Brexit Discussion Thread VI

UsedToWait

^ Excellent post above Enzo,

My first reaction was that the EUs move makes a hard Brexit more likely, giving the hard Brexiteers a softer landing just as the narrative was starting to accommodative the enormity of what a hard Brexit will entail..

On reflection, I think it pulls the rug from under the hard Brexiteers - they can't continue the blatant lies of a 'managed no deal'.
We now know the scenario for No Deal, May's Deal and Remain.

Here's our concessions, and that's your lot.
Here's how long they last.
The end.

It's a parachute that serves our interests, if them loons do decide to fly into the mountain,

Capt'n Midnight

First Up wrote: »

One of the main drivers in creating the Single Market was a lady called Margaret Thatcher.

And it may well be the reason why Corbyn wants Brexit. The irony.


Both sides in the UK need to look at what's happened in the EU since they triggered Article 50. Italy has rolled back on immigration and fudged a budget. Look at Poland, Hungry , Spain and Germany.

It's possible to make small changes to the system from within, the only problem is that there are 27 other countries who also have a say in the process. But it means there aren't abrupt changes out of nowhere.

An Ciarraioch

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

And it may well be the reason why Corbyn wants Brexit. The irony.


Both sides in the UK need to look at what's happened in the EU since they triggered Article 50. Italy has rolled back on immigration and fudged a budget. Look at Poland, Hungry , Spain and Germany.

It's possible to make small changes to the system from within, the only problem is that there are 27 other countries who also have a say in the process. But it means there aren't abrupt changes out of nowhere.

Yes, the only way a political ideology can effect change at European level is by winning national elections across the continent - thus, the centre-right has dominated since the mid-2000s, and why Greece was isolated. A Corbyn government would have few allies within the Council (Spain, Portugal), with even Euroscepticism stronger (Poland, Hungary, Czechia, Austria, Italy).

Capt'n Midnight

Phonehead wrote: »

You clearly haven't done any research or read/listened to any analysis on the consequences of a full Brexit crash out. Yes Ireland will suffer but the UK will suffer catastrophically. I don't believe you are a genuine contributor to this conversation if I'm honest. You've ignored all well thought out responses to your nonsense and still best the same drum

Comparing the economic effects and growth rates and allowing for some hyperbole a Hard Brexit would set the North's growth back by a decade but ours by only a year.


NI economy growth is flat, a hard Brexit would not be good news.
Northern Ireland economy 'on brink of recession' territory

The European Commission's Summer 2018 Interim Economic Forecast predicts Ireland to have the highest GDP growth in the EU in 2018 at 5.6%.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There was a good discussion on Newsnight about this last night. Essentially, the point was made that immigration continues to be a driving force behind Brexit. However, the waterbed effect is beginning to kick in. So, as they reduce immigration from EU countries decreases, immigration from non-EU countries will increase. Thus rendering Britain "less white" as Emily Maitlis pointed out - which won't go down at all well with many Leave voters.

LOL except it isn't.

Do the "useful idiots" who voted to leave because of immigration know that
May says government still aiming to bring net migration under 100,000 ?
Behind Paywall - 13 hours ago but it's same old tired old sound bite by the person who is PM and was in control of immigration before that. You can fool some of the people all the time, or for at least EIGHT years.

More importantly do they know who allowed MORE than 100,000 immigrants in from just China and India last year ? (not counting other countries)
And India has made it very clear that more visas will needed before there's any trade deal.



This makes my blood boil. The Immigrant issue is just Bait and Switch.

It's one thing to lie that leaving the EU will reduce immigration.
You can control that by easily enough by shooting your economy in the foot :rolleyes:
(Nett Polish migration in 2017 dropped to zero)

It's another to then INCREASE immigration from non-EU countries by "taking back control" of something you already had TOTAL control over. China is NOT in the Commonwealth so there isn't even that excuse.


And as others have pointed out the immigration rules have relaxed.
£30,000 jobs ? It's only £20,800 a year for entry-level workers so now net migration from elsewhere (the type the UK currently has more control over) is at its highest level since 2004.

/RANT

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes

Banned.

Bit cynical

Christy42 wrote: »

"Nothing is decided until everything is decided".

