieving both things isn't divergent, both can be done at the same time imo.

These objectives can only be achieved through political manoeuvring; May does not want to budge on ruling out no-deal, being in a customs union, having a 2nd vote, extending Article 50, so there is no co-operating with her. The rest of Parliament will co-operate and try to force her into a better position, which is what we are seeing now.

Again, the UK Collective are not phucking up -- the government are. This government alone have conducted negotiations. And their primary objective has not been considering the country as a whole, but instead keeping their party together. As such, they've have had no wiggle-room in negotiations. That's the phuck up.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Quick question?

If we agree to a deal then in 2/3 years we realise that we have f.cked up and feel trapped/cornered/neutered/marginalised etc etc ...can we still just walk away in a hard Brexit style.

ie....is the 'f.ck this we're off' option always there??

I guess so? Possibly at some cost - depending on the nature of the deal agreed.

Truth be told though, I doubt there would be much appetite to go through it again. At least, not at the level of power. They arent really in to doing proper work, are they? And so I doubt would afford the people another referendum or such.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Quick question?

If we agree to a deal then in 2/3 years we realise that we have f.cked up and feel trapped/cornered/neutered/marginalised etc etc ...can we still just walk away in a hard Brexit style.

ie....is the 'f.ck this we're off' option always there??

yes we can always break any trade deals, there may be tit for tat repercussions but despite people stating the contrary we are a sovereign nation and always had been.

 

[Gutter Boy]

we didn't lose manufacturing because of the EU, correlation does not equal causation.

I know Thatcher was the driver, but she also steered the EU into becoming the police for the markets

 

[P.D.]

The thing is very few people actually want a no deal brexit, what they say is that if it happens then they wouldn't be worried about it but even the ERG want a Canada style free trade deal for instance.

People always talk about economics which is of course important but many people also don't care about it either otherwise they would allow all sorts of other things like fracking, mass house building next to them etc. For many people it's a principle/ideology point of view.

As I see it we're a strong economy and will continue to be albeit with some hiccups for next few years but the EU isn't the be all and end all, it hasn't helped mass youth unemployment all over the EU for instance.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

You are asking me the same questions, I can only give the same answers. I have already said what is better for the UK from the perspective of those who want a left-wing government (the Labour Party), and it's both getting rid of the Tories and getting a soft-Brexit. The road to achieving both things isn't divergent, both can be done at the same time imo.

These objectives can only be achieved through political manoeuvring; May does not want to budge on ruling out no-deal, being in a customs union, having a 2nd vote, extending Article 50, so there is no co-operating with her. The rest of Parliament will co-operate and try to force her into a better position, which is what we are seeing now.

Again, the UK Collective are not phucking up -- the government are. This government alone have conducted negotiations. And their primary objective has not been considering the country as a whole, but instead keeping their party together. As such, they've have had no wiggle-room in negotiations. That's the phuck up.

This conversation started out of the description of Labours plans being instantly dreamland stuff, and so then described as an opening gambit toward a solution.

Quite rightly it was pointed out that time has passed. And instead of playing PR and flimflam, if Labour have a desired solution they should be pushing for it directly.

They could be rallying Parliament behind it, leading the push for change, and really taking charge of proceedings.

Instead they, according to you, are more interested in playing games, manoeuvring, and making sure the Tories get shown up.

This is the fundamental problem I have. And what you reply isnt solutions, its rhetoric.

And yes - you are right. The government have fudged up. But the UK collective pay the price. And while the Conservatives have let us down, I fail to see how the same cannot be levelled at Labour to.

The Lib Dems are toothless, I know, but at least they have had a firm stance/solution throughout. All parties should have the same conviction.

As I said, the small time flimflam really shouldnt be the priority right now. A proper vision, and solution, should be.

And Corbyn saying he can get a unicorn deal is not it. Him using that as an opening stance is locking the door after the horse has bolted, this isnt the time for it and the EU have no need to entertain it. He is wasting time. And his preoccupation with apportioning blame is just getting in the way.

If he was a real leader he would have a bigger picture perspective.