Brexit discussion thread III

flatty

Peregrinus wrote: »

flaneur wrote: »

Probably a fairly excruciatingly high administration fee to put off legitimate applicants?

They're pushing a policy of discouraging immigration. These kinds of things are often calculated as barrier fees to reduce application volumes.

It may also be a notion that the Home Office immigration service must run at no cost to the state.

Flatty is proposing that the EU should sell EU citizenship to UK citizens at a thousand pounds a pop. Nothing to do with the Home Office.

Exactly.

flatty

Peregrinus wrote: »

flatty wrote: »

Firstly, that generation of kids cannot fight for anything as most remain too young to vote.

Then they're hardly going to have a thousand pounds in their back pockets to buy EU citizenship, are they?

flatty wrote: »

Secondly, they were born as EU citizens.

And their justified outrage at being deprived of it will be directed where it should be, at Brexiters in the UK government and parliament.

I see no reason at all why the EU should wish to intervene there.

They can be as outraged as they like. They won't be allowed back in to the EU.
Someone will block them. You know this full well.

Peregrinus

flatty wrote: »

They can be as outraged as they like. They won't be allowed back in to the EU.
Someone will block them. You know this full well.

I don't know this full well. I think its unlikely that they'll apply, unless things in the UK change fairly radically, but if they do apply I think the EU will be quite pleased. We'd much rather have them in that out, and if Brexit has been tried and has been seen to fail well, that's great.

But, if you think that some member state would veto any readmission of the UK, why would you imagine that they will unanimously agree to amend the UK treaties so that EU citizens should become entitled to EU citizenship? That's precisely the kind of cherrypicking of the benefits of membership that the EU, and most or all of its member states, would strongly resist.

breatheme

The EU doesn't grant citizenship and EU citizenship doesn't exist independently to citizenship of a member state. The passport of a member state is an EU passport, and the EU cannot grant citizenship on the grounds that it's not... you know, an actual state.
If a UK national wishes to regain EU citizenship they can move to a member state and naturalise there, same as with any other third country.

LeinsterDub

Brexit secretary David Davis will warn the European commission that it cannot “cherrypick some sectors” when negotiating a trade deal, according to a senior government official, who said the UK planned to treat goods and services as inseparable

Mean while in dream land the UK thinks it's in the driving seat again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/18/david-davis-to-warn-european-commission-it-cannot-cherrypick-brexit-trade-deal-sectors

flaneur

A harsh dose of economic reality is going to arrive eventually. They’re really not understanding that the EU will put the integrity of the EU and it’s financial systems ahead of any trade deal and that the UK has very little leverage.

Peregrinus

solodeogloria wrote: »

Admittedly - this doesn't seem to be a concern for most people at least from what I can see.

It's a concern to quite a lot of people. Applications for Irish passports from non-residents of Ireland have boomed since the Brexit vote; most of these are from Great Britain. There has been a corresponding boom in applications from NI. It's expected that a million Irish passports will be issued by the end of 2017, up from about 700,000 in 2016, which itself was a huge jump from 2015, although I don't have the precise 2015 figure. And presumably many more Britons would apply for Irish passports if they were qualified to get them.

ilovesmybrick

Jennifer Rankin in the Guardian just tweeted this slide by Barnier outlining quite clearly how the UK's stance leaves CETA the only real option they have.

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/943037113406238720

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/943067653341696000

This update is great and highlights what we've been saying for a year

Nody

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Mean while in dream land the UK thinks it's in the driving seat again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/18/david-davis-to-warn-european-commission-it-cannot-cherrypick-brexit-trade-deal-sectors

Someone should explain to him what a FTA is because that's exactly how every FTA is done...

Oh and love this disillusion in the UK government...

Ministers including Davis are thought to believe that countries such as Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands see trade with the UK as particularly important to their economies. As such, they would be nervous of any moves that resulted in Britain crashing out of the EU on to World Trade Organisation rules.

steddyeddy

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Mean while in dream land the UK thinks it's in the driving seat again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/18/david-davis-to-warn-european-commission-it-cannot-cherrypick-brexit-trade-deal-sectors

I had to re-read that a few times. He still thinks the UK is the rule giver?