They also made claims to want to avoid a border and yet have put every piece of bull in the way of that. This gives a bit of security to EU citizens in the UK to sort out their plans if no deal happens.

Nothing to do with any formal agreement though. In the event of no deal the UK have already said unilaterally that EU citizens would retain rights. Today's news is the EU reciprocating.

FrancieBrady

Newsnight leading with 'is there a culture of misogyny inside Labour' after Jeremy's muttered comment.
UK is really in crisis.

Headshot

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Newsnight leading with 'is there a culture of misogyny inside Labour' after Jeremy's muttered comment.
UK is really in crisis.

I can get my head around how they are making such a big deal out of this and Brexit is like put on the back burner.

May must be loving it this in many ways from the politicians are talking about something else than Brexit and Corbyn making an ass out of himself again.

How the **** is he still leader of Labour

Nate--IRL--

No-Deal Brexit plans just published by the Government.

https://merrionstreet.ie/MerrionStreet/en/News-Room/Releases/No_Deal_Brexit_Contingency_Plan.pdf

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/government-publishes-contingency-plan-for-no-deal-brexit-1.3737517

Nate

Inquitus

Enzokk wrote: »

Full speech: Sir Ivan Rogers on Brexit

RTÉ - Brexit Republic

Well worth anyone who visits this forum reading this, it's perhaps an honest a casting of where we are as one could find. It's a very long read mind. Thanks for posting it Enzokk

Water John

Amber Rudd on Peston, very sensible. 'no Deal preparation necessary as we have triggered Art 50'. That is really a swipe at TM.
She also opens up the option for Parliament to decide, if TM's Deal is rejected. Also opens the possibility of a 2nd Ref.

Christy42

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

No-Deal Brexit plans just published by the Government.

https://merrionstreet.ie/MerrionStreet/en/News-Room/Releases/No_Deal_Brexit_Contingency_Plan.pdf

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/government-publishes-contingency-plan-for-no-deal-brexit-1.3737517

Nate

This and the EU plans really shows up the UK recent statement of only looking at it in a centralised way this week into a bad light. These have been done with months of planning and are released with a few months to spare (looks like they were timed to be after the vote but May scuppored that by kicking the can another bit).

The UK seem to only really be starting. Some decentralised work may have been done but that is not a unified response nor does it mean there are not big gaps.

flatty

Water John wrote: »

Amber Rudd on Peston, very sensible. 'no Deal preparation necessary as we have triggered Art 50'. That is really a swipe at TM.
She also opens up the option for Parliament to decide, if TM's Deal is rejected. Also opens the possibility of a 2nd Ref.

Amber Rudd is one of the few leaders in UK politics. One of the few with genuine integrity, and with the resilience needed. I think she's the only hope. May stabbed her in the back, but she took the fall, kept her counsel, and looks and sounds more impressive by the day.

Water John

Think she would be a great PM but wouldn't be able to keep brexiteers onside.

prinzeugen

Peregrinus wrote: »

JLR have not been silent about the threat posed by Brexit:

https://www.ft.com/content/d077afaa-7f8a-11e8-bc55-50daf11b720d

https://news.sky.com/story/no-deal-brexit-could-cost-60m-a-day-jaguar-boss-warns-11495300

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-11/jlr-chief-tells-may-hard-brexit-will-cost-jobs-wipe-out-profit

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jaguar-land-rover-boss-ralf-speth-ready-to-follow-bmw-with-brexit-factory-shutdown-bqq6gs7jj

You can't really filter out all the JLR statements that mention Brexit, and then argue that the fact that the remaining statements don't mention Brexit proves that JLR is unaffected by Brexit. People will point at you in the street and laugh, and you don't really want that, do you?

As for the claim that "the official statement from JLR" did not mention Brexit, JLR has not yet issued an official statement about next month's expected production cutbacks. What they have issued, and what you link to, is comments on the outturn for 2018. True, it doesn't mention Brexit but, then, Brexit didn't happen in 2018. What it does say is that, while sales in China are falling, sales in Europe are rising. Despite this, it's reported that they are expecting to reduce production in the UK. The link with Brexit is obvious and, even if it weren't obvious, as noted above JLR have been pointing it out explicitly for many months now.

