Brexit negotiations
- Thread starter Scott-Copywriter
- Start date
- Original Poster
- #642
I agree. I consider it a bit of a Braveheart situation. Some seem to suggest that they would sacrifice all they have for patriotic freedom.
But what people say, and how people react when it happens, can be very different. I simply refuse to believe that 39% of leave voters would consider being sacked, or having a family member sacked, to be a price worth paying.
That's quite easy to say without losing face if these people genuinely believe it won't happen. The same applies to retired voters. It's not very threatening to lose a theoretical job you no longer have.
I'm sure opinions would swiftly change if someone was made redundant with a mortgage to pay and a family to feed.
Anyway, yes, there definitely aren't 50%+ of voters who want a hard Brexit. With 17.4 million leave voters, there will be a vast mix of people who all have slightly different ideas of what they think the post-Brexit arrangement should be. Some would accept damage. Some would not. Some want single market access. Some don't. The list goes on.
I know many leavers don't like the idea of a second referendum, but in my view, nothing else makes any sense.
The "best deal" for the UK is subjective in many ways. There could be parts of it both remainers and leavers hate. It's just too complicated to expect this to be split along "party lines", so to speak. Some leavers might hate the deal, whereas some remainers might actually like it.
In truth, even as a remainer, if the deal was similar to the EFTA and looked good on paper, I'd certainly consider it. I wouldn't rule it out just because I wanted to stay. It depends what it is. I think that goes for a lot of people on both sides.
Upvote
0
@Scott-Copywriter , what the hell are you on about?
There seems to be some assumption here that Brexit = massive job losses. That's cuckoo.
There seems to be some assumption here that Brexit = massive job losses. That's cuckoo.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #645
The survey Cobby posted shows that 39% of leave voters would consider losing their job a price worth paying for Brexit. I think they say it's a price worth paying now, but they'd certainly change their tune if it did happen. That's all.
Although I do think a few hundred thousand job losses are plausible, depending on the outcome of the negotiations.
Upvote
0
Ah, @Cobby ?! I've got that troll on "Ignore". I highly recommend the Ignore function for trolls like him.
Why ask if job loss is the price worth paying? Why not ask how many would let their grandmothers die, how many would become vegetarian, how many would get castrated?
Yes, castration.
Ask the male population how many would get castrated as the price for leaving the EU. Ask the women how many would tolerate another 2 stone showing on their bathroom scales. These are the type of questions needed if you want to demonstrate that the population has changed their minds about Brexit.
As far as jobs are concerned, there will be some adjustments - some industries hiring more staff, some reducing headcount etc. I suspect that overall we'll have lots of staff shortages! Official unemployment figures will go up a fraction till the economy adjusts to the new demands of employers.
In the meanwhile leave it to the idiots at places like the Guardian to make the association between Brexit and job losses. At UKBF we're smarter than Guardian readers!
Upvote
0
Today's Good News
Mark Carney, our pro-Remain head of the Bank of England was interviewed yesterday. Even he now admits there are good times ahead post-Brexit.
He's talking about just financial services, of course. But, hold on a sec, weren't all financial services going to move to Frankfurt or some other European city?
Apparently not! He's finally received my note about London being so dominant in financial services that France and Germany can't really take much away (as much as they'd like to).
But what's interesting is how this story was covered across the media.
The BBC: "Mark Carney: Banking sector could double in size in 25 years"
The Sun: "UK financial sector could DOUBLE in size as it flourishes after Brexit, says Bank of England Governor"
The Express: "UK financial sector to DOUBLE in size after EU exit, Carney claims"
Business Insider: "CARNEY: The City of London could be worth almost £40 trillion by 2042 if Brexit goes well"
The Spectator (taking a slightly different path): "Bank of England: inflation blip is ‘entirely’ temporary"
Doom & Gloom Scaremongerers otherwise called the Guardian: "Don't relax rules on City after Brexit, Mark Carney warns "
They couldn't bring themselves to post a headline with good news about post-Brexit growth or about the inflation increase being just a temporary blip. If it wasn't them who actually interviewed Carney they may not have covered the story at all!
Mark Carney, our pro-Remain head of the Bank of England was interviewed yesterday. Even he now admits there are good times ahead post-Brexit.
He's talking about just financial services, of course. But, hold on a sec, weren't all financial services going to move to Frankfurt or some other European city?
Apparently not! He's finally received my note about London being so dominant in financial services that France and Germany can't really take much away (as much as they'd like to).
But what's interesting is how this story was covered across the media.
