Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

This type of post brexit realignment also works in the opposite direction.Reuters have recently reported a thousand EU financial providers and businesses opened UK offices after brexit.

We all knew (and said) that there would be changes on both sides of the Channel, so its no surprise that some businesses want to continue trading in the British market and have (or will) set up offices in the UK.

But equally, we all knew - and forecast - that there would be a gradual waning of the UK's importance in several sectors, because when all is said and done, the UK has very few unique selling points, and lots of small drifts away from the UK would amount to a significant loss of influence.

I'd say most of us were expecting that to take five years or more. It looks like it's happening somewhat faster. Last year, London was the biggest share trading centre; now it's dropped to second place. Last year, London was the biggest international TV hub; now it's in fourth place. Several orchestras and other performance artists have moved out of the UK because of Brexit and there's no indication that the trade deals with Japan, Australia or Liechtenstein are going to fill the gap.

Can you, Rob, provide us with any validated examples of London or GB becoming a more important centre for any sector since Brexit?

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

There are multiple articles from multiple sources saying exactly the same thing,that EU companies are setting up offices in the UK(some as recently as April this year).
I'd rather not post links for obvious reasons.

Emphasis on the word "exactly". The obvious reason is that they all - every single one of them - refer back to that same Bovill press release. There is no other source for that information that I can find.

Quick research tip: when checking news reports, google complete sentences from the text. You'll find the exact same phrases cropping up all over the place, because modern journalists rarely do journalism any more. So whether you've read it on the BBC, Reuters or Morning Glory, it's still the same info copy-and-pasted from Bovill.

If you want to challenge my numbers (35 new applications since 2019) go ahead: show us where you're getting your data from.

Capt'n Midnight

I'm gonna guess China will dump steel in the UK once they remove EU era restrictions.

Brexit ‘madness’ will wreck UK steel industry, Tories warned


There's also this little bit of Albian perfidy
Brussels is concerned that British government is favouring domestic firms, in breach of trade deal

20silkcut

eire4 wrote: »

I think your been generous saying fantasy I would say more like classic brexiteer disingenuous comments.

If it’s not Von der Leyen it was juncker and before him it was Manuel barroso and before him it was Jacques de lor and all the way back to de Gaulle and Napoleon. They are all out to get them.
They need a constant bogeyman or in this case woman. Like the Japanese soldier who fought on till 1974 I think Churchill needs to be rose from the dead and give an address to the commons that things have moved on it’s all over and they can stand down.

View

20silkcut wrote: »

If it’s not Von der Leyen it was juncker and before him it was Manuel barroso and before him it was Jacques de lor and all the way back to de Gaulle and Napoleon. They are all out to get them.
They need a constant bogeyman or in this case woman. Like the Japanese soldier who fought on till 1974 I think Churchill needs to be rose from the dead and give an address to the commons that things have moved on it’s all over and they can stand down.

Churchill would be denounced as a traitor were he able to do that and did so by the very same people that currently are the first to hail him as a hero.

Strazdas

20silkcut wrote: »

If it’s not Von der Leyen it was juncker and before him it was Manuel barroso and before him it was Jacques de lor and all the way back to de Gaulle and Napoleon. They are all out to get them.
They need a constant bogeyman or in this case woman. Like the Japanese soldier who fought on till 1974 I think Churchill needs to be rose from the dead and give an address to the commons that things have moved on it’s all over and they can stand down.

The Brexiteers have reinvented Churchill himself. All of the bad and negative stuff in his career is edited out (he being a racist for example) - the only thing they want to discuss is his rousing speeches from summer 1940.

He was clearly a complex character, but the Brexit brigade don't do complexity. They only want simplistic slogans and everything as black and white.

20silkcut

"There I sat with the great Russian bear on one side of me with paws outstretched, and, on the other side, the great American buffalo. Between the two sat the poor little English donkey, who was the only one who knew the right way home”

Always thought this quote from Churchill sums up perfectly the geopolitical reality at the height of world war 2. A reality impervious to the minds of modern day brexiteers.
The only difference with today is you can swap out a Russian bear for a Chinese one.

Britain wouldn’t be even sitting at such a table today in the first place.

Peregrinus

That was kind of Churchill's point.