Zubeneschamali

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Mean while in dream land the UK thinks it's in the driving seat again.

Davis again talking entirely for the UK audience, no-one at the EU will pay any attention to this.

His "lots of EU governments have backed us privately" spoofology is just sad.

Leroy42

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Davis again talking entirely for the UK audience, no-one at the EU will pay any attention to this.

His "lots of EU governments have backed us privately" spoofology is just sad.

Well, I have no doubt that at least some of the individual member governments would say to the UK that they see their position. Remember, that each of these will be looking to keep as good a relationship with the UK as possible.

However, would any of them break away from the EU to side with the UK, because that is the only logical conclusion to take from that?

The UK think that some member states will give up access to SM in order to get a special deal with the UK? Seems fanciful to me

flaneur

Considering they spout pure nonsense most of the time, and he can’t name any of these governments, I would be highly skeptical.

I’d say it’s a crude attempt at divide and conquer.

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

Well, I have no doubt that at least some of the individual member governments would say to the UK that they see their position. Remember, that each of these will be looking to keep as good a relationship with the UK as possible.

However, would any of them break away from the EU to side with the UK, because that is the only logical conclusion to take from that?

The UK think that some member states will give up access to SM in order to get a special deal with the UK? Seems fanciful to me

Even if some countries would it's an all or nothing agreement (which UK once again appear to forget) so one single country can stop the whole deal...

steddyeddy

The EU will refuse to back the UK over any future Falklands votes.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-uk-falklands-islands-un-votes-security-council-united-nations-chagos-lord-hannay-a8118086.html?amp

murphaph

breatheme wrote: »

The EU doesn't grant citizenship and EU citizenship doesn't exist independently to citizenship of a member state. The passport of a member state is an EU passport, and the EU cannot grant citizenship on the grounds that it's not... you know, an actual state.
If a UK national wishes to regain EU citizenship they can move to a member state and naturalise there, same as with any other third country.

Yep. However Ireland might consider a fast track to naturalisation for highly skilled migrants from Britain. It would "encourage" companies to relocate to our shores with their skilled employees.

flaneur

murphaph wrote: »

Yep. However Ireland might consider a fast track to naturalisation for highly skilled migrants from Britain. It would "encourage" companies to relocate to our shores with their skilled employees.

We don’t have to - under existing Irish law U.K. nationals can move here and live, work, vote here without any impediment. That won’t change.

If they want to regain EU nationality by becoming Irish, they can do that by living and working here for a period of time.

LeinsterDub

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Davis again talking entirely for the UK audience, no-one at the EU will pay any attention to this.

You can be sure people in the EU are paying attention to all this. Remember his set of comments and the walk back he had to do?

seamus

Anita Blow wrote: »

The dog on the street knows what's going to happen to such protections once the UK leaves

And with a projected 10% contraction in GDP, realistically employers will be able to ride roughshod over workers because everyone will be so desperate to cling onto their job that they will put up with anything; including massive amount of unpaid overtime.

Is this message really not getting through in the UK? Labour support Brexit, but surely they can't let this farce continue with the literal decimation of worker's lives that will take place?

PixelTrawler

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/943067653341696000

This update is great and highlights what we've been saying for a year

That should be put up on billboards around London. Excellent illustration of the problem.

Edit. And this is going to haunt them in 2018 because a solution still has not been offered.

Zubeneschamali

seamus wrote: »

Labour support Brexit, but surely they can't let this farce continue with the literal decimation of worker's lives that will take place?

Corbyn has his eye solely on winning Westminster elections. Having the Tories pick on workers means more votes for Labour.

Leroy42

PixelTrawler wrote: »

That should be put up on billboards around London. Excellent illustration of the problem.