The BBC: "Mark Carney: Banking sector could double in size in 25 years"
The Sun: "UK financial sector could DOUBLE in size as it flourishes after Brexit, says Bank of England Governor"
The Express: "UK financial sector to DOUBLE in size after EU exit, Carney claims"
Business Insider: "CARNEY: The City of London could be worth almost £40 trillion by 2042 if Brexit goes well"
The Spectator (taking a slightly different path): "Bank of England: inflation blip is ‘entirely’ temporary"
Doom & Gloom Scaremongerers otherwise called the Guardian: "Don't relax rules on City after Brexit, Mark Carney warns "
They couldn't bring themselves to post a headline with good news about post-Brexit growth or about the inflation increase being just a temporary blip.
If it wasn't them who actually interviewed Carney they may not have covered the story at all!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #650
But is this the claim that the financial sector will double because of Brexit? If not, how much larger would it have grown if we'd stayed in the EU?
While many aspects of the UK economy won't shrink to a smaller size than they were before, I'd be keen to know how much more they could have grown if we'd stayed put.
Upvote
0
There's no pleasing some people!
Let me get this right - you people said there'd be a disaster for our financial services. Now that it's been predicted that our financial services will boom you're trying to argue that this boom is a disaster because it could have been a bigger boom if we Remained?!
Let me get this right - you people said there'd be a disaster for our financial services. Now that it's been predicted that our financial services will boom you're trying to argue that this boom is a disaster because it could have been a bigger boom if we Remained?!
Upvote
0
There's no pleasing some people!
Let me get this right - you people said there'd be a disaster for our financial services. Now that it's been predicted that our financial services will boom you're trying to argue that this boom is a disaster because it could have been a bigger boom if we Remained?!
Clinton, do yourself a favour and jump out now - just pop in every now and again for a good laugh. I did a long time ago because the BS was hurting my nose.
Upvote
0
I think I'll take that advice @The Accountancy Lab.
I've made my point about the good news. And there's plenty more good news today, but I'll move on now and watch from the sidelines for a bit to see how this thread develops.
A tip for everyone: As I predicted a couple of days ago, the pound has pulled back a bit from the high of the year. Not a lot, just a little bit. If you trade currencies here's your chance to load up on GBPUSD as it has dropped to circa 1.3040. I don't expect it to pull back much further.
I've made my point about the good news. And there's plenty more good news today, but I'll move on now and watch from the sidelines for a bit to see how this thread develops.
A tip for everyone: As I predicted a couple of days ago, the pound has pulled back a bit from the high of the year. Not a lot, just a little bit. If you trade currencies here's your chance to load up on GBPUSD as it has dropped to circa 1.3040. I don't expect it to pull back much further.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #654
There's no pleasing some people!
Let me get this right - you people said there'd be a disaster for our financial services. Now that it's been predicted that our financial services will boom you're trying to argue that this boom is a disaster because it could have been a bigger boom if we Remained?!
Is it a boom, though? If it would have been far higher growth in the EU, that's not a boom. That's forecast damage caused by Brexit.
What I don't get is how leaving the EU and losing (or severely disrupting) financial passporting rights is somehow going to cause a boom in our financial sector we otherwise wouldn't have had.
Maybe if we relax all our regulations, sure, but Carney has warned against that. I assume his prediction is based on the UK not doing that.
It's not a disaster. Even I admit that, depending on the outcome, the UK financial sector could go on to do reasonably well.
However, if (with hypothetical figures to illustrate the point) the UK financial sector would have tripled inside the EU in 25 years, but will double outside the EU in 25 years, I'm not sure how much that could be classified as "good news".
His other quotes are also telling (from The Guardian, funnily enough):
He's saying that we won't grow our market share. We'll just retain what we have, but the natural expansion of the global economy means that the UK financial sector will expand at a much faster rate than the UK. We'll essentially have the same slice of a much larger pie.
That's not a "boom". Is it good news in so far that we may not lose our market share? Sure, I suppose. I'd prefer if we increased it though.
I get your daily "good news" briefing, but let's not go too far in the other direction by insinuating that Brexit is taking us to the land of milk and honey. The fact that just keeping the market share we have is considered good news really says it all.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #655
On another note, I flew across the Schengen Area a little while ago. That's perhaps something a lot of Brits don't do if they only ever fly from the UK to mainland Europe and back again.
It reminded me of what a marvellous experience it is. No stressful checks. No border controls. Nothing. It felt like I was on a domestic flight. You technically don't even need a passport. It's a shame the UK has never been able to enjoy it.
Perhaps that sort of thing has always been part of the problem. We've never been integrated into the EU like most other countries. We've always kept it at arm's length.
Because of that, there's a disconnected feeling. I've noticed many people, particularly leave voters, talking as if Europe is a separate entity, when we are actually Europe. The EU is the UK and 27 other countries. And we're a big part of it, too.
