Will Britain piss off and get on with Brexit II (mod warning in OP)

ancapailldorcha

Annascaul wrote: »

The real problem I see with Brexit ( apart from populism, political lies and any right wing attitudes ) is the question what would happen to the rest of the EU, if for some reason Brexit-UK would be an economic success? Would this be the end of the EU as we know it? Other EU countries might have similar intentions?

The UK pound is up a bit from last year, unemployment is low and the public finances of the UK are better now than they were in the financial crisis.

I may certainly be wrong, but certain facts do get you thinking.....

I see no reason to devote any thought to this. The only people likely to benefit from Brexit will be the billionaires with a stake in it.

Annascaul

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I see no reason to devote any thought to this. The only people likely to benefit from Brexit will be the billionaires with a stake in it.

That is very much true. Often these billionaires have also left the island by now and are managing their benefit from afar....

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

The Germans and especially the French hate the UK and always have. whether its to do with the past when Britain defeated them or? I dont know. The old Spanish do as well.

The French and Spanish were always trying to invade Britain. Maybe it stems from there?

Maybe they just see Britain as the only country which can get its act together and compete with them?

Can't really blame the UK for all that. It was them trying to take over Britain or dragging Britain into their silly little wars they were always having.

:pac:

Boredstiff666

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I see no reason to devote any thought to this. The only people likely to benefit from Brexit will be the billionaires with a stake in it.

Annascaul wrote: »

That is very much true. Often these billionaires have also left the island by now and are managing their benefit from afar....

At last it has eventually landed. These are just some of the people who will very soon be making everything isnt as smooth or goes the way you think.

Perhaps you should read how one 'non entity' called George Soros made his fist bulk of dosh way back almost 30 years ago now.

Boredstiff666

Deleted User wrote: »

:pac:

Should have read more before you posted. The jokes on you now for not reading why that was posted:pac::pac:

Annascaul

Deleted User wrote: »

:pac:

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

The Germans and especially the French hate the UK and always have. whether its to do with the past when Britain defeated them or? I dont know. The old Spanish do as well.

The French and Spanish were always trying to invade Britain. Maybe it stems from there?

Maybe they just see Britain as the only country which can get its act together and compete with them?

Can't really blame the UK for all that. It was them trying to take over Britain or dragging Britain into their silly little wars they were always having.

Germans don't really hate the UK, in the end, the royal family has a strong German background.

Otherwise, I think the UK is a very insecure society these days. The Brits were always used to dominate other nations and have colonies work for them. True they brought infrastructure, a legal system and soldiers, but that option doesn't exist anymore. Thus the UK is in difficulty finding a new orientation.

Also the UK still have that old system of class. In which class you were born into, is where you stay. Moving upwards isn't really possible. This is also a not beneficial in today's world. Those who voted for Brexit would either be part of the society who lost, or part of those who benefit on the loss of the lower class.....

I bet the UK lost so much in business already, that it would actually be way better paying into the EU budget and still having market access.

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Should have read more before you posted. The jokes on you now for not reading why that was posted:pac::pac:

:pac:

Boredstiff666

Annascaul wrote: »

Germans don't really hate the UK, in the end, the royal family has a strong German background....Well whooppee feckin doo.....I do wish somebody else would take them. They are a total embarrassment to British people.

Otherwise, I think the UK is a very insecure society these days. ...Oh really!...How exactly?

The Brits were always used to dominate other nations and have colonies work for them. ....This was actually because other Nations, the French and especially the Spanish kept attacking them and their interests and also trying to invade them.

True they brought infrastructure, a legal system and soldiers, but that option doesn't exist anymore. Thus the UK is in difficulty finding a new orientation....Really.....I am all ears on how lost they are...please tell?

Also the UK still have that old system of class. In which class you were born into, is where you stay. ...Absolutely feckin laughable

Moving upwards isn't really possible. OK yarh...Pass me the petite pois....see not that hard after all.

This is also a not beneficial in today's world. What isnt?