Still, brexitry does require a high degree of wilful turning away of the eyes and mind to sustain it, so I'm not completely surprised that you haven't noticed any of this.

The boss of JLR is a well known for his anti Brexit views. You said it yourself. JLR has not issued an official statement. So it confirms my view that its bollox. Diesel car sales are falling in Europe. And what does JLR make in the UK? Diesels.

Sales of diesel cars are nothing to do with Brexit so I don't know how anyone can link the two.

But sure, I am another Brexiter that has no idea according to you. You anti Brexit folks always have to add a personal insult don't you.

Anthracite

downcow wrote: »

I am surprised you take the chief con as gospel. Of course he needs his budget increased. We have had relative peace for 20 years (at least less killings than Dublin).

Major urban centres do tend to have higher levels of drug gang crime.

SharpshooterTom

This the reason why the Tories and May blew their 20 point lead in the last election.

Corbyn, for all his faults, was out stumping about healthcare, income inequality, abolition of tuition fees etc.

Tories out campaigning "ZOMG do you know he talked to the IRA once about 35 years ago!?!?!".

Then it was Antisemitism, now its misogyny. Its interesting the right wing always accuse the left of playing "identity politics", bbc obsessed with minorities and womens football, guardian hates white british people etc, not to mention that disgraceful performance by Claire Perry on QT a few weeks ago yelling endlessly about Corbyn being an antisemite and even accusing host David Dimbleby of being sexist.

All the Tories and the British right wing have ever done is play identity politics against Corbyn. They have no policies, just the usual FEAR FEAR FEAR and hope something, anything sticks.

As I say you can see why despite Corbyn being a fairly weak leader, he managed to close the the 25 point gap to just 2 points. People see through all this crap eventually, they look desperate.

mickoneill31

prinzeugen wrote: »

The boss of JLR is a well known for his anti Brexit views. You said it yourself. JLR has not issued an official statement. So it confirms my view that its bollox. Diesel car sales are falling in Europe. And what does JLR make in the UK? Diesels.
.

If a company doesn't make a statement then it's bollox?
I'm starting a new job in the new year. The company is huge and the job is senior enough. The hiring manager told me that I was replacing a guy that finished up in London and that he was told he couldn't recruit in the UK and had to hire from one of their EU offices. This company hasn't made a public statement either. I know a guy working in the company and up until a couple of years ago they were focusing their recruitment in the UK. I wonder what changed and I wonder how many other companies are doing this quietly.
But it's obviously bollix if they don't announce it to the world.

Most companies arent going to get involved. They're just working around Brexit.

prinzeugen

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

This the reason why the Tories and May blew their 20 point lead in the last election.

Corbyn, for all his faults, was out stumping about healthcare, income inequality, abolition of tuition fees etc.

Tories out campaigning "ZOMG do you know he talked to the IRA once about 35 years ago!?!?!".

Then it was Antisemitism, now its misogyny. Its interesting the right wing always accuse the left of playing "identity politics", bbc obsessed with minorities and womens football, guardian hates white british people etc, not to mention that disgraceful performance by Claire Perry on QT a few weeks ago yelling endlessly about Corbyn being an antisemite and even accusing host David Dimbleby of being sexist.

All the Tories and the British right wing have ever done is play identity politics against Corbyn. They have no policies, just the usual FEAR FEAR FEAR and hope something, anything sticks.

As I say you can see why despite Corbyn being a fairly weak leader, he managed to close the the 25 point gap to just 2 points. People see through all this crap eventually, they look desperate.

Corbyn is a Neil Kinnock Mk2. So bad nobody will vote for them other than ex miners and indoctrinated students.

The left.. Free speech. Just as long as its socialist/communist party approved!

Typical left wing. Do as I say, not as I do. The speaker in the HOC should be replaced as his bias for Labour is so obvious.

Peregrinus

prinzeugen wrote: »

The boss of JLR is a well known for his anti Brexit views.

Pretty well everbody in the UK motor industry holds anti-brexit views. You should probably be asking yourself why that might be.

prinzeugen wrote: »

You said it yourself. JLR has not issued an official statement.