I've spent some time in other European countries over the past few years, and there is a much stronger feeling of being in Europe. You really feel like the EU, and the 27 other members, are around you in a community.
The borderless transport, all the European products, the Euro and so on. Some might say they don't want any of those things for various reasons, but without them, it's easy to forget what the EU is, and easier to imagine it as a group of shadowy bureaucrats in an ivory tower.
I've also noticed that it's usually the people who have the most interaction with Europe who favour remain. The people who have lived, worked and made friends in the other nations of the EU.
Feeling European plays a big part, and if you don't, I can imagine it being a lot easier to feel separate and therefore have no sense of belonging in the EU.
It's a shame, but it is what it is.
PS: And strangely, I find the Brits much, much friendlier towards their next door neighbours compared to people in a number of other countries in the EU. I told someone in Spain that British neighbours often exchange Christmas cards and he thought we were bonkers (that happens in the North East, anyway).
It reminded me of what a marvellous experience it is. No stressful checks. No border controls. Nothing. It felt like I was on a domestic flight. You technically don't even need a passport. It's a shame the UK has never been able to enjoy it.
Perhaps that sort of thing has always been part of the problem. We've never been integrated into the EU like most other countries. We've always kept it at arm's length.
Because of that, there's a disconnected feeling. I've noticed many people, particularly leave voters, talking as if Europe is a separate entity, when we are actually Europe. The EU is the UK and 27 other countries. And we're a big part of it, too.
I've spent some time in other European countries over the past few years, and there is a much stronger feeling of being in Europe. You really feel like the EU, and the 27 other members, are around you in a community.
The borderless transport, all the European products, the Euro and so on. Some might say they don't want any of those things for various reasons, but without them, it's easy to forget what the EU is, and easier to imagine it as a group of shadowy bureaucrats in an ivory tower.
I've also noticed that it's usually the people who have the most interaction with Europe who favour remain. The people who have lived, worked and made friends in the other nations of the EU.
Feeling European plays a big part, and if you don't, I can imagine it being a lot easier to feel separate and therefore have no sense of belonging in the EU.
It's a shame, but it is what it is.
PS: And strangely, I find the Brits much, much friendlier towards their next door neighbours compared to people in a number of other countries in the EU. I told someone in Spain that British neighbours often exchange Christmas cards and he thought we were bonkers (that happens in the North East, anyway).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #660
Does anyone else find it unusual that the EFTA isn't being mentioned more often as a viable solution?
It seems to be flying well under the radar at the moment. Even Farage has mentioned the EFTA and Norway more than any other MP on either side.
I suppose free movement is the sticking point, but apart from that, it ticks a lot of boxes. It even has its own court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFTA_Court) so we could get around that ECJ issue.
It seems to be flying well under the radar at the moment. Even Farage has mentioned the EFTA and Norway more than any other MP on either side.
I suppose free movement is the sticking point, but apart from that, it ticks a lot of boxes. It even has its own court (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFTA_Court) so we could get around that ECJ issue.
Upvote
0
EFTA would mean:
Free movement of people
Access to the single market
Membership of the customs union
Payment of fees, either at the current level we pay or higher
It is the elephant in the room. It is the safest outcome. It also makes the whole notion of Brexit completely pointless as we end up in the same position but don't have any say.
That's why no-one is mentioning it. If they talk about it too soon the deluded Leavers will complain it does not mean leaving. If they come up with it at the end of the negotiations the deluded Remainers will complain there is no point in leaving.
I have stated from the ime the result was known that this is where we are likely to end up, in which case, what is the point?
Free movement of people
Access to the single market
Membership of the customs union
Payment of fees, either at the current level we pay or higher
It is the elephant in the room. It is the safest outcome. It also makes the whole notion of Brexit completely pointless as we end up in the same position but don't have any say.
That's why no-one is mentioning it. If they talk about it too soon the deluded Leavers will complain it does not mean leaving. If they come up with it at the end of the negotiations the deluded Remainers will complain there is no point in leaving.
I have stated from the ime the result was known that this is where we are likely to end up, in which case, what is the point?
Upvote
0
I think it will come back into prominence once the EU "negotiations" have broken down. In my view they will if the EU remain adamant about a ludicrously high financial settlement, and requiring jurisdiction for the ECJ post Brexit. Both of those are redlines that will cause failure.
When we reach that point it will certainly be something to consider.
Daniel Hannan has always been a champion of EFTA and has written much about it, which Google will find.
Upvote
0
No, EFTA is not a customs union, though it does have a coordinated trade policy. We would be free to have trade deals with whoever we chose.
And current EFTA members pay only small contributions to the EU budget.