Those who voted for Brexit would either be part of the society who lost, or part of those who benefit on the loss of the lower class.....I understand what you are saying but you totally wrong.

I bet the UK lost so much in business already, that it would actually be way better paying into the EU budget and still having market access.....Well as I keep saying we will wait and see.

Written by someone who thinks he knows a country and its people through watching corrie and eastenders.

ambro25

ambro25 wrote: »

It is, because the single example you referenced, already enjoyed a structural organisation apt to accomodate Brexit outcomes through a long-existing EU27 location, but for the shifting of some roles and functions hitherto based in London.

would you like more examples? there are quite a lot.

ambro25 wrote: »

That may be a common situation for many large corporates like UBS. It isn't for UK-only smaller structures (particularly lean ones that have been taking full advantage of digitisation so far, and avoiding the need for EU27 offices so), nor for the legions of UK SMES without an in-depth understanding of NTBs (-that will inevitably arise due to Brexit, and impede their commercial access to EU27 markets, for regulatory reasons).

yes, there are. that is why you are highly unlikely to find anyone working in the financial sector who voted for Brexit and one of the reasons why London had the strongest level of remain votes in the UK.

ambro25 wrote: »

I do not recall this 'Commission diktat' argument, but FWIW the "european" character of a business is typically codified in sector-relevant EU legislation and echoed in national legislation of EU member states through harmonisation.

I referenced the "real and effective place of business" test earlier. For various types of professional services, that is complemented by physical location in the EU or EEA, nationality of the service provider (professional) being EU or EEA, and professional qualification of service provider (professional) being EU or EEA. Frequently as not, these 3 tests are cumulative (fail 1=fail them all).

Whatever the EU Commission may say about these, is neither here nor there: it's the law, until the EU Parliament should change it. Incidentally, this is how Brexit outcomes become predictable: EU law is what it is, pre-Brexit it applied to UK and all who sail in her, post-Brexit it doesn't, what are the consequences of EU law ceasing to apply to the UK and all who sail in her.

yes, I understand that, which is why I disputed Firt Up's argument that the EU Commission could arbitrarily decide what is and isn't a "Europen Company". It does make you wonder how all the brass plaque companies in Amsterdam, Luxembourg and Dublin get away with it though.

ambro25 wrote: »

By way of topical example, that's exactly why my UK colleagues shall have to pass through me (for a fee ) from 1 Jan 21, or lose all of the business to the EU27 competition: no longer located in EU/EEA, no longer EU/EEA nationals, UK quals no longer EU/EEA. These are 100% NTBs (access fully removed), long confirmed by the EU (Feb 2019) as entering into force at end of transition period (which prorogated EU law until then), and absolutely not solvable by a trade agreement: primary EU law would need to be updated instead.

I expect substantially the same outcomes apply in many further avenues of professional services. Financial ones first of all, which is why the structures are being created and the professionals relocated.

yes, we get it, you are wonderful :rolleyes:

ambro25 wrote: »

Seems you're studiously avoiding my question about how the UK will mitigate these relocations. Maybe you think the UK doesn't need to?

did you ask that question of me?

these relocations will be hard to replace, which is why I have never supported Brexit.

ambro25

Aegir wrote: »

would you like more examples? there are quite a lot.

I'm aware.

Amongst large corpos, that is, hence my earlier comment about 'large corpos like UBS' indeed :rolleyes:

Aegir wrote: »

yes, there are. that is why you are highly unlikely to find anyone working in the financial sector who voted for Brexit and one of the reasons why London had the strongest level of remain votes in the UK

Not really a reply to that point you quoted, is it?

Aegir wrote: »

yes, I understand that, which is why I disputed Firt Up's argument that the EU Commission could arbitrarily decide what is and isn't a "Europen Company". It does make you wonder how all the brass plaque companies in Amsterdam, Luxembourg and Dublin get away with it though.

Are these brass plaque companies providing any regulated commercial services locally?

