EPTUK Politics Mega-thread - Page 252
| Forum Index > General Forum |
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk | ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On November 08 2016 00:40 MyLovelyLurker wrote: UK is not part of the Schengen Zone, so it doesn't matter. The EU immigration crisis has negligible impact on UK. You will need a passport to travel to and from the UK. The UK nationals who place immigration in UK as part of the agenda of leaving the EU either: I can't disagree with you in principle with Schengen possibly bringing unlimited risk, but that's why I'm deliberately putting numbers on everything. I said earlier actual asylum seekers in the UK - not potential - were 0.003% of the total population. Immigration is the main worry of 40% of British citizen, and the number of immigration-related articles in the press doubled last year. Worry is irrational when it leads you to trade demonstrable, actual benefits for low-odds risk. Doesn't want the free movement of EU nationals into the UK. or Associate the political restriction of freedom of movement of EU nationals within EU countries with immigration from outside the EU. or Is totally misinformed. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6273 Posts
Britain has no overall strategy for leaving the European Union and splits in Prime Minister Theresa May's cabinet could delay a clear negotiating position for six months, according to a memo for the government that was leaked to The Times newspaper. The document, prepared by consultancy firm Deloitte for the government department that supports the prime minister and her cabinet, casts Britain's top team in a chaotic light: May is trying to control key Brexit questions herself while her senior ministers are divided and the civil service is in turmoil. "The Prime Minister is rapidly acquiring the reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself - which is unlikely to be sustainable," according to the document, dated Nov. 7 and published by The Times. "It may be 6 months before there is a view on priorities/negotiation strategy as the political situation in the UK and the EU evolves," said the document, titled "Brexit Update". May's spokeswoman said the Deloitte memo was unsolicited, had nothing to do with the government and had no credence. Deloitte declined immediate comment. "It was not commissioned by the government," May's spokeswoman told reporters. "It does seem as though this is a firm touting for business now aided by the media." But such a disorderly portrayal of the government underscores both the extent of the turmoil unleashed by the June 23 vote to leave the EU and the uncertainties ahead as May tries to pull Britain out of the world's biggest trading bloc. Like the Brexit vote, Donald Trump's victory in the United States has underscored how swiftly assumptions are being turned upside down, pushing governments, investors and chief executives into the unknown. The pound fell as much as 1.3 percent to 87.07 pence per euro EURGBP=D4 following the memo leak before recovering to 86.92 pence. It also lost more than half a percent to $1.2417. GBP=D4 'NO COMMON STRATEGY' The memo said no common strategy had emerged, partly as a result of splits within the government and partly due to the evolving political situation in the rest of the EU where both France and Germany face major elections in 2017. May's cabinet is split, with Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Trade Minister Liam Fox and Brexit Minister David Davis - who all campaigned to leave the EU - on one side and finance minister Philip Hammond and Business Secretary Greg Clark - who wanted to remain - on the other, according to the memo. May's priority, it said, is survival and keeping her ruling Conservative Party together, rather than business or economic considerations. "Industry has 2 unpleasant realizations - first, that the Government's priority remains its political survival, not the economy," the memo said. "Second, that there will be no clear economic-Brexit strategy any time soon because it is being developed on a case-by-case basis as specific decisions are forced on Government." The document also said that "major players" in industry were likely to "point a gun at government's head" to secure assurances similar to that given to carmaker Nissan that it would not suffer from Brexit. "The public stance of Government is orientated primarily to its own supporters, with industry in particular barely being on the radar screen - yet," it said. Government departments were working on more than 500 Brexit-related projects and might require an additional 30,000 civil servants, it said. If the Supreme Court forces the government to give lawmakers a say on triggering the formal talks to leave the bloc, some ministers might be happy to see more radical Brexit options watered down, the memo said. May has promised to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which kicks off two years of talks with Brussels, by the end of March but she has so far given little away about her plans for Britain's future relationship with the bloc. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday that Britain must be clear about its aims for Brexit by the end of March. uk.reuters.com | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9844 Posts
Of course, they could prove their point by telling us, even very vaguely, what their plan is. I'm not so sure they'll do that either though  On an unrelated note, here's a fantastic article from the Financial Times about McDonnell's economic plan and why our government should take it very seriously indeed: https://www.ft.com/content/069d4a38-8738-11e6-a75a-0c4dce033ade I am not surprised the centre-left in Germany and in the UK are struggling to win elections. We do not know whether Mr Corbyn can succeed. What we do know is that his more moderate predecessors could not, at least not since the onset of the financial crisis. That was one of the biggest economic events of our time. It has also redefined politics. Where does this lead us? From an economic point of view there is nothing extreme in the argument for large investment programmes, especially after years of fiscal consolidation. Yet the only established political party that offers this choice in Europe is Mr Corbyn’s, which is promising £500bn. In Germany, only the Left party, successors to East Germany’s communists, supports big increases in investment. On the continent you have to go the outer extremes of the political spectrum to find someone to endorse an investment stimulus. So when an established party, like Labour, offers a shift in macroeconomic policies that have a chance of ending our post-crisis malaise, it should be taken seriously. If the ruling Conservatives mess up Brexit, which they just might, the scheduled 2020 elections could become an open race. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6273 Posts
