Extreme Brexit could be worse than financial crisis for UK: BoE

[nontabury]

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

I saw your reply by accident, so I'll reply.

 

Your kind had 3 years to come up with a solution and you failed. All you did was, you complained about everything. Useless, utterly useless people. 

 

You are not worthy of second though anymore. Bye.

How many times must this be repeated. Yes, the negotiations on the British side have been an utter shambles. Lead by a remain supporting P.M

 who was appointed,not by the British people, but by Conservative M.P’s

 many of whom, come the next G.E will be collecting their P45, unless they do the honorable thing and abide by the Democratic wishes of the British people. Who turned out to vote in record numbers in a people’s referendum in 2016.

[rixalex]

10 hours ago, 7by7 said:

There is one very good reason for holding another vote before Brexit.

 

If we cancel Article 50 and don't leave then, as the ECJ has ruled, we will remain in the EU on exactly the same terms we have now.

 

If we do leave and then decide it was a mistake and apply to rejoin then we will almost certainly have to do so on the same terms as as all new members. Which, among other conditions, would mean joining Schengen, adopting the Euro and losing the rebate.

 

Which is why I believe the UK public should be given the opportunity of making a final decision, as I have outlined again above, before we take the almost certain irrevocable step of finally leaving.

 

If that final decision is to leave, even if it's to leave with no deal; then so be it.

And leavers get accused of wanting to have their cake and eat it!

 

Yes, i do appreciate that leaving the EU and then reentering does mean that we might not get the same terms we are on now, but i'm sorry, the vote was to leave and unless you do that first, before you begin the discussion about re-entering, you will completely disenfranchise a very section of people who would quite likely simply boycott another vote held before we leave, and you will also have set a precedent in which it is possible to promise to abide by whatever the will of the people is, and then simply backtrack after the vote saying that people didn't know what they were voting for.

 

So yes, while a vote to reenter the EU after we have left might cost Britain in terms of the conditions the EU offers us, that cost will be dramatically outweighed by the fact that for one, the matter of whether or not Brexit can or can not work will have been proven once and for all, rather than just being speculated upon, and for two, people who voted to leave will still feel like there is a point to voting.

 

Re "If that final decision is to leave, even if it's to leave with no deal; then so be it."

 

And why on earth would anyone believe you, or any politician who promised that, if there is to be another referendum? We already had the Prime Minister prior to the last vote promising the exact same thing - "we will implement whatever you decide". You can only make that promise credibly once. The moment you make the promise and then subsequently break it, forget ever making it again, and having anyone take you seriously.

[Grouse]

6 hours ago, vinny41 said:

There is not need for "MY kind" to come up with a solution, we gave out directions to the UK Goverement on 23rd June 2016 and we are waiting patiently for the Goverment to carry out the instructions of 17.4 million voters. You not find a single post on this forum where I have complained about leaving 

"My Kind and the other 17.4 million people that voted to leave are waiting for the UK Government to carry out the instructions that we gave them on 23rd June 2016.

“The greatest lie of the EU referendum was not the NHS pledge plastered on the side of a bus. It was the government’s pledge that it would enact whatever we voted for. It is this lie that the people will not forget, or forgive," writes Brendan O’Neill

https://twitter.com/spikedonline?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

I have no doubt that the CON government would indeed have forced through the referendum opinion. However, they no longer have a majority and parliament is not bound in any way. 

 

By all means take it out on the CONs; be my guest. However, parliament is sovereign.

[vinny41]

23 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I have no doubt that the CON government would indeed have forced through the referendum opinion. However, they no longer have a majority and parliament is not bound in any way. 

 

By all means take it out on the CONs; be my guest. However, parliament is sovereign.

The UK is due to leave the European Union on 29 March, 2019 - it's the law, regardless of whether there is a deal with the EU or not.

If there is no UK request or no EU agreement to extend the negotiations, or if either the UK Parliament or the European Parliament or the other 27 EU Member States do not endorse the negotiated withdrawal agreement, there will be no ‘deal’ and the EU Treaties will no longer apply to the UK from 29 March 2019.

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8397/CBP-8397.pdf

Edited January 5, 2019 by vinny41
added url

[baboon]

29 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I have no doubt that the CON government would indeed have forced through the referendum opinion. However, they no longer have a majority and parliament is not bound in any way. 

 

Yeah, that was money well spent on the DUP, eh?

[owl sees all]

16 hours ago, bomber said:

good point,but what makes you think the UK standing alone with a Labour Govt and most likely going into a recession is going change the bankers and their cronies,we will be much weaker and they know it,they are quids in already and with more to come,i dont think they (blair/soros etc) are bothered if we leave or stay,the UK and JC are hardly heavyweights

I had to think with clear head (after the NY wine consumption), before responding to this excellent post.

 

Assuming a Labour government is elected, it is no foregone conclusion that JC could actually get to grips with 'The City'. It is a law unto itself, and is not officially part of the UK. It has it's own laws, and even its own police force. It is so entrenched as the number one financial hub in the world that I can't see any significant changes there. It will be banking as usual IMO. However, in saying that, I reckon he will 'try' to reign in the BoE, which is a private concern that is surrounded in secrecy and has its own special laws and regulations. He will, IMO, get the BoE to be more transparent**. At the present time gleaning info' is impossible.