Answer on one of those newly-minted Brexit 50p if you wish

Aegir wrote: »

yes, we get it, you are wonderful :rolleyes:

Merely mercenarian. As mercenarian as Brexiters caused me to become.

Aegir wrote: »

did you ask that question of me?

these relocations will be hard to replace, which is why I have never supported Brexit.

I did in post 865.

But I'll let you off the hook if you wish, since you're not a Leaver

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/06/german-mps-taken-aback-boris-johnson-hardline-brexit-trade-talks-rhetoric

Robert Habeck, the leader of the German Greens, and a potential German chancellor after next year’s elections, was also gloomy that a deal could be struck. He said: “Johnson has stated that under no circumstances does he intend to conduct the negotiations after 11 months. He has categorically ruled out extension of the negotiations. He does not want to accept the EU rules for work, environment, or the jurisdiction of the European court of justice. The EU, on the other hand, cannot accept tax or regulatory dumping on its doorstep and must protect its single market and insist on a level playing field. The risk of an unregulated no-deal Brexit is still high, and maybe has never before been higher.”

I'm having trouble understanding what the point was in signing the Withdrawal Agreement. They pay the divorce bill, put NI in a weird place, all the while knowing that the chances of a deal with their demands are very low.

Surely the British public will be outraged if they crash out with No Deal after paying 33 billion.

Boredstiff666

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/06/german-mps-taken-aback-boris-johnson-hardline-brexit-trade-talks-rhetoric

Robert Habeck, the leader of the German Greens, and a potential German chancellor after next year’s elections, was also gloomy that a deal could be struck. He said: “Johnson has stated that under no circumstances does he intend to conduct the negotiations after 11 months. He has categorically ruled out extension of the negotiations. He does not want to accept the EU rules for work, environment, or the jurisdiction of the European court of justice. The EU, on the other hand, cannot accept tax or regulatory dumping on its doorstep and must protect its single market and insist on a level playing field. The risk of an unregulated no-deal Brexit is still high, and maybe has never before been higher.”

I'm having trouble understanding what the point was in signing the Withdrawal Agreement. They pay the divorce bill, put NI in a weird place, all the while knowing that the chances of a deal with their demands are very low.

Surely the British public will be outraged if they crash out with No Deal after paying 33 billion.

Has it been paid? If it hasn't and they go out with no deal as you say....then will it be paid?

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Has it been paid? If it hasn't and the go out with no deal as you say....then will it be paid?

I think they've started paying it. And yes, it will be paid even if there is no trade deal.

Boredstiff666

Deleted User wrote: »

I think they've started paying it. And yes, it will be paid even if there is no trade deal.

When you say it will be paid. You mean it will be paid in that time frame or ???

Because If not paid in that time frame it may never be paid unless.....there is a deal.

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

When you say it will be paid. You mean it will be paid in that time frame or ???

Because If not paid in that time frame it may never be paid unless.....there is a deal.

I don't know if the payment schedule lasts beyond this year, but even if it does and there is no trade deal, I don't see why it wouldn't be paid. They've signed an international agreement saying they would pay it.

So does a level playing field work with ways, or will the Eu continue to turn a blind eye to blatant tax evasion facilitated by member states?

Will we seen a new approach now one of the architects of tax evasion is no longer president of the commission?

Boredstiff666

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't know if the payment schedule lasts beyond this year, but even if it does and there is no trade deal, I don't see why it wouldn't be paid. They've signed an international agreement saying they would pay it.

If they have agreed to pay and do not or delay payment what can anybody do to the UK?

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

If they have agreed to pay and do not or delay payment what can anybody do to the UK?

I don't really know. Trade embargoes / Sanctions / Stop paying British MEPs' salaries I suppose.

It's really not worth talking about. There is absolutely no chance the UK is retarded enough to destroy its links with the EU and show the world it breaks deals over a paltry 33 billion.

Dytalus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

If they have agreed to pay and do not or delay payment what can anybody do to the UK?

