May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[AlexRich]

1 hour ago, jimmybkk said:

 

I think he got what he wanted - a vote for Brexit.

 

You would clearly have preferred to see a remain outcome, which would have resulted in Cammo continuing as our CiC, and Ozzie continuing as the numbers man. Given that when the chips were down and it became apparent that they were (somewhat amazingly) completely and utterly unprepared for the eventual outcome of the referendum called by Cammo, rather than stick around... accept the decision of the people... and deal with the outcome... they both made an extremely hasty beeline for the exits...

 

And yet these jokers are who you would want to be running Britain now, yes? I would love to hear what character traits you feel they possess that makes you think they are so right for the job...

 

Instead we now have the three amigos Boris, Davis and Fox ... hardly inspiring really? A serial liar and chancer, a mediocre politician and a closeted gay man who inspires no one! None of them have a clue about the complexities they are facing ... they are May's convenient scapegoats should this adventure up Sh*t Creek turn out badly. As for May, she sold her soul to the Daily Mail in return for their support ... they couldn't quite stomach the thought of Boris Johnson, so at least they got one thing right. Unfortunately, her political epitaph is likely to be worse than Cameron's. 

 

I suspect that Cameron quit because his heart wasn't in Brexit ... did you really expect him to implement something he has no belief in? His resignation came as no surprise to anyone, his position was untenable once the vote went against him. As for Osborne, my understanding is that he was keen to stay on, but May dislikes him so much she was keen for him to go. The choice was not his to make.

 

Cameron agreed to a referendum because he was under pressure from right wing conservatives and the threat of UKIP. He gambled and lost. It was not his idea, he simply gave in to pressure. The history books will not be kind to him, or the Mayhem Government. 

 

 

 

[chiang mai]

5 hours ago, jimmybkk said:

 

How can you know that there would have been an option to Brexit later if the British public had voted to remain now? There's no obligation nor requirement for future referendums as I understand it, so in the wake of a remain vote I can only imagine that those in power would be reciting rhetoric along the lines of: "We asked the public what they wanted in 2016 and they told us they wanted to remain, and so we shall follow their wishes... There is no need for another referendum... We know what the majority of the British people want..."

 

The last time there was a referendum such as this regarding whether the British public wanted to remain a part of the EEC (as it was then) was in 1975, 2 years after we joined (notably, there was no referendum beforehand about whether or not we wanted to join the EEC...). So should we expect the next referendum on this issue in 2057? Is that what you mean by "later"? Kinda too late by then if things have gone t!ts up in the meantime, if you ask me...

 

 

5 hours ago, jimmybkk said:

 

How can you know that there would have been an option to Brexit later if the British public had voted to remain now? There's no obligation nor requirement for future referendums as I understand it, so in the wake of a remain vote I can only imagine that those in power would be reciting rhetoric along the lines of: "We asked the public what they wanted in 2016 and they told us they wanted to remain, and so we shall follow their wishes... There is no need for another referendum... We know what the majority of the British people want..."

 

The last time there was a referendum such as this regarding whether the British public wanted to remain a part of the EEC (as it was then) was in 1975, 2 years after we joined (notably, there was no referendum beforehand about whether or not we wanted to join the EEC...). So should we expect the next referendum on this issue in 2057? Is that what you mean by "later"? Kinda too late by then if things have gone t!ts up in the meantime, if you ask me...

 

 

That wasn't what you asked earlier, you're now changing the ground rules of your argument by adding, "if the British public had voted to remain now".

 

Answer, dunno.

[jpinx]

12 hours ago, Grouse said:

 

I don't know ANY Brexiteers 

 

There are a few in here, and I meet quite a few in my daily life.  They are normal, sane and put forward cohesive arguments with solid backup references.  I also meet remainers with similar attributes. The problem with forum debates is the lack of the subtleties of body language etc to communicate humour, etc.  Brexit is a hot potato and the extremes of opinion are expressed vociferously - becoming personal attacks in some cases.  It is silly in the extreme to personalise postings in forums, but some people can't help themselves behind a keyboard. It's a bit like granny becoming a she-devil when she gets behind the wheel of a car.  We've all seen it - we've all typed and then deleted   Mostly the posters in here are folks who we would happily shoot the breeze with over a coffee in real life, so it is really a pity to allow the environment of the forum to drag things down.  Mods can only do so much - I have been a mod on forums in the past and it's pretty sad to see how vitriolic things can get.  Personally -- I would be very happy to sit down with the most cantakerous poster and enjoy the repartee.  :)

 

 

[Laughing Gravy]

I have to say one of the best articles I have read on the matter.