 

AS for your suggestion that the UK will 'most likely going into a recession". I don't agree. There will be initial confusion over certain issues, but, I'm sure we will adjust and adapt. It is not often said on these Brexit treads, but the German manufactures (and others) are lobbying their Parliament about the potential loss of trade.

 

JC is in a funny (strange) position. He has barely 40 MPs that he can count on in parliament but massive support amongst members. He has kept his head down over Brexit. I personally would like him to revert to the original Labour position on the EU (it was then Common Market).

 

I do think that Blair cares about being out of Europe. Brexit would, after the next election, (which Labour could win) he could be irrelevant unless he starts up a new re-join party (sort of UKIP flipped). This is not so far-fetched, because a 'ReJoin' party would cut across parties and be extremely popular in many UK areas. Although he could just join the Libs.

 

Finally; the US, would not want a pacifist at number 10. No, no, no!!s. The whole world 'hidden-hand' community is gradually ratcheting up the 'them and us' theme. The 'bend the knee' countries, would lose one of their clique

 

** PM me for more info. Can't put it on this thread.

 

 

Edited January 5, 2019 by owl sees all

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

The UK is due to leave the European Union on 29 March, 2019 - it's the law, regardless of whether there is a deal with the EU or not.

If there is no UK request or no EU agreement to extend the negotiations, or if either the UK Parliament or the European Parliament or the other 27 EU Member States do not endorse the negotiated withdrawal agreement, there will be no ‘deal’ and the EU Treaties will no longer apply to the UK from 29 March 2019.

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8397/CBP-8397.pdf

And? Parliament can do as it wishes, when it wishes.

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

The UK is due to leave the European Union on 29 March, 2019 - it's the law, regardless of whether there is a deal with the EU or not.

If there is no UK request or no EU agreement to extend the negotiations, or if either the UK Parliament or the European Parliament or the other 27 EU Member States do not endorse the negotiated withdrawal agreement, there will be no ‘deal’ and the EU Treaties will no longer apply to the UK from 29 March 2019.

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8397/CBP-8397.pdf

 

good link, ta

very informative document

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

Yeah, that was money well spent on the DUP, eh?

costly propping up,

 

article in Bangkok Post today re DUP being totally opposed to the deal/backstop thing and will

for sure vote against

 

 

[dick dasterdly]

46 minutes ago, Grouse said:

And? Parliament can do as it wishes, when it wishes.

Do you honestly believe this is a good point?

 

Edit - Particularly when it comes to democracy?

Edited January 5, 2019 by dick dasterdly

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

Assuming a Labour government is elected, it is no foregone conclusion that JC could actually get to grips with 'The City'. It is a law unto itself, and is not officially part of the UK. It has it's own laws, and even its own police force. It is so entrenched as the number one financial hub in the world that I can't see any significant changes there. It will be banking as usual IMO. However, in saying that, I reckon he will 'try' to reign in the BoE, which is a private concern that is surrounded in secrecy and has its own special laws and regulations. He will, IMO, get the BoE to be more transparent**. At the present time gleaning info' is impossible.

 

 

Not exactly true about The City not being part of the UK, but functionally pretty close. That said, while it may not be subject to jurisdiction from Parliament, it is subject to the jurisdiction of the EU. So its financial status there looks to be at least somewhat imperiled.

[melvinmelvin]

52 minutes ago, Grouse said:

And? Parliament can do as it wishes, when it wishes.

maybe it can, dunno,

but it certainly does not look that way seen from LoS

 

just before xmas Corbyn tabled a non conf

 

 

response from #10 we are not interested in playing political games

 

before xmas, parliament debates the deal with a view to make a decision

PM stops the process - says January , looks like the parliament is under the PM's heel - just 2 examples, there has been similar events earlier where the PM "steers" the parliament

[sandyf]

20 hours ago, Chartist said:

 

our decision had been made long before the referendum was announced. 

I was exporting globally and into Europe before the single market. The introduction of the single market was the greatest exporting benefit provided to UK SME's by any UK government.

Many that voted to leave made that decision based on misconceptions of who was to blame for what. I have yet to hear any constructive argument that offsets the benefits of the single market, and don't say trade deals, only the deluded would think that the UK can come up with "better" deals.

[vinny41]

4 hours ago, Grouse said:

And? Parliament can do as it wishes, when it wishes.

You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately... Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!

 

A few honest men are better than numbers

The State, in choosing men to serve it, takes no notice of their opinions; if they be willing faithfully to serve it – that satisfies. I advised you formerly to bear with men of different minds from yourself:

 

 

[7by7]

8 hours ago, rixalex said:

the vote was to leave and unless you do that first, before you begin the discussion about re-entering, you will completely disenfranchise a very section of people who would quite likely simply boycott another vote held before we leave,

If people sincerely believe that Brexit is the best future for this country, why would they boycott another referendum and so risk losing that?