Edit. And this is going to haunt them in 2018 because a solution still has not been offered.

London is not the problem. Its the other regions, that will, in all probability, suffer more than London from any brexit

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

London is not the problem. Its the other regions, that will, in all probability, suffer more than London from any brexit

If Barnier is serious (no financial passporting deal) London is going to suffer plenty.

We all are.

As Tusk said, all there is is vinegar.

devnull

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Mean while in dream land the UK thinks it's in the driving seat again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/18/david-davis-to-warn-european-commission-it-cannot-cherrypick-brexit-trade-deal-sectors

The way he speaks is almost like he is portraying the EU as desperate for a trade deal and the fact that the UK are holding all the cards rather than the other way around. The problem with these Brexiteers is they behave like the UK is some massive and powerful country and the EU is some relatively small Island that is desperate to gain the support of the UK!

FreudianSlippers

Leroy42 wrote: »

They were born as UK citizens with rights to EU Freedom of movement through UK membership of the EU. They are not EU citizens. (at least that is mu understanding of it)

The UK have decided to revoke those rights. Thats democracy.

EU Citizenship is additional to citizenship of the Member State, it's not a birthright citizenship. Therefore, if your MS leaves the EU, you are no longer entitled to citizenship.

ancapailldorcha

seamus wrote: »

And with a projected 10% contraction in GDP, realistically employers will be able to ride roughshod over workers because everyone will be so desperate to cling onto their job that they will put up with anything; including massive amount of unpaid overtime.

Is this message really not getting through in the UK? Labour support Brexit, but surely they can't let this farce continue with the literal decimation of worker's lives that will take place?

Of course they can. They need a disease so that they can be the cure. Then there is the fact that nationlising industries will be much easier post-Brexit which is a key item on the agenda of Marxists like John McDonnell and Seumas Milne. If they can play this right and by right I mean less disastrously than the current government, Brexit will be the gift that keeps on giving. Just like the Tories' favorite Labour overspending canard.

Tell me how

devnull wrote: »

The way he speaks is almost like he is portraying the EU as desperate for a trade deal and the fact that the UK are holding all the cards rather than the other way around. The problem with these Brexiteers is they behave like the UK is some massive and powerful country and the EU is some relatively small Island that is desperate to gain the support of the UK!

To be fair. A newspaper can do a lot to present a narrative such as is done here.
Secondly, in his position, what else can he do. There is probably a sense deep down within the Brexit negotiating team that they are going to be hammered for everything, why acquiesce without trying to fight your corner, even if it does not look good.

That being said, he doesn't seem comfortable in the battle though does he. Not like he is relishing it.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

To be fair. A newspaper can do a lot to present a narrative such as is done here.
Secondly, in his position, what else can he do. There is probably a sense deep down within the Brexit negotiating team that they are going to be hammered for everything, why acquiesce without trying to fight your corner, even if it does not look good.

That being said, he doesn't seem comfortable in the battle though does he. Not like he is relishing it.

TBF, when you knowingly lie to the electorate (and parliament) to the point of destroying the economy, and for personal political gain, then you deserve everything you get.

Peregrinus

Nody wrote: »

Oh and love this disillusion in the UK government...

Ministers including Davis are thought to believe that countries such as Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands see trade with the UK as particularly important to their economies. As such, they would be nervous of any moves that resulted in Britain crashing out of the EU on to World Trade Organisation rules.

Davis is quite right. We are nervous of any moves that might result in the UK crashing out. What Davis has failed to spot, though, is that those moves are moves made by the UK government. Specifically, the adoption of radically inconsistent Brexit objectives. They want regulatory freedom, tariff-free frictionless trade with the EU and an open border in Ireland? Ain't gonna happen. Never could. Contradiction in terms. And the fear we have is that when the UK government finally has to confront the contradictions of its own position, they'll have a meltdown and flounce off with no deal at all.