Yes. I said it. You said the opposite. You now concede that you were wrong. But, despite the facts being other than you claimed, you still hold the view which you previously justified by reference to the now-debunked "facts". QED, I think.

prinzeugen wrote: »

So it confirms my view that its bollox.

How am I not suprised that JLR having failed to say what you thought they said somehow "confirms" what you claimed when you thought they said it? By your own account, the beliefs you hold are of the kind that is "confirmed" by a compete absence of evidence.

Seriously, if you know of an analysis from any reputable source that suggests that Brexit doesn't pose a grave threat to the UK auto manufacturing/assembly industry, now would be a good time to link to it. And if you can't do that, this is probably a dead horse that you should stop flogging. You are confirming all the prejudicial stereotypes that people hold about Brexiters.

prinzeugen

mickoneill31 wrote: »

If a company doesn't make a statement then it's bollox?
I'm starting a new job in the new year. The company is huge and the job is senior enough. The hiring manager told me that I was replacing a guy that finished up in London and that he was told he couldn't recruit in the UK and had to hire from one of their EU offices. This company hasn't made a public statement either. I know a guy working in the company and up until a couple of years ago they were focusing their recruitment in the UK. I wonder what changed and I wonder how many other companies are doing this quietly.
But it's obviously bollix if they don't announce it to the world.

Most companies arent going to get involved. They're just working around Brexit.

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

The reason they are keeping it on the qt, is they know they could be hauled through the courts.

Peregrinus

Podge_irl wrote: »

It is even noted in the document that "This is subject to the UK conferring equivalent rights to EU air carriers, as well as the UK ensuring conditions of fair competition." Nothing has been arranged or agreed with the UK.

Nothing is going to be arranged or agreed with the UK. It's important to understand that the EU's no-deal planning is going to consist of a series of unilateral measures - there will be no "mini-deals" with the UK.

The unilateral measures will be chosen by the EU because they confer benfits on (or, rather, minimise harm to) the EU and its members. Their impact on the UK, positive or negative, is not a consideration.

In some cases the unilateral measures will be conditional on reciprocation by the UK. This is not a covert way of reaching agreement with the UK; more a recognition that the nature of some measures is such that they won't confer any benefit on/minimise any harm to the EU unless they are matched by the UK. Therefore, we will only take these measure if they are going to be matched.

prinzeugen

Peregrinus wrote: »

Pretty well everbody in the UK motor industry holds anti-brexit views. You should probably be asking yourself why that might be.


Yes. I said it. You said the opposite. You now concede that you were wrong. But, despite the facts being other than you claimed, you still hold the view which you previously justified by reference to the now-debunked "facts". QED, I think.


How am I not suprised that JLR having failed to say what you thought they said somehow "confirms" what you claimed when you thought they said it? By your own account, the beliefs you hold are of the kind that is "confirmed" by a compete absence of evidence.

Seriously, if you know of an analysis from any reputable source that suggests that Brexit doesn't pose a grave threat to the UK auto manufacturing/assembly industry, now would be a good time to link to it. And if you can't do that, this is probably a dead horse that you should stop flogging. You are confirming all the prejudicial stereotypes that people hold about Brexiters.

JLR has NEVER said jobs are going to go in the UK as a result of Britex. Lots of "mights" but no "This will happen" . Its bollox!

If Britex was such a threat to the auto industry, the production would have been moved or in the process of being moved by now.

And I love the wee personal insult again! No doubt you will get many thanks for your post. Maybe remainers should read up a little. Am I concerned? No.

No deal and in 2 years people will be asking what all the fuss was about.

Peregrinus

prinzeugen wrote: »

JLR has NEVER said jobs are going to go in the UK as a result of Britex. Lots of "mights" but no "This will happen" . Its bollox!

If Britex was such a threat to the auto industry, the production would have been moved or in the process of being moved by now.

Production of the Land Rover Discovery is being moved from Solihull to Slovakia. Separately, a thousand jobs have been cut at Solihull and Castle Bromwich. Investment in the UK auto industry has halved. These are not "mights", and they are not unrelated to the fact that, in a no deal Brexit, UK-made cars (most of which are exported to other EU countries) will face a 10% tariff, effective next March.

