Post-Brexit Thread

[1andrew1]

Fears EU Brexit delays will spur bank exodus to eurozone
EU Brexit negotiators are insisting Britain agrees to its European divorce settlement before Brussels offers any transitional deal, expecting international banks to get cold feet over losing “passporting” rights and start shifting operations from London to the eurozone...
That process has already started with Lloyd’s of London, the 328-year-old insurance market, becoming the first major City business to put a timetable on plans to move a part of its operations to the EU in preparation for Brexit.
Last week a group of Japanese financial institutions told the British government they would begin moving functions from London within six months unless they received clarity on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
Google headline or pay link https://www.ft.com/content/f136b774-...3-7e34c07b46ef

---------- Post added at 20:58 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

But it is complicated, Andrew. You can't blame the Government for that. It was the British people who voted for Brexit, after all!

This is certainly not a straight forward process and the Government is right to be taking a bit of time to study the consequences of this before entering into negotiations.

I do blame the Government for asking the civil service to prepare financial and staffing plans in the event of Brexit without defining what Brexit will mean. And I do blame the Government for not disclosing its plans as doing so should help prevent British job relocations.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I have got to pick you up on this repeated point that Brexit is the "will of the people". It is the will of 37% of the electorate. That's all that was required to win the referendum.

Consequently, she must take into account the impact of Brexit on the nation as a whole and not just the wishes of the minority that voted to Leave.

It is an irony that a Trades Union requires 40% of a total electorate (not merely votes cast) to trigger a strike whereas a vote to radically change the financial, cultural and political makeup of the whole country could have been decided by Bob in Essex ..

If the people who didn't vote wanted to stay in the EU, then they should have voted. You have no basis to believe that all those who didn't vote were remainers anyway.

In any case, Brexit is good for the country. The EU is suffocating us and taking away our ability to shape the direction of travel for the UK. We have asked the people and they have answered. Now we need to get on with delivery.

As far as the unions are concerned, you are missing the elephant in the room. That is that only a proportion, often a small proportion, of employees who are also members of a trade union. So a company of 1,000 employees and only 100 trade union members need only 40 votes to strike. Looks a bit different when put like that, doesn't it?

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I have got to pick you up on this repeated point that Brexit is the "will of the people". It is the will of 37% of the electorate. That's all that was required to win the referendum.

Consequently, she must take into account the impact of Brexit on the nation as a whole and not just the wishes of the minority that voted to Leave.

Erm, no. The majority of those who voted, voted to leave. You can call it a minority but in that case those who voted to remain are even more of a minority.
I take issue with your statement that those who voted to remain should have their wishes taken into account. They shouldn't. For the simple reason that their wish was to remain, which was the issue that they (you) lost over. Why the hell should the winners of this referendum allow the losers to dictate any terms since those are likely to be contrary to the wishes of the winning side?!

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

If the people who didn't vote wanted to stay in the EU, then they should have voted. You have no basis to believe that all those who didn't vote were remainers anyway.

In any case, Brexit is good for the country. The EU is suffocating us and taking away our ability to shape the direction of travel for the UK. We have asked the people and they have answered. Now we need to get on with delivery.

As far as the unions are concerned, you are missing the elephant in the room. That is that only a proportion, often a small proportion, of employees who are also members of a trade union. So a company of 1,000 employees and only 100 trade union members need only 40 votes to strike. Looks a bit different when put like that, doesn't it?

I am not claiming that all those that did not vote were Remainers so please don't say I did.

We have asked the people and they have answered

Not quite, a minority of the people "answered"

As to elephants in the room, I cannot see any.

---------- Post added at 22:28 ---------- Previous post was at 22:23 ----------

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Erm, no. The majority of those who voted, voted to leave. You can call it a minority but in that case those who voted to remain are even more of a minority.
I take issue with your statement that those who voted to remain should have their wishes taken into account. They shouldn't. For the simple reason that their wish was to remain, which was the issue that they (you) lost over. Why the hell should the winners of this referendum allow the losers to dictate any terms since those are likely to be contrary to the wishes of the winning side?!