 

"That vote was not merely advisory. Proposing the Referendum Bill in 2015, Philip Hammond, then the foreign secretary, declared: “The decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by parliamentarians in this chamber.” In a leaflet sent to every household the government, backing Remain, nevertheless promised: “This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.”

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/high-court-judges-are-wrong-about-brexit-nqkh0tqxn

Edited November 8, 2016 by Laughing Gravy

[jpinx]

2 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I have to say one of the best articles I have read on the matter.

 

"That vote was not merely advisory. Proposing the Referendum Bill in 2015, Philip Hammond, then the foreign secretary, declared: “The decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by parliamentarians in this chamber.” In a leaflet sent to every household the government, backing Remain, nevertheless promised: “This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.”

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/high-court-judges-are-wrong-about-brexit-nqkh0tqxn

 

yes -- it's another part of the huge government-sponsored publicity campaign pre-referendum which promised implementation of the result.  The fact the the government was supporting Remain, and then Cameron resigned when Brexit won, makes one wonder if the whole government should not have resigned and forced a general election.  That would have been much more interesting, and would have avoided all the current mess.

 

[jpinx]

9 hours ago, jimmybkk said:

 

I think he got what he wanted - a vote for Brexit....

 

...  not so fast Watson

[chiang mai]

18 minutes ago, jpinx said:

 

There are a few in here, and I meet quite a few in my daily life.  They are normal, sane and put forward cohesive arguments with solid backup references.  I also meet remainers with similar attributes. The problem with forum debates is the lack of the subtleties of body language etc to communicate humour, etc.  Brexit is a hot potato and the extremes of opinion are expressed vociferously - becoming personal attacks in some cases.  It is silly in the extreme to personalise postings in forums, but some people can't help themselves behind a keyboard. It's a bit like granny becoming a she-devil when she gets behind the wheel of a car.  We've all seen it - we've all typed and then deleted   Mostly the posters in here are folks who we would happily shoot the breeze with over a coffee in real life, so it is really a pity to allow the environment of the forum to drag things down.  Mods can only do so much - I have been a mod on forums in the past and it's pretty sad to see how vitriolic things can get.  Personally -- I would be very happy to sit down with the most cantakerous poster and enjoy the repartee.  :)

 

 

"They are normal, sane and put forward cohesive arguments with solid backup references".

 

You're 'avin' a laugh, aren't ya!

 

[jpinx]

7 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

"They are normal, sane and put forward cohesive arguments with solid backup references".

 

You're 'avin' a laugh, aren't ya!

 

yes and no

[Orac]

"They are normal, sane and put forward cohesive arguments with solid backup references".
 
You're 'avin' a laugh, aren't ya!
 

There are valid reasons for leaving the EU though on the whole I still beleive we are better of in.

Anyone claiming to be 100% certain one way or the other isn't doing their homework and needs to broaden their information sources.

[jpinx]

13 minutes ago, jpinx said:

deleted -- smiley issues

 

Edited November 8, 2016 by jpinx

[Srikcir]

44 minutes ago, jpinx said:

If this is a valid way of overturning a referendum

"there was undue influence" doesn't appear to be the court's reason but rather "Parliament alone has the power to trigger Brexit by notifying Brussels of the UK’s intention to leave the European Union"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/nov/03/article-50-high-court-ruling-high-court-set-to-rule-on-whether-mps-should-vote-on-triggering-article-50-politics-live

So it's a case of following a legal legislative process.

[jpinx]

3 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

"there was undue influence" doesn't appear to be the court's reason but rather "Parliament alone has the power to trigger Brexit by notifying Brussels of the UK’s intention to leave the European Union"

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/nov/03/article-50-high-court-ruling-high-court-set-to-rule-on-whether-mps-should-vote-on-triggering-article-50-politics-live

So it's a case of following a legal legislative process.

From the referenced Independent article .........

 

"The group, led by Professor Bob Watt of the University of Buckingham, alleges that the Leave campaign made “assertions of fact that were knowingly misleading”.

Read more

Vote Leave £350m for the NHS pledge was ‘just an example’, chair says

The falsehoods named include the high-profile claim that the EU was costing £350 million a week – a claim that Vote Leave continued to use despite repeated ticking offs by the UK Statistics Authority."