Upvote
0
Would not be unhappy, but it doesn't solve the problem of how we participate in the EU single market, which comes with EEA membership rather than EFTA.
Though we could strike a bespoke deal as Switzerland has.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #666
We can gain membership of the single market via the EFTA. It would just require the four freedoms. We'd have to sign up to the EEA agreement along with some of the other members:
http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf
That being said, Liechtenstein, an EFTA member, does have some restrictions on free movement which are periodically reviewed every five years (renewed twice, so far).
I think this is all going to boil down to what the public is willing to accept in terms of free movement of people.
The EU will not hand over what we want on a silver platter because it incentivises other countries to leave as well. But I think there will be a balance to be achieved somewhere. This happening in the EU is probably off-limits, but it may happen in the EFTA where, on the face of it, the EU won't be appearing to heavily undermine its principles.
But the British public has to compromise on movement, otherwise we'll get nowhere. Free movement of labour, perhaps. If we want to restrict it as much as we do with the rest of the world, I think anything resembling single market participation is off the table.
All in all though, if we did compromise and work this out in the right way, we could come out of this in pretty good shape. Perhaps even better off in the long-run.
Upvote
0
It will, as everything else looks good.
I think some measure of constraint on free movement that genuinely put the UK govt in control of numbers would be accepted by the public. There would be other details like benefits and free use of the NHS that could be resolved to public satisfaction.
Overall I agree with you, if we can find the right compromise on free movement, we would be well on our way to having our cake and eating it.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #669
My worry is the Government sticking to this 100,000 net migration target.
They're either insane or delusional - or both. Non-EU net migration alone was 175,000 last year. We could stop EU migration completely and still be not far from double the target.
I just don't get it. I really don't. We're way down on the list of net migrants per 1,000 of the population. Many other developed nations have far more. It's not like we're in a particularly perilous situation compared to the rest of the world.
If they stick to that target, or even close, we have absolutely no chance of being in the EEA, and no chance of negotiating good free trade agreements with the rest of the world (as they almost always have some semblance of relaxed visa rules to facilitate easier movement of workers for economic purposes).
The EU isn't including free movement of people just to be awkward. It's a cornerstone of any economy along with goods, services and capital. Humans do the work, and often they need to be closer to where the action is.
The idea of succeeding post-Brexit while closing some EU doors, and not just refusing to open new doors with the world, but closing some existing doors as well, is just nonsense.
Upvote
0
That 175,000 total last year for non-EU net migration, it included the 'children' fleeing persecution in France that we accepted?
There are often stories of unsuccessful attempts to get into Britain from France, the ones who are successful of course the media won't report as they won't be aware of them.
There are often stories of unsuccessful attempts to get into Britain from France, the ones who are successful of course the media won't report as they won't be aware of them.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #671
Asylum applicants make up around 7%-10% of net migration figures. You could stop all of them, and all EU migration on top, and we still wouldn't be anywhere near the supposed target.
We know about the vast majority of migrants who arrive via unofficial channels because they apply for asylum. That way, they go through a proper legal process and are taken care of during that time with accommodation and a weekly allowance.
Once they step foot on British soil, they have the right to apply and the right to due process. How they get here is irrelevant. Even if it's illegal.
Comparatively, very few migrants fail to claim asylum. They'd have no clothes, no food, no shelter, no money. Nothing. They would also be unable to get a legal job or seek any sort of assistance.
Of course, many do claim asylum, make an application, get rejected and then (eventually) deported. Over 60% of all asylum applications are refused.
Upvote
0
I'm still puzzled as to what it is about France that is so awful they must flee to the UK.
And somehow that is our fault.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Commercial airlines and boats that allow people to board without valid papers are required to return them to their point of embarkation.
If they are not commercial flights or boats they are unlikely to come here direct from a country from which they are fleeing. Not many people get on a people smuggler boat in Libya and set sail for the UK.
If they are not commercial flights or boats they are unlikely to come here direct from a country from which they are fleeing. Not many people get on a people smuggler boat in Libya and set sail for the UK.
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
Andy Burnham's Manifesto for Small Business, and How It Stacks Up Against Count BinfaceIf all goes to plan (or rather, to Labour's timetable), Andy Burnham...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
SEO in the Age of AI: What UK Small Businesses Actually Need to KnowTL;DR Search has shifted from "ten blue links" to answer engines, and...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
What Carphone Warehouse, Microsoft and Uber Have in Common: They Started in a DownturnThere's a comforting myth that you need a booming economy to start...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
What Makes a Small Business Actually Sellable?There's a question that a lot of small business owners never think to...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Why Your Team Keeps Asking the Same Questions (And What to Actually Do About It)Every small business owner knows the moment. You're halfway through...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