While it may seem surprising that Churchill should compare England (by which, of course, he meant the UK) to a donkey, the quote is genuine. It's from The Second World War, which Churchilll published in instalments between 1948 and 1953. It refers to the Tehran conference in November 1943, which was the first of the WW2 conferences between the leaders of the "Big Three" allies. It was at this conference that Churchill realised that both the US and the USSR had vast ambitions for their respective global roles after the war and that, potentially, these ambitions might pose as great a threat to the world as Nazi Germany did; possibly even greater.

The idea he developed for moderating this danger was that there should be a multipolar world in which other centres of power would be a "united states of Europe" and the UK "with her Commonwealth and Empire". This of course didn't happen; the British Empire/Commonwealth pretty much never functioned as coherent political or military entity after the Second World War, although it wasn't until the Suez Crisis in 1956 that the UK learned how much that had diminished its power and relevance. The development of a "united states of Europe" was hampered by the division of Europe (and of Germany) between the Soviet and US spheres of influence, and the resulting slow start of the EU. By the time the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957 the Cold War was in full swing, both sides had extensive nuclear arsenals and a variety of functioning delivery systems, and a global nuclear holocaust was a real possibility for resolving what was, when it comes down to it, a difference of opinion over the optimal way of organising national economies.

Once it became clear that the Empire was finished and the Commonwealth was never going to function as a political, military or economic power, the UK's best hope for global relevance lay in throwing in it's lot with other European powers. From the early 1950s Churchill could see this and, for instance, when the European Coal and Steel Community was established he urged that the UK should join. After he stood down as PM in 1955 he generally kept silent on such matters, out of deference to his successors as PM/party leader, but it's known that when Eden resigned he advised the Queen to send for McMillan, who was a leading pro-European.

Capt'n Midnight

You may know of Robert Schuman , he of the "Schuman Declaration" that led to the European Coal and Steel community that lead to the EU.

Anyway the Pope has put him on the path to
sainthood in the Roman Catholic Church.

Should go down well in some quarters, not so well in others.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Emphasis on the word "exactly". The obvious reason is that they all - every single one of them - refer back to that same Bovill press release. There is no other source for that information that I can find.

Quick research tip: when checking news reports, google complete sentences from the text. You'll find the exact same phrases cropping up all over the place, because modern journalists rarely do journalism any more. So whether you've read it on the BBC, Reuters or Morning Glory, it's still the same info copy-and-pasted from Bovill.

If you want to challenge my numbers (35 new applications since 2019) go ahead: show us where you're getting your data from.

If we were discussing epidemiology or any other subject connected to infections or health matters I would defer to you as that is your area of expertise.
However, as you have mentioned Bovill as the main source of my data let's look at them.A company with over twenty years expertise in the financial compliance sector,amongst others. With offices in UK,Europe,Asia and the Americas.
Who's opinion would you think the majority of posters might tend to favour if they were unbiased?

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

However, as you have mentioned Bovill as the main source of my data let's look at them.A company with over twenty years expertise in the financial compliance sector,amongst others. With offices in UK,Europe,Asia and the Americas.
Who's opinion would you think the majority of posters might tend to favour if they were unbiased?

Hang on a second. You didn't refer to Bovill - you referred to Reuters, and then to "multiple sources".

I pointed out that all the "multiple sources" I could find linked back to this one single press release put out by Bovill, and that press release contained two factual statements of interest - the number of applications for temporary registration in 2019 and the updated number for 2021.

There's no "opinion" involved - Bovill's press release showed that there has been a grand total of 35 additional applications for temporary permissions in the two years since their first Freedom of Information request.

Bovill is, like any other company, keen to keep its own name in circulation because it has a service to sell, one that has become necessary because of Brexit. That press release and all the copycat news articles spawned by it is nothing more than advertising. I've done the marketing course - I know how it works.

Strazdas

Peregrinus wrote: »

That was kind of Churchill's point.

While it may seem surprising that Churchill should compare England (by which, of course, he meant the UK) to a donkey, the quote is genuine. It's from The Second World War, which Churchilll published in instalments between 1948 and 1953. It refers to the Tehran conference in November 1943, which was the first of the WW2 conferences between the leaders of the "Big Three" allies. It was at this conference that Churchill realised that both the US and the USSR had vast ambitions for their respective global roles after the war and that, potentially, these ambitions might pose as great a threat to the world as Nazi Germany did; possibly even greater.