 

..............making this a separate issue and nothing to do with the trigger-mechanism for Article 50

[Srikcir]

1 minute ago, jpinx said:

From the referenced Independent article .........

 

"The group, led by Professor Bob Watt of the University of Buckingham, alleges that the Leave campaign made “assertions of fact that were knowingly misleading”.

Read more

Vote Leave £350m for the NHS pledge was ‘just an example’, chair says

The falsehoods named include the high-profile claim that the EU was costing £350 million a week – a claim that Vote Leave continued to use despite repeated ticking offs by the UK Statistics Authority."

 

..............making this a separate issue and nothing to do with the trigger-mechanism for Article 50

I don't contest there may have been falsehoods presented during the campaigns for/against the referendum. But I disagree that "undue influence" was the cause for the court's decision.

[Grouse]

12 hours ago, jpinx said:

 

Personal information is generally not put on public forums.

 

I'm not interested in your hat size!

 

Just wondered what motivated you....

 

I have kids and their future prospects are a big deal for me.

 

I was fortunate to live and work for several years in Denmark and in Germany. I have very positive memories of these times. It's why I believe the EU is a benign influence

 

I have several electrical engineering companies in Thailand and I am usually paid in THB

 

I had a first class education which was 100% free. Again I'm with the EU (and Scotland) on that.

 

So you can see my influences.

 

Even so, it was not a clear cut decision but on balance, remain and fix was the correct decision IMHO

[jpinx]

Everyone wants a "good" outcome, but what that really means is different for each person.  There is no solution that's going to satisfy everyone, mainly because we are in an environment of confrontational politics..   If the various bodies got together and actually worked out compromises which genuinely reflect public opinion, we would probably have an EU of loosely federated but independent countries sharing a common market of free trade and with a promise to help each other in a similar vein to NATO, but not confined to military matters.  To achieve this we need politicians without egos - a bit of an oxymoron .....

 

Grouse's option of "Remain and Fix" is ideologically correct, but everyone knows it's gone past the point of being fixable.....  

Edited November 8, 2016 by jpinx

[Grouse]

TorFX

 

Market Update - GBP USD

The Pound to US Dollar exchange rate rallied by around two cents last week to strike its highest level in a month thanks to a High Court judgement on ‘Brexit’.

Carney Bounce Boosts Pound

‘Cable’ ticked higher last Monday in response to Bank of England Governor Mark Carney’s pledge to stay on at Threadneedle Street until 2019. Following calls for Carney’s head from some prominent ‘Brexiteers’, the 12-month extension quelled fears that the Old Lady’s independence was becoming compromised. If the Governor had been dismissed out of hand then the likelihood is that markets would interpret the decision to be politically motivated, which could have seriously exacerbated negative sentiment towards Sterling.

GBP/USD remained flat on Tuesday as the Carney bounce wore off and demand for the ‘Greenback’ was hurt by fears of a Donald Trump election victory. Trump’s polling figures improved after the FBI launched another probe into Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of private email servers.

US election jitters continued driving market sentiment on Wednesday and GPB/USD rallied to a three-week high as traders hedged their bets. If Trump were to win then his unconventional policies would likely lead to a selloff in the US Dollar.

High Court Ruling Sends Sterling Higher

Sterling strengthened by around a cent versus the ‘Greenback’ on Thursday when the UK High Court ruled that British parliamentary approval would be required before Prime Minister Theresa May invokes Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and formally starts the UK’s two-year divorce process with the European Union. Although the decision will probably not reverse the referendum result, it may delay the invocation of Article 50 and force May to pursue a softer stance on ‘Brexit’. The Pound’s appeal increased as investors bet on a higher chance of Britain retaining access to the single market.

The BoE left monetary policy on hold on Thursday and noted that stimulus could be boosted or reduced in future months. Although the hawkish message led to a reduction in near-term BoE easing expectations it was largely overshadowed by the High Court ruling.

 

[Grouse]

20 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Everyone wants a "good" outcome, but what that really means is different for each person.  There is no solution that's going to satisfy everyone, mainly because we are in an environment of confrontational politics..   If the various bodies got together and actually worked out compromises which genuinely reflect public opinion, we would probably have an EU of loosely federated but independent countries sharing a common market of free trade and with a promise to help each other in a similar vein to NATO, but not confined to military matters.  To achieve this we need politicians without egos - a bit of an oxymoron .....

