Article 50 Discussion

[obiter dictum]

It just needs the legislature to instiugate the majority wishes, not the Executive being a constitutional issue

[unclebulgaria67]

It just needs the legislature to instiugate the majority wishes, not the Executive being a constitutional issue

 

Parliament will decide on this on a point by point basis. Perhaps the Brexit deal will be so good that there are no reasons to block it happening. Or the economics are so bad with poor trading arrangements, that parliament will decide to block it, offering a new referendum.

 

I don't think anyone can be certain what will happen. Government has to proceed with the Brexit process, because uncertainty would kill the economy. But at some point we might get to the position where Brexit is not seen by the majority as being sensible.

 

There is a chance the EU might cut a better deal with restricted rights of movement for the UK to stay in the EU.

[citizenB]

I think a lot of the things we are hearing... larger organisations such as banks closing branches, getting shot of staff - companies not investing - no salary increases - Consumer confidence lacking.. have absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Brexit just provides an excuse for something that would have happened anyway.

[honeybee13]

That possibly is happening in some companies, CB.

 

But OH's company was bought by Americans a couple of years ago because they wanted a presence in Europe. Now they've seen the result of the Brexit vote, they're actively looking to move head office from London to Paris asap. They won't be the only ones.

 

Plus, you have companies that might have come to London if we were going to be in Europe, who will now look elsewhere to base their companies. Both of these are likely to see jobs lost.

[citizenB]

That possibly is happening in some companies, CB.

 

But OH's company was bought by Americans a couple of years ago because they wanted a presence in Europe. Now they've seen the result of the Brexit vote, they're actively looking to move head office from London to Paris asap. They won't be the only ones.

 

Plus, you have companies that might have come to London if we were going to be in Europe, who will now look elsewhere to base their companies. Both of these are likely to see jobs lost.

 

 

I imagine that is why China wanted to invest heavily in the UK as well, honeybee !

[obiter dictum]

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-faces-battle-to-keep-banking-sector-in-london-5rnntd0sw?shareToken=a794c5763efdbf43d65a52c460e6d087

[citizenB]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/28/imf-admits-disastrous-love-affair-with-euro-apologises-for-the-i/

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/28/imf-admits-disastrous-love-affair-with-euro-apologises-for-the-i/

 

The International Monetary Fund’s top staff misled their own board, made a series of calamitous misjudgments in Greece, became euphoric cheerleaders for the euro project, ignored warning signs of impending crisis, and collectively failed to grasp an elemental concept of currency theory.

 

This is the lacerating verdict of the IMF’s top watchdog on the fund’s tangled political role in the eurozone debt crisis, the most damaging episode in the history of the Bretton Woods institutions.

 

It describes a “culture of complacency”, prone to “superficial and mechanistic” analysis, and traces a shocking breakdown in the governance of the IMF, leaving it unclear who is ultimately in charge of this

extremely powerful organisation.

 

The report by the IMF’s Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) goes above the head of the managing director, Christine Lagarde It answers solely to the board of executive directors, and those from Asia and Latin America are clearly incensed at the way European Union insiders used the fund to rescue their own rich currency union and banking system.

[citizenB]

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-faces-battle-to-keep-banking-sector-in-london-5rnntd0sw?shareToken=a794c5763efdbf43d65a52c460e6d087

 

 

“The City would probably be hurt in the short term, but it would not spell disaster. The City’s competitive advantage is founded on more than just unfettered access to the single market. A European Union exit would enable the United Kingdom to broker trade deals with emerging markets that could pay dividends for the financial services sector in the long run.”

 

That’s the conclusion of the Capital Economics report quoted in the article (see here -https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/#financial-services-and-the-city). If we lose access to the single market - by no means certain - the City will lose automatic passporting rights, and its exports to the EU could be hit. But the City would retain all its other competitive advantages, including its skilled labour force, its business infrastructure, its language, and its time zone. Plus it would not have to adhere to the increasingly anti-market regulations coming from Brussels. Longer term its primacy could well be reinforced.