The idea he developed for moderating this danger was that there should be a multipolar world in which other centres of power would be a "united states of Europe" and the UK "with her Commonwealth and Empire". This of course didn't happen; the British Empire/Commonwealth pretty much never functioned as coherent political or military entity after the Second World War, although it wasn't until the Suez Crisis in 1956 that the UK learned how much that had diminished its power and relevance. The development of a "united states of Europe" was hampered by the division of Europe (and of Germany) between the Soviet and US spheres of influence, and the resulting slow start of the EU. By the time the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957 the Cold War was in full swing, both sides had extensive nuclear arsenals and a variety of functioning delivery systems, and a global nuclear holocaust was a real possibility for resolving what was, when it comes down to it, a difference of opinion over the optimal way of organising national economies.

Once it became clear that the Empire was finished and the Commonwealth was never going to function as a political, military or economic power, the UK's best hope for global relevance lay in throwing in it's lot with other European powers. From the early 1950s Churchill could see this and, for instance, when the European Coal and Steel Community was established he urged that the UK should join. After he stood down as PM in 1955 he generally kept silent on such matters, out of deference to his successors as PM/party leader, but it's known that when Eden resigned he advised the Queen to send for McMillan, who was a leading pro-European.

100%, but the Brexiteer / English nationalist press is in total denial about all of it. In their fantasy world, Britain was "tricked" into joining the EEC and had no idea how pernicious it was or how it had aspirations to becoming a political union in time.

Most of these lies are dependent on the idea of England / Britain being a great superpower which simply doesn't need Europe.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Hang on a second. You didn't refer to Bovill - you referred to Reuters, and then to "multiple sources".

I pointed out that all the "multiple sources" I could find linked back to this one single press release put out by Bovill, and that press release contained two factual statements of interest - the number of applications for temporary registration in 2019 and the updated number for 2021.

There's no "opinion" involved - Bovill's press release showed that there has been a grand total of 35 additional applications for temporary permissions in the two years since their first Freedom of Information request.

Bovill is, like any other company, keen to keep its own name in circulation because it has a service to sell, one that has become necessary because of Brexit. That press release and all the copycat news articles spawned by it is nothing more than advertising. I've done the marketing course - I know how it works.

Yes,I referred to Reuters but as you pointed out the source was mentioned as Bovill in a few of the various articles available online. I would hasten to also point out there are articles saying figures in excess of one thousand companies which suggests multiple sources.
Again, your relegation of the credentials of Bovill to a marketing company doesn't convince me Celtic.I'm sure Bovills would have to meet stringent standards to be deemed qualified to advise companies on the many potential pitfalls of relocation into different financial markets.
I doubt doing a marketing course would qualify someone as a financial compliance expert.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

Again, your relegation of the credentials of Bovill to a marketing company doesn't convince me Celtic.I'm sure Bovills would have to meet stringent standards to be deemed qualified to advise companies on the many potential pitfalls of relocation into different financial markets.
I doubt doing a marketing course would qualify someone as a financial compliance expert.

And again, you're not reading things as they're written. I very much doubt that Bovill wrote that press release themselves, and I didn't say they were a marketing company - I said they were marketing their company, taking advantage of Brexit to do so, to pick up whatever business they can from non-UK financial companies that wish to trade in the UK.

You can wave around notional references to articles that report "figures" all you like, but unless and until you can actually cite one of them, it's nothing but hot air. The information I gave cites the exact number reported by the two Freedom of Information requests, which is indeed "more than one thousand" - but that doesn't change the fundamental reality that there are still only 35 more in 2021 than there were in 2019.

This is the kind of nonsense that inspired the infamous £350m-a-week slogan, and the same kind of nonsense again that had Brexiters whooping for joy at Britain's EU-beating year-on-year growth as reported earlier this month, blissfully ignorant of the fact that the figure didn't come close to lifting the UK back to where it was a year ago. There's a huge amount of financial illiteracy in the general public, and in particular amongst Leave voters (don't have the link to hand, but the data is out there on the internet somewhere) and no shortage of Tory-voting businessmen quite happy to profit from it.

Tyrone212

A new poll has revealed that just 25 per cent of the British public think Brexit is going well.