 

Grouse's option of "Remain and Fix" is ideologically correct, but everyone knows it's gone past the point of being fixable.....  

 

Agreed except the last para

 

I honestly think that there will need to be changes across the EU as a whole

 

I expect this to happen if only to avoid brittle fracture!

[rockingrobin]

13 hours ago, jpinx said:

 

Given the history of referendums (dae?) in UK two things are clear -- there's been very few and they've always been held for internal party political reasons.  If the government was truly representing the people, there'd be no need for them because the MP's would be reflecting the consensus of his constituents wishes anyway, allowing the normal process of motion, debate, vote, enactment to create the laws we collectively want. 

 

There's two reasons this does not happen -- one is because the party political system actually stifles the feed of opinion from constituent to MP for all but the constituents who are party stalwarts. Secondly we have a government in Westminster that is subservient to the EU and we can not make the laws we want.

' If the government was truly representing the people, there'd be no need for them because the MP's would be reflecting the consensus of his constituents wishes anyway, allowing the normal process of motion, debate, vote, enactment to create the laws we collectively want. '

 

I think Edmund Burke speech in 1774 provides sufficient clarity

'  Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, '

 

'  But authoritative instructions; mandates issued, which the member is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgment and conscience,--these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental mistake of the whole order and tenor of our constitution '

 

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html

 

 

Edited November 8, 2016 by rockingrobin

[jpinx]

7 minutes ago, Grouse said:

TorFX

 

Market Update - GBP USD

The Pound to US Dollar exchange rate rallied by around two cents last week to strike its highest level in a month thanks to a High Court judgement on ‘Brexit’.

Carney Bounce Boosts Pound

‘Cable’ ticked higher last Monday in response to Bank of England Governor Mark Carney’s pledge to stay on at Threadneedle Street until 2019. Following calls for Carney’s head from some prominent ‘Brexiteers’, the 12-month extension quelled fears that the Old Lady’s independence was becoming compromised. If the Governor had been dismissed out of hand then the likelihood is that markets would interpret the decision to be politically motivated, which could have seriously exacerbated negative sentiment towards Sterling.

GBP/USD remained flat on Tuesday as the Carney bounce wore off and demand for the ‘Greenback’ was hurt by fears of a Donald Trump election victory. Trump’s polling figures improved after the FBI launched another probe into Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of private email servers.

US election jitters continued driving market sentiment on Wednesday and GPB/USD rallied to a three-week high as traders hedged their bets. If Trump were to win then his unconventional policies would likely lead to a selloff in the US Dollar.

High Court Ruling Sends Sterling Higher

Sterling strengthened by around a cent versus the ‘Greenback’ on Thursday when the UK High Court ruled that British parliamentary approval would be required before Prime Minister Theresa May invokes Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and formally starts the UK’s two-year divorce process with the European Union. Although the decision will probably not reverse the referendum result, it may delay the invocation of Article 50 and force May to pursue a softer stance on ‘Brexit’. The Pound’s appeal increased as investors bet on a higher chance of Britain retaining access to the single market.

The BoE left monetary policy on hold on Thursday and noted that stimulus could be boosted or reduced in future months. Although the hawkish message led to a reduction in near-term BoE easing expectations it was largely overshadowed by the High Court ruling.

 

Basing anything on a single FX rate is a fools errand.  When HC is voted in the US$ will jump and £ apparently drop.  Better to take £ against a selection of currencies --  not just $.

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

' If the government was truly representing the people, there'd be no need for them because the MP's would be reflecting the consensus of his constituents wishes anyway, allowing the normal process of motion, debate, vote, enactment to create the laws we collectively want. '

 

I think Edmund Burke speech in 1774 provides sufficient clarity

'  Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, '

 

'  But authoritative instructions; mandates issued, which the member is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgment and conscience,--these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental mistake of the whole order and tenor of our constitution '

 

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html

 

 

As applied to the US political system - yes -- but UK is a bit different.  UK can have a referendum which provides an INSTRUCTION to the MP, and which he must follow regardless of his personal opinion, or resign his seat as Cameron did.  If all the Remainer MP's had resigned  there would have been a GE and things would never have become this messy

Edited November 8, 2016 by jpinx

[Laughing Gravy]

47 minutes ago, jpinx said:

Everyone wants a "good" outcome, but what that really means is different for each person.  There is no solution that's going to satisfy everyone, mainly because we are in an environment of confrontational politics..   If the various bodies got together and actually worked out compromises which genuinely reflect public opinion, we would probably have an EU of loosely federated but independent countries sharing a common market of free trade and with a promise to help each other in a similar vein to NATO, but not confined to military matters.  To achieve this we need politicians without egos - a bit of an oxymoron .....