If more has not happened yet, it's because the drop in the pound has provided a temporary boost to the industry, enablting them to wait and see what the terms of Brexit wil be. But if there is a no-deal Brexit (or indeed any Brexit which doesn't involve an FTA with a zero tariff on cars and car parts) divestment will follow very quickly. How could it be otherwise?

prinzeugen wrote: »

No deal and in 2 years people will be asking what all the fuss was about.

This glib assurance might carry some weight if you could offer even the barest justification for it. As it is, it flies in the face of well-known facts - like the 10% tariff, and the role of JIT supply chains in the UK auto industry - and the simplest common sense. Every time you make this obviously dubious claim without offering a credible justification for it, you confirm everybody's worst preconceptions. Do you really think that's a wise strategy?

BonnieSituation

prinzeugen wrote: »

Corbyn is a Neil Kinnock Mk2. So bad nobody will vote for them other than ex miners and indoctrinated students.

The left.. Free speech. Just as long as its socialist/communist party approved!

Typical left wing. Do as I say, not as I do. The speaker in the HOC should be replaced as his bias for Labour is so obvious.

And there's me thinking Mr Bercow was a Conservative fellow, of Jewish stock no less.

Seems a strange bedfellow for Jezza's lefty Anti-semite ruffians...

Peregrinus

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes:-it`s negotiation which is in the interests of both parties-purely business-what are you trying to suggest?

It's not a negotiation. It's a unilateral measure introduced by the EU to minimise damage to the EU. Its effect on the UK is incidental; the EU is unconcerned with this.

And look at the detail of the announcement. In a no-deal situation, the EU will continue (for a limited period) to accept derivative contracts written in London pre-Brexit Day, but it won't accept new contracts. Which means that, from Brexit day, the City of London will be writing precisely zero new derivative contracts for EI-regulated customers. Existing contracts, as they mature and are closed out, will not be replaced by new contracts written in London; they'll be replaced by new contracts written by EU-regulated institutions.

That's clearly not the outcome of "a negotiation which is in the interests of both parties"; it's the unilateral imposition by the EU of a program for the orderly but fairly rapid running-down of the City of London's business of selling derivative contracts to EU-regulated entities.

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think it`s a negotiation between two parties . . .

It really isn't. The EU position here is clear; their no-deal measures will be decided unilaterally, for EU advantage; not negotiated, for mutual advantage. Both self-respect and self-interest dictate this stance on the part of the EU.

They will remain willing to negotiate with the UK, but their first negotiating priorities will be what they are now - settlement of the UK's financial obligations to the Union; citizens' rights; the Irish border.

CelticRambler

prinzeugen wrote: »

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

There must be quite a few idiots in British HR then, as I've heard the same from colleagues working in England, particularly in my own sector which relies quite heavily on foreign workers to fill the gaps left by 30-something white females deciding that workplace equality isn't all it's cracked up to be.

BTW why do you keep referring to the fabric retailer, Britex - what have they got to do with Brexit?

prinzeugen

prinzeugen wrote: »

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

The reason they are keeping it on the qt, is they know they could be hauled through the courts.

I don't think you're in any position to talk about HR after your posts in the Can't get a job thread.

And some evidence that a company cannot hire staff in any country it sees fit to would be good as well. I'd find it hard to believe jobs must be advertised across Europe and the winning candidate work in their home country's office, by law.

Peregrinus

prinzeugen wrote: »

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

The reason they are keeping it on the qt, is they know they could be hauled through the courts.

I think you've misunderstood mickoneill. It's not the case that he's applying for a job in London that is only open to nationals of the EU-27. On the retirement/resignation of the current occupant the opportunity is being taken to relocate the role from London to an EU-27 location, presumably because the the nature of the role makes it desirable that it be discharged with the Single Market.

Presumably a British citizen is free to apply for the job and will be considered on the same basis as any other applicant. But, if appointed, he'll leave the UK to take up the job.

There's nothing illegal about this and the company faces no prospect of being hauled through th courts. They haven't made a public announcement about this because, well, why would they?