This comes up every so often. Strictly speaking, there's no hard-and-fast punishment that can be visited upon countries. No 'World Police' is going to slap the island of Britain in handcuffs and wheel away Parliament into a cell.

But countries that break international agreements at the very least lose huge amounts of trust earned among the international community. Why would China, or Australia, or the US, or any country trust the UK when it signed an agreement? They've shown that as soon as it becomes unpleasant they just...won't uphold their side of things. Would you forge a trade (or other type of) agreement with someone who could, at a earliest convenience, tear it up?

There is the International Court of Justice which oversees international agreements (I believe the WA falls under its jurisdiction, please someone correct me if I'm wrong), and if the UK decide they won't abide by the ICJ's rulings they can pretty much guarantee a swathe of political and economic problems coming their way. Countries which flaunt international law need to be exceptionally powerful to get away with it, or they risk become de facto 'rogue states'. Once you're a rogue state...there goes pretty much all regular international diplomacy for your nation.

This won't happen to the UK. They're not careless enough to flip off the ICJ. They're not some despotic dictatorship that wouldn't care about flirting with pariah status. They may well fight any case the EU brings to the ICJ, but if they lost the case I'm 100% convinced they'd pay the money.

Boredstiff666

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't really know. Trade embargoes / Sanctions / Stop paying British MEPs' salaries I suppose.

It's really not worth talking about. There is absolutely no chance the UK is retarded enough to destroy its links with the EU and show the world it breaks deals over a paltry 33 billion.

No I was asking because I didnt know. But from what you say............The MEP's have gone.........the links and trade embargo would also hurt the EU.

So basically it could be quite a big arm twister even though it may be a little naughty?

Boredstiff666

Dytalus wrote: »

This comes up every so often. Strictly speaking, there's no hard-and-fast punishment that can be visited upon countries. No 'World Police' is going to slap the island of Britain in handcuffs and wheel away Parliament into a cell.

But countries that break international agreements at the very least lose huge amounts of trust earned among the international community. Why would China, or Australia, or the US, or any country trust the UK when it signed an agreement? They've shown that as soon as it becomes unpleasant they just...won't uphold their side of things. Would you forge a trade (or other type of) agreement with someone who could, at a earliest convenience, tear it up?

There is the International Court of Justice which oversees international agreements (I believe the WA falls under its jurisdiction, please someone correct me if I'm wrong), and if the UK decide they won't abide by the ICJ's rulings they can pretty much guarantee a swathe of political and economic problems coming their way. Countries which flaunt international law need to be exceptionally powerful to get away with it, or they risk become de facto 'rogue states'. Once you're a rogue state...there goes pretty much all regular international diplomacy for your nation.

This won't happen to the UK. They're not careless enough to flip off the ICJ. They're not some despotic dictatorship that wouldn't care about flirting with pariah status. They may well fight any case the EU brings to the ICJ, but if they lost the case I'm 100% convinced they'd pay the money.

Yes but I wasn't implying they would not pay. But if you have been in business you would know that lots of companies delay payment.....accidently of course to get a bit extra or to make sure certain things happen etc.

Dytalus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

No I was asking because I didnt know. But from what you say............The MEP's have gone.........the links and trade embargo would also hurt the EU.

So basically it could be quite a big arm twister even though it may be a little naughty?

Presumably by salaries, he meant pensions. Part of the 33 billion the UK owes is for the pensions of their MEPs, who still receive them despite leaving the EU. If the UK refuses to pay, the EU might be able (I'd need to read up on EU law regarding this) to cease pension payments to previously serving MEPs.

Boredstiff666

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

No I was asking because I didnt know. But from what you say............The MEP's have gone.........the links and trade embargo would also hurt the EU.

So basically it could be quite a big arm twister even though it may be a little naughty?

The MEPs are gone but the EU still pays their pensions. A big part of the "bill" is these future payments. Yes, trade embargoes and sanctions etc. would hurt the EU, but so would allowing the UK to disregard its debts to it without any sanctions.