You need to understand that this is not roulette where winner takes all. This vote decided we leave the EU but the terms on which we leave should be decided by HMG who will consider the interests of the nation and population as a whole and not just a small minority of it.

You will have to come to terms with this as this process plays out. If not, you will be very disappointed ..

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by ianch99

You need to understand that this is not roulette where winner takes all. This vote decided we leave the EU but the terms on which we leave should be decided by HMG who will consider the interests of the nation and population as a whole and not just a small minority of it.

You will have to come to terms with this as this process plays out. If not, you will be very disappointed ..

I don't have to come to terms with that since leave won. You need to come to terms with losing and stop trying to move the goalposts/change reality to suit your world view. I'll be disappointed if the remoaners get much say in the outcome since their wishes are opposed to the winning sides desires.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Not quite, a minority of the people "answered"

And a minority of those who answered voted to remain.

[OLD BOY]

I think it is reasonable to deduce that the probability is that non voters were split between remainers and exiteers in roughly the same proportion as those who voted.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Erm, no. The majority of those who voted, voted to leave. You can call it a minority but in that case those who voted to remain are even more of a minority.
I take issue with your statement that those who voted to remain should have their wishes taken into account. They shouldn't. For the simple reason that their wish was to remain, which was the issue that they (you) lost over. Why the hell should the winners of this referendum allow the losers to dictate any terms since those are likely to be contrary to the wishes of the winning side?!

Yeah I'm sure the winner of the next general election will allow the losing parties to determine their policy just so the minority get their way. It'd be laughable if it wasn't pathetic.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

You need to understand that this is not roulette where winner takes all. This vote decided we leave the EU but the terms on which we leave should be decided by HMG who will consider the interests of the nation and population as a whole and not just a small minority of it.

H'mm. Actually, I think that most people who voted to leave wanted to bring to an end to the free movement of people and bring back British sovereignty. What element of that do you not understand, and pray tell me how we are expected to bring that about if we stay in the common market?

Most people can see that the kind of arguments you espouse are simply a smokescreen for 'no change' promoters who don't want to listen to the majority.

How very undemocratic of you.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Osem

Yeah I'm sure the winner of the next general election will allow the losing parties to determine their policy just so the minority get their way. It'd be laughable if it wasn't pathetic.

Referendums and elections are different. A political party gets elected to carry out its mandate. The referendum was a yes/no about remaining or leaving the EU and nothing more. A majority in favour of leave does not automatically mean a majority in favour of ending freedom of movement, leaving the single market, etc.

---------- Post added at 23:21 ---------- Previous post was at 23:11 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

H'mm. Actually, I think that most people who voted to leave wanted to bring to an end to the free movement of people and bring back British sovereignty. What element of that do you not understand, and pray tell me how we are expected to bring that about if we stay in the common market?

Most people can see that the kind of arguments you espouse are simply a smokescreen for 'no change' promoters who don't want to listen to the majority.

How very undemocratic of you.

From the Government's point of view, it only has a mandate to leave the EU. That is the problem with a binary question like "remain" or "leave". People attach their personal interpretations to each choice that aren't there.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Referendums and elections are different. A political party gets elected to carry out its mandate. The referendum was a yes/no about remaining or leaving the EU and nothing more. A majority in favour of leave does not automatically mean a majority in favour of ending freedom of movement, leaving the single market, etc.[COLOR="Silver"]

Then why are you so bothered about plans? We voted leave so leave it should be according to your point of view.

No negotiations, no deals.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Then why are you so bothered about plans? We voted leave so leave it should be according to your point of view.

No negotiations, no deals.

As a patriotic Brit who cares for his country, I want the Government to disclose its plans in order to stop more companies exporting British jobs to the EU. Some seem happy to sacrifice British people's livelihoods so the EU 27 don't learn of our intentions until March. As you can surmise, I don't share that belief.

I'm not sure as to why voting leave excludes negotiations or deals. It doesn't. Negotiations are a pre-requisite of leaving the EU; leaving the single market is possibly not a pre-requisite of leaving the EU it's being tested in the courts so we cannot say with certainty either way yet.