That still seems to me the most likely scenario for a no-deal Brexit. If I was David Davis, I really wouldn't be drawing attention to it.

flaneur

The more likely scenario might be Corbyn negotiating the deal ...

ancapailldorcha

It looks like the City has resorted to infantile name-calling which is a shame as I was hoping it would be a bastion of reason. Alas. Source:

City bosses have hit back at the EU’s lead Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, for suggesting a trade deal between the bloc and Britain cannot include special arrangements for financial services.

Square Mile lobby group TheCityUK branded Mr Barnier a “Scrooge” for ruling out a bespoke agreement for cross-border frictionless trade between banks and other financial firms.

“There is no place [for financial services]. There is not a single trade agreement that is open to financial services. It doesn’t exist,” Mr Barnier told newspapers including the Guardian.

The British public voted for this. It is not the EU's fault. They make Barnier out to be some sort of mean individual while they bankroll an increasingly unstable Conservative party who wrought this farce to begin with.

Peregrinus

flaneur wrote: »

The more likely scenario might be Corbyn negotiating the deal ...

I think that's less likely to lead to a hard Brexit than the Tories doing so.

Corbyn and Labour have their own divisions over Brexit and have yet to get off the fence. But they do have the opportunity to watch and learn from the complete hames that the Tories are making of this, and I think it unlikely that, going into the next election (however soon that may be) they will be saddling themselves with the same set of conflicting red lines that the Tories have adopted. They'll target a softer Brexit and one more likely to deliver a good trade deal with the EU and an open border in Ireland, at the cost if need be (and it will need to be) of the freedom to negotiate a really good trade deal with Teapotistan.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It looks like the City has resorted to infantile name-calling which is a shame as I was hoping it would be a bastion of reason. Alas. Source:



The British public voted for this. It is not the EU's fault. They make Barnier out to be some sort of mean individual while they bankroll an increasingly unstable Conservative party who wrought this farce to begin with.

To be fair, it is a bit of a tongue in cheek comment. Here's his full statement which essentially puts it up to both teams of negotiators:

It might be Christmas, but Michel Barnier doesn’t need to play Scrooge. Just because financial services have not been encompassed in free trade agreements to date is no reason to dismiss them from a future UK/EU free trade agreement. Services make up around 80% of the UK’s economy – and around 70% of the EU’s, with financial services making up a significant component of that. It is vital for the future competitiveness of the UK, and Europe as a whole, that UK and EU negotiators work to secure an ambitious and comprehensive deal.

flatty

Well, my company is up for sale.
Which may in the end result in significant job loss in a poor enough area.
Hope that makes the brexiteers proud.

Peregrinus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It looks like the City has resorted to infantile name-calling which is a shame as I was hoping it would be a bastion of reason . . .

Mmm. Read to the bottom of the statement, ancapailldorcha. It starts with a sound-bite about Barnier, I suspect becase (a) it was issued in response to an invitation to comment on what Barnier said, and (b) they have a press officer who knows how to get a headline. But the kicker is not the start of the statement; it's the conclusion:

". . . It is vital for the future competitiveness of the UK, and Europe as a whole, that UK and EU negotiators work to secure an ambitious and comprehensive deal."

In other words, they're not saying that it's down to the EU to give them what they want. They're aware that the UK is as involved in this, and as responsible for the outcome, as the EU is.

This isn't calculated to make the headlines and, right enough, it didn't. But it'll be noticed in Downing Street, and in Conservative Central Office.

ancapailldorcha

That's what I get for reading the Telegraph I suppose.

The City is ultimately a big Conservative party backer though and if they were so concerned they should have made their concerns known much sooner than this. If they were afraid of Ed Miliband, God knows what they must think of the current Labour leadership.

For the EU, the only issue is short term disruption. Capital and Labour are much more mobile now than they were even a few decades ago. Skilled staff in the City could very easily move to the continent, especially to places like Frankfurt which already has a thriving financial sector.

brickster69

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

London is not the problem.  Its the other regions, that will, in all probability, suffer more than London from any brexit

If Barnier is serious (no financial passporting deal) London is going to suffer plenty.