I'd say the chances of the UK not paying are like 0.1%, and embargoes as a response to that would be even lower.


Edit: I said salaries above by mistake.

Dytalus

Boredstiff666 wrote: »

Yes but I wasn't implying they would not pay. But if you have been in business you would know that lots of companies delay payment.....accidently of course to get a bit extra or to make sure certain things happen etc.

Course they do. Nations do as well. But there is only so far you can push it - especially if there's a time frame for payment within the WA (again, would need to scrutinise it). Companies get taken to court or have debt collectors sent after them all the time.

The UK has agreed to pay. The EU holds the cards on this, and is unlikely to bend much to get the money they are owed. If someone owed me €1,000, I'm not going to do them a favour to get them to pay me back - I'm going to take them to small claims court.

Boredstiff666

Dytalus wrote: »

Course they do. Nations do as well. But there is only so far you can push it - especially if there's a time frame for payment within the WA (again, would need to scrutinise it). Companies get taken to court or have debt collectors sent after them all the time.

The UK has agreed to pay. The EU holds the cards on this, and is unlikely to bend much to get the money they are owed. If someone owed me €1,000, I'm not going to do them a favour to get them to pay me back - I'm going to take them to small claims court.

Twas only a question. But the small claims court or any civil court is certainly no sure way of getting payment. In fact its toothless if someone was intent on not paying.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The MEPs are gone but the EU still pays their pensions. A big part of the "bill" is these future payments

Which does make you wonder what the eu’s total pension liability must be.

Aegir

Aegir wrote: »

Which does make you wonder what the eu’s total pension liability must be.

Wonder no more. It's around €63.8 billion, or around 0.5 Jeff Bezos'.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12506.htm #69.

sondagefaux

Dytalus wrote: »

This comes up every so often. Strictly speaking, there's no hard-and-fast punishment that can be visited upon countries. No 'World Police' is going to slap the island of Britain in handcuffs and wheel away Parliament into a cell.

But countries that break international agreements at the very least lose huge amounts of trust earned among the international community. Why would China, or Australia, or the US, or any country trust the UK when it signed an agreement? They've shown that as soon as it becomes unpleasant they just...won't uphold their side of things. Would you forge a trade (or other type of) agreement with someone who could, at a earliest convenience, tear it up?

There is the International Court of Justice which oversees international agreements (I believe the WA falls under its jurisdiction, please someone correct me if I'm wrong), and if the UK decide they won't abide by the ICJ's rulings they can pretty much guarantee a swathe of political and economic problems coming their way. Countries which flaunt international law need to be exceptionally powerful to get away with it, or they risk become de facto 'rogue states'. Once you're a rogue state...there goes pretty much all regular international diplomacy for your nation.

This won't happen to the UK. They're not careless enough to flip off the ICJ. They're not some despotic dictatorship that wouldn't care about flirting with pariah status. They may well fight any case the EU brings to the ICJ, but if they lost the case I'm 100% convinced they'd pay the money.

It's the Permanent Court of Arbitration, rather than the ICJ that the UK and the EU have agreed to refer disputes within the Joint Committee or one of the Specialised Committees (including the one for Northern Ireland matters) that they cannot resolve.

Both parties can nominate members to the arbitration panel, from a pool of potential nominees, and the Withdrawal Agreement makes the arbitration panel's recommendations and decisions binding on both parties.

The CJEU retains responsibility for adjudicating on matters of EU law contained within the Withdrawal Agreement.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/840655/Agreement_on_the_withdrawal_of_the_United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Northern_Ireland_from_the_European_Union_and_the_European_Atomic_Energy_Community.pdf

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Wonder no more. It's around €63.8 billion, or around 0.5 Jeff Bezos'.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldeucom/125/12506.htm #69.

If there is one thing politicians are good at, it’s feathering their own nests.

Aegir

Aegir wrote: »

If there is one thing politicians are good at, it’s feathering their own nests.

Take it away and only the rich can afford to play.