Originally Posted by Osem

Yeah I'm sure the winner of the next general election will allow the losing parties to determine their policy just so the minority get their way. It'd be laughable if it wasn't pathetic.

That's far too simplistic a view .The 'winning side' is getting 100% of it's own way ,there is no doubt about that because we are leaving the EU ,that is what was voted for .However the terms of that departure are very much open for discussion,they should and will involve everyone because it will affect everyone.Trying to compare a referendum result with a general election result is totally bizarre and quite frankly smacks of desperation as people run out of arguments to keep remainers out of the equation .

---------- Post added at 07:07 ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

H'mm. Actually, I think that most people who voted to leave wanted to bring to an end to the free movement of people and bring back British sovereignty. What element of that do you not understand, and pray tell me how we are expected to bring that about if we stay in the common market?

Most people can see that the kind of arguments you espouse are simply a smokescreen for 'no change' promoters who don't want to listen to the majority.

How very undemocratic of you.

I voted out because i do not agree with the single market and freedom of movement ,i did not have British sovereignty at the forefront of my decision making simply because we have always retained the ultimate sovereignty ,it is that parliamentary sovereignty that is taking us out of the EU.I accept that some minor aspects of sovereignty were relinquished as a condition of EU membership but we have always retained Parliamentary sovereignty

---------- Post added at 07:15 ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Fears EU Brexit delays will spur bank exodus to eurozone
EU Brexit negotiators are insisting Britain agrees to its European divorce settlement before Brussels offers any transitional deal, expecting international banks to get cold feet over losing “passporting” rights and start shifting operations from London to the eurozone...
That process has already started with Lloyd’s of London, the 328-year-old insurance market, becoming the first major City business to put a timetable on plans to move a part of its operations to the EU in preparation for Brexit.
Last week a group of Japanese financial institutions told the British government they would begin moving functions from London within six months unless they received clarity on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
Google headline or pay link https://www.ft.com/content/f136b774-...3-7e34c07b46ef

---------- Post added at 20:58 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------

I do blame the Government for asking the civil service to prepare financial and staffing plans in the event of Brexit without defining what Brexit will mean. And I do blame the Government for not disclosing its plans as doing so should help prevent British job relocations.

The government managed to give Nissan assurances that meant they would be staying so why can't the government do the same for the rest of industry ?

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by martyh

However the terms of that departure are very much open for discussion,they should and will involve everyone because it will affect everyone.

Good luck with that one. Once it hasn't happened you can come down from that dream cloud.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by martyh

That's far too simplistic a view .The 'winning side' is getting 100% of it's own way ,there is no doubt about that because we are leaving the EU ,that is what was voted for .However the terms of that departure are very much open for discussion,they should and will involve everyone because it will affect everyone.Trying to compare a referendum result with a general election result is totally bizarre and quite frankly smacks of desperation as people run out of arguments to keep remainers out of the equation .

---------- Post added at 07:07 ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 ----------



I voted out because i do not agree with the single market and freedom of movement ,i did not have British sovereignty at the forefront of my decision making simply because we have always retained the ultimate sovereignty ,it is that parliamentary sovereignty that is taking us out of the EU.I accept that some minor aspects of sovereignty were relinquished as a condition of EU membership but we have always retained Parliamentary sovereignty

---------- Post added at 07:15 ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 ----------



The government managed to give Nissan assurances that meant they would be staying so why can't the government do the same for the rest of industry ?

Yes it is a simple/simplistic comparison but it's purely intended to make a point, nothing else. Anything would be 'simple' in comparison to the exercise we are now embarked upon so what other analogy wouldn't be? Nobody here seriously expects remainers not to have a view about what happens now but it's perfectly clear that a good number or people would like to see the result reversed or bogged down in legal challenges to the point that it stalls so it's perfectly acceptable to challenge that.

As for the deal being done and dusted - I think we're a long way from that and what I fear isn't constructive debate, it's deliberate attempts to delay and confuse the process which then leads to other remainers claiming HMG isn't being decisive and hasn't got a plan blah blah blah. If we're not careful and the EU doesn't fall apart before the exit finally takes place, we could just find ourselves securing a deal which nobody is happy with.