That article is pretty regular leftist stimulus talk. I don't think that's still justified for the UK with 2+% growth rates. The UK isn't in a recession. | ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
On the plus side judges are likely to rule that article 50 can not be declared before 2019. All in all, Britain is likely to have just simply pissed off their trade partners; big surprise. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
Trump is good for Brexit and bad for the EU. Also: inflation down, unemployment down, consumer spending significantly up. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9206 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:30 bardtown wrote: Trump is good for Brexit In what way is it good for Brexit? | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6273 Posts
I think the consequence of article 50 going trough parliament is that it'll be conditional on more parliamentary oversight instead of Brexit not happening at all. That's a good thing. The government shouldn't be able to decide such a thing in their own. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9206 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:36 LegalLord wrote: If the U.K. ultimately leaves the single market, has there been any substantial talk about how it will realign its terms of favorable trade? Obviously Britain still has the Commonwealth and that's a likely direction to go, but has some thought been given to EU alternative trade blocs? I don't doubt that a country like the U.K. needs some form of reliable trade partners given that it's an island nation. There's been some flirting with India, China and the US, but substantial? Absolutely none. The first question any 3rd party needs answered is what the UK's relationship with the EEA will be. And they don't even know it themselves yet. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6273 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:40 LegalLord wrote: Ultimately I don't see A50 happening before elections do, since that will provide far more clarity as to how Brits want to leave the EU, not just that they do. Polling before has been quite clear that Regrexit isn't in the cards right now. How will that bring clarity on how Brits want Brexit? The conservative party is split on the issue and the other parties are for remain. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:43 RvB wrote: How will that bring clarity on how Brits want Brexit? The conservative party is split on the issue and the other parties are for remain. It's quite likely that the next election will replace the very highly pro-Remain Parliament with one more aligned with the type of Brexit the population wants. A50 is absolutely going to be a big issue in the next campaign. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22343 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:46 LegalLord wrote: It's quite likely that the next election will replace the very highly pro-Remain Parliament with one more aligned with the type of Brexit the population wants. A50 is absolutely going to be a big issue in the next campaign. Indeed, if A50 is delayed till after the elections then it will be 100% the main point of said election. And the current position after the referendum is very unclear (thats what you get with bad referendum question). What sort of Brexit people want is a very good question to ask because it dramatically changes the effect upon Britain. And the pro-remain will likely let it happen if given the oppertunity because there is a decent chance that in an election Remain will win this time around. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6273 Posts
| ||
|
Agathon
France1505 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:36 LegalLord wrote: Obviously Britain still has the Commonwealth and that's a likely direction to go. Well, why? When Australia needs submarines, does it buy UK's? Or French ones? When India needs warplanes, does it buy Tornados because India is a member of the Commonwealth? Or french Rafales? When Canada needs warplanes, it buys Tornados? Or US F16? If the members of the Commonwealth don't buy British stuff today, why would they buy tomorrow? | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6273 Posts
en.m.wikipedia.org | ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
On November 17 2016 21:30 bardtown wrote: Mythical with more mythology. The judges don't get to decide any such thing. They will decide whether or not triggering A50 must go through parliament, and every significant Labour figure has already said they won't block A50. Trump is good for Brexit and bad for the EU. Also: inflation down, unemployment down, consumer spending significantly up. They won't block it depending on what the government plans to negotiate. The monkey with blond hair seems to think that Italy should be more open to a favourable trade deal due to wine exports. Trump is good for Brexit because he is the USA's version of Brexit. A time warp back 40 years. Inflation is not down. Unemployment is, however benefit claims are up (long live 0 hour contracts? lol..). Consumer spending would be up wouldn't it? It's Christmas in 1.5 months. Also an SC judge has said it would be more problematic as they will need to draw up legislation to supercede the 1972 act which is the part that would take severely longer than previously estimated. Maybe you should try reading something other than tabloid newspapers. I know the Sun has p3, but that doesn't make it a reliable source. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On November 18 2016 02:52 RvB wrote: A bigger issue is that the commonwealth is no perfect substitute for the EU since with trade both distance and size of the trading partner matters. en.m.wikipedia.org Well it is possible to trade with the EU without joining the single market. But an economic bloc would help mitigate the effects of leaving a large trade bloc that gives it more leverage in trade issues. | ||
| ||