 

Grouse's option of "Remain and Fix" is ideologically correct, but everyone knows it's gone past the point of being fixable.....  

The way the EU has gone over the last 20 years and certainly the way since the referendum clearly shows to me, that there is no fixing it. It is one way (Their way) or no way, in such an arrogant way. This is the fundamental flaw that is causing the unrest and its demise in my opinion. The whole situation and the way the EU commission conduct themselves, has been brought to light more and more. Unless there is a massive change in the way it conducts itself and its structure then the way the EU is, will be no more. it is not just the UK but many other EU countries who want out of its control. I have been accused of being xenophobic which is further from the truth. As I have mentioned I like many European countries and some I have lived in but the way the EU has morphed from its original concept, is something I just can't abide.

[rockingrobin]

37 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

' If the government was truly representing the people, there'd be no need for them because the MP's would be reflecting the consensus of his constituents wishes anyway, allowing the normal process of motion, debate, vote, enactment to create the laws we collectively want. '

 

I think Edmund Burke speech in 1774 provides sufficient clarity

'  Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, '

 

'  But authoritative instructions; mandates issued, which the member is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgment and conscience,--these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental mistake of the whole order and tenor of our constitution '

 

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html

 

 

 

34 minutes ago, jpinx said:

As applied to the US political system - yes -- but UK is a bit different.  UK can have a referendum which provides an INSTRUCTION to the MP, and which he must follow regardless of his personal opinion, or resign his seat as Cameron did.  If all the Remainer MP's had resigned  there would have been a GE and things would never have become this messy

The speech has no connection to the US

The speech came about after Lord Verney wasnt going to renominate Burke  for the borough of Wendover, however after 2 merchants did nominate Burke , he went to Bristol and delivered his speech

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

 

The speech has no connection to the US

The speech came about after Lord Verney wasnt going to renominate Burke  for the borough of Wendover, however after 2 merchants did nominate Burke , he went to Bristol and delivered his speech

Ah -  my bad -  1774 -- things have moved on a lot since then  ; )  Interesting style of speaking, sounds like the grammar and style of the founding fathers.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

Basing anything on a single FX rate is a fools errand.  When HC is voted in the US$ will jump and £ apparently drop.  Better to take £ against a selection of currencies --  not just $.

 

Basket case?

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

As applied to the US political system - yes -- but UK is a bit different.  UK can have a referendum which provides an INSTRUCTION to the MP, and which he must follow regardless of his personal opinion, or resign his seat as Cameron did.  If all the Remainer MP's had resigned  there would have been a GE and things would never have become this messy

 

You have any references?

[jpinx]

36 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

You have any references?

No - but it seems to be the perceived wisdom.  I'm sure someone will provide some kind of referenced contra-opinion within the next few hours : )

[Johnyo]

Taking Back control Tory style

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/08/in-brexit-britain-welfare-will-be-for-multinationals?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, Johnyo said:

Taking Back control Tory style

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/08/in-brexit-britain-welfare-will-be-for-multinationals?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

All the big international manufacturers get a "deal" in one way or another.  maybe favourable premesis or advertising or whatever.  We see it all the time, not just in UK.  There are lots of potential cases being brought to the attention of the EU all the time.  It wasn't very subtle but it was just a statement of an existing fact - nothing new because of Brexit.

 

I have personal experience of a UK company doing business internationally and it is often easier to trade with (for example) Australia, than the EU because OZ doesn't have the same requirements on their product as does the EU. 

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

No - but it seems to be the perceived wisdom.  I'm sure someone will provide some kind of referenced contra-opinion within the next few hours : )

 

You want a reference? Try the High Court.

[chiang mai]

Meanwhile:

 

"Diminished growth will result in 31 billion pounds of lost tax revenue, only partially offset by a 6 billion-pound reduction in spending if Britain ceases to contribute to the European Union budget, the non-partisan research group said in a report published on Tuesday. It means Britain is heading for a deficit of 14.9 billion pounds in 2019-20 instead of the 10.4 billion-pound surplus predicted in March by former chancellor, George Osborne."

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-08/hammond-facing-25-billion-pound-blow-to-u-k-budget-ifs-says