It will also affect 8000 EU Companies who use passporting to access the UK FS industry. Also London can revert to TIPA with the WTO. Unless the EU decided they would not open up services to WTO because the UK is part of it.
CETA will probably be the worst case scenario if an agreement was to be reached.

Thargor

Thargor wrote: »

Wow I never knew this, this whole mess is just amazing to witness:

https://twitter.com/GuitarMoog/status/942213433696706561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fall%2F

Theresa May condemns threats and abuse against MPs

Prime minister says intimidation of politicians has ‘no place in our politics’ after Tory Brexit rebellion leads to harassment incidents

She doesnt think politicians should be threatened but declaring judges to be "enemies of the people" gets you a position at her side with a high salary plus pension? Wish someone had put that to her today...

solodeogloria

brickster69 wrote: »

It will also affect 8000 EU Companies who use passporting to access the UK FS industry. Also London can revert to TIPA with the WTO. Unless the EU decided they would not open up services to WTO because the UK is part of it.
CETA will probably be the worst case scenario if an agreement was to be reached.

Good evening!

Precisely right. Clients in EU member states depend on access to London financial markets. Regulators in EU member states don't have a massive desire to take back Euro clearing as they feel it is too much risk to take on. Governments depend on accessing London's debt markets for selling Government bonds.

This infrastructure isn't quickly replaceable. Banks have lowered the numbers of moves that they are making out of London. UBS was one of the first because of assurances that they have received from regulators about back to back booking, but The Financial Times is noting that moves have been scaled down across the board. This is just one of the reasons why I'm sceptical of the prophecies of doom on this forum.

There are options other than passporting for London to explore. With the adoption of MiFID II which everyone in the City is scrambling to get implemented right now in their IT systems there's the option of third country equivalence. There will be no better candidate than Britain post-Brexit.

It's worth pointing out that TheCityUK are an advocacy group of a subset of City bankers, they aren't the same as being some authority that speaks for the whole City of London. They are right however. The UK and the EU both need a good deal that includes services.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

murphaph

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Precisely right. Clients in EU member states depend on access to London financial markets. Regulators in EU member states don't have a massive desire to take back Euro clearing as they feel it is too much risk to take on. Governments depend on accessing London's debt markets for selling Government bonds.

This infrastructure isn't quickly replaceable. Banks have lowered the numbers of moves that they are making out of London. UBS was one of the first because of assurances that they have received from regulators about back to back booking, but The Financial Times is noting that moves have been scaled down across the board. This is just one of the reasons why I'm sceptical of the prophecies of doom on this forum.

There are options other than passporting for London to explore. With the adoption of MiFID II which everyone in the City is scrambling to get implemented right now in their IT systems there's the option of third country equivalence. There will be no better candidate than Britain post-Brexit.

It's worth pointing out that TheCityUK are an advocacy group of a subset of City bankers, they aren't the same as being some authority that speaks for the whole City of London. They are right however. The UK and the EU both need a good deal that includes services.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

It's worth pointing out that Barnier says the UK is looking at a deal along the lines of Canada. He even made a slide to get the message across.

Jim2007

solodeogloria wrote: »

This infrastructure isn't quickly replaceable.

The don't have to replace the infrastructure, because both the Fed and the ECB require banks like UBS, seemingly one of your favourites to have at least two sites of continent capable of running their entire operations. UBS have three such sites that I am aware of in Europe alone. One in Zurich city, one outside of Zurich and one outside Frankfurt. Credit Suisse by contrast have only two such sites as does DB.

solodeogloria wrote: »

This is just one of the reasons why I'm sceptical of the prophecies of doom on this forum.

Michel Barnier: Financial services excluded from Brexit trade deal

The EU will not do a post-Brexit trade with the U.K. that includes financial services, its chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier told a group of European newspapers.