 

What is far more likely is that many people who voted Leave last time, having seen the actual future consequences of Brexit or realised their reasons for voting Leave actually have noting to do with the EU, will change their minds and so vote to remain.

 

That is why ardent Brexiteers are so afraid of giving the people the, to quote @nontabury, 'Democratic' final choice; they fear losing.

 

Even Farage was last year in favour of another referendum; until he realised his side would probably lose!

[7by7]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

And? Parliament can do as it wishes, when it wishes.

Do you honestly believe this is a good point?

 

Edit - Particularly when it comes to democracy?

The UK is a representative, Parliamentary democracy in which Parliament is sovereign.

 

What system, dick dasterdly, would you prefer?

[LucysDad]

5 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

If people sincerely believe that Brexit is the best future for this country, why would they boycott another referendum and so risk losing that?

 

What is far more likely is that many people who voted Leave last time, having seen the actual future consequences of Brexit or realised their reasons for voting Leave actually have noting to do with the EU, will change their minds and so vote to remain.

 

That is why ardent Brexiteers are so afraid of giving the people the, to quote @nontabury, 'Democratic' final choice; they fear losing.

 

Even Farage was last year in favour of another referendum; until he realised his side would probably lose!

 

 

Something of a myopic view..... unsurprsisingly.

 

 

There is likely to be a large number of remain voters, who are incensed at the UK's treatment by the EU, who would change their vote.

 

 

[7by7]

1 minute ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

Something of a myopic view..... unsurprsisingly.

 

 

There is likely to be a large number of remain voters, who are incensed at the UK's treatment by the EU, who would change their vote. 

 

In which case, why are Brexiteers so afraid of another vote if they believe they will win?

 

Why are you incensed by the EU's treatment of the UK?

 

Are you incensed because, like many Brexiteers, you want to keep all the advantages of EU membership only to find that, unsurprisingly, the EU have said that we can't leave the club and expect to retain the advantages of membership?

 

[damascase]

2 minutes ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

Something of a myopic view..... unsurprsisingly.

 

 

There is likely to be a large number of remain voters, who are incensed at the UK's treatment by the EU, who would change their vote.

 

 

‘......the UK’s treatment by the EU’: keep putting blame on the EU. Is the EU stopping you from leaving? 

[nontabury]

12 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

The UK is a representative, Parliamentary democracy in which Parliament is sovereign.

 

What system, dick dasterdly, would you prefer?

That the people’s vote is sovereign. It’s called Democracy, the alternative is :- 

[BritManToo]

10 minutes ago, damascase said:

Is the EU stopping you from leaving? 

More like threats at the moment.

The latest being we won't let your airlines land at our airports.

 

The appropriate response being, we won't let your airlines use our airspace or land at our airports.

But Ms. May has no balls, and doesn't really want to leave anyway.

 

If I were PM, I'd already be be introducing conscription, and building tanks and guns in preparation for the inevitable.

Edited January 5, 2019 by BritManToo

[bomber]

13 minutes ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

Something of a myopic view..... unsurprsisingly.

 

 

There is likely to be a large number of remain voters, who are incensed at the UK's treatment by the EU, who would change their vote.

 

 

incensed by what treatment the EU have let us remain half in despite voting to leave,far to fair imo,i would of said get on with it and see what happens.

[bomber]

4 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

More like threats at the moment.

The latest being we won't let you airlines land at our airports.

do you really believe that?

[nontabury]

15 minutes ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

Something of a myopic view..... unsurprsisingly.

 

 

There is likely to be a large number of remain voters, who are incensed at the UK's treatment by the EU, who would change their vote.

 

 

 

Yes I’ve noticed this trend. Allthough I don’t put all the blame on the E.u Bureaucrats. T.May and her remain supporting parliament, must also take some credit for many Brixiteers now demanding a no deal exit.

  

[rixalex]

If people sincerely believe that Brexit is the best future for this country, why would they boycott another referendum and so risk losing that?

Because you're not losing something if you aren't actually genuinely being offered it.

If politicians backtrack on their promise to carry out the will of the people from the 2016 vote, what reason would a leave voter have to think they won't backtrack again? So what's the point in voting?


Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[BritManToo]

5 minutes ago, bomber said:

would of said get on with it and see what happens.

But the EU needs the money.

[rixalex]

 
Are you incensed because, like many Brexiteers, you want to keep all the advantages of EU membership only to find that, unsurprisingly, the EU have said that we can't leave the club and expect to retain the advantages of membership?
 

And once again, speaking on behalf of people you so clearly do not understand nor represent. Why not just stick to speaking for those you do?





Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[damascase]

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

But the EU needs the money.

Keep dreaming.......

[bomber]

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

But the EU needs the money.

i doubt that very much.

[bomber]

1 minute ago, damascase said:

Keep dreaming.......

britman is another Brit thinking the EU and its 26 members are going to go down the toilet because the UK is leaving,talk about stupidity,i wonder how far his 40bt for his mighty pound is stretching these days ???? not far iam sure