 

 

 

From the same article

[obiter dictum]

I think the point being made is that people are quoting from this newspaper, that newspaper but in reality, people just do not have a clue on what will happen. It is nothing more than one giant roulette wheel in reality. And that is what scares people

[Guest]

indeed, there are positive and negative reports abound re trade/economy etc. eg re the former, GlaxoSK recently stating further investment/manufacturing in the uk despite. then, re the latter the bbc reporting just now that a manufacturing lobby group reports a 'dip in confidence' re uncertainty.

one thing that does seem fairly certain though, is that one of the apparent main issues (immigration) that exitors voted on prob wont change much. and that was pretty much clear prior on consideration.

 

There is a chance the EU might cut a better deal with restricted rights of movement for the UK to stay in the EU.

wld be surprised if that happened, it wld set the precedent for others....unless that is to be the way forward in the eu generally across the board?

[unclebulgaria67]

Must read article on Brexit process.

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/david-allen-green-brexit-means-brexit-but-in-reality-it-s-a-long-time-away-a3314616.html

[citizenB]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/20/brexit-eu-referendum-economy-project-fear

 

 

Unemployment would rocket. Tumbleweed would billow through deserted high streets. Share prices would crash. The government would struggle to find buyers for UK bonds. Financial markets would be in meltdown. Britain would be plunged instantly into another deep recession.

 

Remember all that? It was hard to avoid the doom and gloom, not just in the weeks leading up to the referendum, but in those immediately after it. Many of those who voted remain comforted themselves with the certain knowledge that those who had voted for Brexit would suffer a bad case of buyer’s remorse.

 

It hasn’t worked out that way. The 1.4% jump in retail sales in July showed that consumers have not stopped spending, and seem to be more influenced by the weather than they are by fear of the consequences of what happened on 23 June. Retailers are licking their lips in anticipation of an Olympics feel-good factor.

 

[obiter dictum]

Could that be because Article 50 has not been triggered and the status Quo is continuing?

 

Not forgetting the currency exchange has fallen through the floor with price of imports going through the roof

 

It has only been eight weeks since the Referendum as well

Edited August 20, 2016 by obiter dictum

[Guest]

Could that be because Article 50 has not been triggered ...

 

and, as said, the sales increase was put down to the hols/nice weather....always will happen, even if out.

[buckthorn]

Could that be because Article 50 has not been triggered and the status Quo is continuing?

 

Not forgetting the currency exchange has fallen through the floor with price of imports going through the roof

 

It has only been eight weeks since the Referendum as well

Imports have ‘not’ gone through the roof at all and inflation is still only 0.6%.

 

“Economists hike forecasts as Brexit confidence grows”

 

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/topstories/economists-hike-forecasts-as-brexit-confidence-grows/ar-BBvRoQw?ocid=spartandhp

Edited August 21, 2016 by Andyorch
edited

[obiter dictum]

A little education is in order. As we are an island nation and do not make anything anymore being a service economy, we have to import raw materials.

 

As that raw material is purchased in either the Euro or Dollar, and not sterling the current strength of the pound means you get less imported for the current strength of that pound.

 

Simply economics for most people

[buckthorn]

I will agree with that a little education would not do you any harm.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Andyorch
edited out personal remark

[unclebulgaria67]

Have you seen how much Pounds Sterling has fallen since 23rd June. It will mean UK companies are at risk of takeover, as it will be cheaper for foreign buyers. Also foreign buyers might look to continue investing in UK property, keeping price increases going.

 

Any impacts on inflation won't be seen until later in the year, as increased costs of imports start to feed through.

 

I am not convinced Theresa May will trigger Article 50 during 2017, as i think it is possible that this is not seen as the best route to take. The Italian who wrote this article said he was not convinced about it being the way to exit the EU. The EU/UK might instead choose to negotiate a different arrangement, as the EU tries to keep the UK within the single market, but with concessions agreed by all 27 other countries.