Barnier said that the loss of access for the City of London was a consequence of the U.K.’s decision to leave the EU single market. “There is no place [for financial services]. There is not a single trade agreement that is open to financial services. It doesn’t exist,” Barnier told the Guardian.

So do you thing Barnier is making prophecies as well???

Jim2007

brickster69 wrote: »

It will also affect 8000 EU Companies who use passporting to access the UK FS industry.

But as London declines in importance that may not be such a big deal.

RobertKK

Why would the EU want to allow London outside of the EU to remain the financial capital of Europe?

The EU will keep current passporting rules and companies who use the UK for passporting in the EU will move continue with plans to move some of their business out of the UK and into places like Paris, Frankfurt and Dublin.

The EU isn't going to allow London to remain as top dog in Europe, just because some in the UK think they are due some special deal after telling the EU where to go.

brickster69

Jim2007 wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

It will also affect 8000 EU Companies who use passporting to access the UK FS industry.

But as London declines in importance that may not be such a big deal.

True, but still self harm whichever way you look at it. Normally it will be the poor people who suffer, most of the rich don't give a damn. If they want to try to punish the UK then both sides lose. 
Seems a bit daft to make enemies of Countries though in this day and age. Especially Nuclear Superpower allies.

Christy42

brickster69 wrote: »

Jim2007 wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

It will also affect 8000 EU Companies who use passporting to access the UK FS industry.

But as London declines in importance that may not be such a big deal.

True, but still self harm whichever way you look at it. Normally it will be the poor people who suffer, most of the rich don't give a damn. If they want to try to punish the UK then both sides lose. 
Seems a bit daft to make enemies of Countries though in this day and age. Especially Nuclear Superpower allies.

And yet no one ever apply this self harm logic to the UK.

Seriously Europe will suffer a paper cut which some still expect is enough for the UK demand whatever it wants while it waits by the cliff edge.

solodeogloria

Good evening!

murphaph wrote: »

It's worth pointing out that Barnier says the UK is looking at a deal along the lines of Canada. He even made a slide to get the message across.

I don't take what he says any more seriously than what the Government say. These are negotiating positions. We need to see Phase 2 worked out to see what the conclusion is.

Jim2007 wrote: »

The don't have to replace the infrastructure, because both the Fed and the ECB require banks like UBS, seemingly one of your favourites to have at least two sites of continent capable of running their entire operations. UBS have three such sites that I am aware of in Europe alone. One in Zurich city, one outside of Zurich and one outside Frankfurt. Credit Suisse by contrast have only two such sites as does DB.

UBS also have a pretty large foothold in London that they aren't looking at reducing dramatically. 5,500 permanent employees and probably a couple of thousand contractors. Yet they only feel the need to move 250.

The picture at other banks in London is looking similar. Not that many are actually moving.

Why is that? Well, presumably because they aren't particularly worried about the post-Brexit climate.

I don't know why you point out that UBS and other banks have sites on the continent already. Pretty much every Tier 1 investment bank will have a site in continental Europe already.

Edit: Infrastructure isn't just buildings for banks. It's also clearing houses and exchanges.

Jim2007 wrote: »

Michel Barnier: Financial services excluded from Brexit trade deal

So do you thing Barnier is making prophecies as well???

I don't take his word any more seriously than any other negotiator in this process.

I know that the EU27 are hugely dependent on London for financial services and that won't end by March 2019. The next stage for businesses is to plan for life after Brexit. I suspect the banks in the City are much further ahead than anyone on this and have researched the legal implications of Brexit. (From the FT article it seems that UBS have done quite a bit of research and have confirmed that not much will change).

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

murphaph

UBS have no more of an idea of the end state than any of us.

Tell me how

solodeogloria wrote:

. I suspect the banks in the City are much further ahead than anyone on this and have researched the legal implications of Brexit.

Impossible. There is no deal yet, no one knows what the framework which needs to be assessed legally is.

The banks will say that they are planning rigorously for every eventuality which translates as waiting and seeing.

Banks talk a good game more than play it. Crash of 08 was evidence of that.