[buckthorn]

Have you seen how much Pounds Sterling has fallen since 23rd June. It will mean UK companies are at risk of takeover, as it will be cheaper for foreign buyers. Also foreign buyers might look to continue investing in UK property, keeping price increases going.

 

Any impacts on inflation won't be seen until later in the year, as increased costs of imports start to feed through.

 

I am not convinced Theresa May will trigger Article 50 during 2017, as i think it is possible that this is not seen as the best route to take. The Italian who wrote this article said he was not convinced about it being the way to exit the EU. The EU/UK might instead choose to negotiate a different arrangement, as the EU tries to keep the UK within the single market, but with concessions agreed by all 27 other countries.

 

Have you got a link to that?

[unclebulgaria67]

Have you got a link to that?

 

Link to what ?

[obiter dictum]

The issue on Article 50 is at the High Court in October. What ever the decision will probably be appealed to the Supreme Court anyway

[buckthorn]

Link to what ?

 

This:-The Italian who wrote this article said he was not convinced about it being the way to exit the EU. The EU/UK might instead

choose to negotiate a different arrangement, as the EU tries to keep the UK within the single market, but with concessions agreed by all 27 other countries.

[unclebulgaria67]

This:-The Italian who wrote this article said he was not convinced about it being the way to exit the EU. The EU/UK might instead

choose to negotiate a different arrangement, as the EU tries to keep the UK within the single market, but with concessions agreed by all 27 other countries.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-britain-theresa-may-article-50-not-supposed-meant-to-be-used-trigger-giuliano-a7156656.html

 

i predict that the courts will rule that Parliament must take decisions before a minister can trigger any EU treaty clause, because the EU referendum never contained any binding authority.

 

When they get around to looking at this properly and discussing it with EU/EU country leaders, they will come to the conclusion that triggering Article 50 with a supposed 2 year period to negotiate exit, is not the best way. Instead they will negotiate UK's position with the EU and see where it goes. Because the 2 year period can be extended, it could get pretty silly with financial markets looking at a timetable and investors looking at possible ways of making short term profits. And people who voted leave would be extremely annoyed if Article 50 time period kept being extended. Better to have meaningful negotiations within the whole of the EU to decide on new treaties. Those countries not in the Euro will want to see changes anyway. The EU can't keep putting off not negotiating treaties because countries have referendum commitments.

[obiter dictum]

I agree unclebulgaria. It can only be that way being that the UK is a parliamentary democracy. That is the great thing obout our uncodified constitition, the judiciary being seperate from the Executive and legislature

[buckthorn]

Their is a load of rubbish flung about that we cannot sell to the single market – without agreeing to the free movement of people. (C**p)

 

Question what is the single market’?

The ‘Single Market’ simple means that any business in an EU country can sell to anyone else in an EU country, without paying tariffs

(taxes on imports) or facing ‘non-tariff barriers’ (tricks which countries use, like complicated rules and regulations, to make it difficult

for foreign companies to sell into their markets).

 

In return for this, they agree to the ‘free movement’ of four things: goods, services, capital- and people.

 

There are more than 100 non-EU countries with some kind of trade agreement with the EU. Only 4 have

‘free movement of people’ in their agreement. One of those (Liechtenstein) is actually let off, because it is

too small. Another, Switzerland, has voted to get rid of it.

 

So what they are saying is ‘We can have either have free movement of people, or agree to pay tariffs.

If we agree to pay world tariffs, like all other non-EU countries do, we will pay less than the EU currently

charges us to be a member (and gain more)!

 

As we are their biggest customers, they may want to cut us an even better deal, for lower tariffs. That is

what is being negotiated.

 

This is some of the countries who have signalled that they would like to open trade talks with the UK:

Australia-Canada-China-Ghana-Iceland-India-Mexico-New Zealand-South Korea-United States.

 

Meanwhile German industrialists had told their government that they expect it to ensure a free trade deal with the UK.

Edited August 29, 2016 by silverfox1961
removed provocative line of text