The YouGov survey of 3,249 adults found Conservative voters were the most likely to think the UK’s split from the European Union has been a success, although that number only just constitutes a majority (51 per cent).

Leave voters, on the hand, are less optimistic, with just 45 per cent saying it is going well, while 92 per cent of Remain voters say it is going badly.

Just five per cent of Labour voters think it is going well.

Strazdas

Tyrone212 wrote: »

A new poll has revealed that just 25 per cent of the British public think Brexit is going well.

The YouGov survey of 3,249 adults found Conservative voters were the most likely to think the UK’s split from the European Union has been a success, although that number only just constitutes a majority (51 per cent).

Leave voters, on the hand, are less optimistic, with just 45 per cent saying it is going well, while 92 per cent of Remain voters say it is going badly.

Just five per cent of Labour voters think it is going well.

The big takeaway from this is that people could never get behind Brexit. It was always going to be deeply, deeply divisive. If it's like this after five years, it will still be like it after ten or fifteen.

Strangely, this aspect of Brexit hasn't been particularly widely debated i.e. the very divisiveness of it and the fact that it can only split the country in two (most of the media focus has been on whether it is a 'good idea' or not).

timetogo1

https://twitter.com/BylineTV/status/1407033712999645190?s=09

They make it hard to have sympathy. I know some people believed the amazing promises from the leave side. But 5 years later you'd hope they'd be waking up.

From the video

"Farmers will go under, it's challenging, they're (politicians) lining their own pockets, I'd vote for brexit again because it'll sort itself out".

Strazdas

timetogo1 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BylineTV/status/1407033712999645190?s=09

They make it hard to have sympathy. I know some people believed the amazing promises from the leave side. But 5 years later you'd hope they'd be waking up.

From the video

"Farmers will go under, it's challenging, they're (politicians) lining their own pockets, I'd vote for brexit again because it'll sort itself out".

They were taken in by a scam or Ponzi scheme run by liars and crooks (including the right wing press). Difficult for them to admit they have been scammed though. They can just about publicly admit the whole thing has gone horribly wrong, but are struggling with calling out the liars and the con job that took place.

Larbre34

timetogo1 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BylineTV/status/1407033712999645190?s=09
"Farmers will go under, it's challenging, they're (politicians) lining their own pockets, I'd vote for brexit again because it'll sort itself out".

That'd make you laugh, from his accent he's South African or Rhodesian or some such.

Padre_Pio

Larbre34 wrote: »

That'd make you laugh, from his accent he's South African or Rhodesian or some such.

Bloody immigration. Coming over here, voting for Brexit. Twice if he had the chance :rolleyes:

Mr.Wemmick

timetogo1 wrote: »

They make it hard to have sympathy. I know some people believed the amazing promises from the leave side. But 5 years later you'd hope they'd be waking up.

From the video

"Farmers will go under, it's challenging, they're (politicians) lining their own pockets, I'd vote for brexit again because it'll sort itself out".

They are waking up for sure.. but there's still a deep-rooted arrogance in the UK I hope brexit cures them of. They still do not fully understand that the UK is not the centre of the friggin' universe.

That said, I see the realisation everywhere in the UK now - builders a few doors down telling me they were sold a pup, all lies and now they can't get building materials and the delays from overseas deliveries are harming them all. Supermarket shelves do not look good here and check-out workers telling me it's brexit and no EU workers on the land to pick the food.

I must say, it's good to see/hear this as opposed to the washed-over glazed look of we must escape from the evil EU in pre-referendum and protected transition times.

lawred2

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

They are waking up for sure.. but there's still a deep-rooted arrogance in the UK I hope brexit cures them of. They still do not fully understand that the UK is not the centre of the friggin' universe.

That said, I see the realisation everywhere in the UK now - builders a few doors down telling me they were sold a pup, all lies and now they can't get building materials and the delays from overseas deliveries are harming them all. Supermarket shelves do not look good here and check-out workers telling me it's brexit and no EU workers on the land to pick the food.

I must say, it's good to see/hear this as opposed to the washed-over glazed look of we must escape from the evil EU in pre-referendum and protected transition times.

I hope it's the "sold a pup" narrative that becomes the dominant narrative and not the "we're being victimised by those bitter Europeans" narrative.

I think it can still very much go either way.

Mr.Wemmick

lawred2 wrote: »

I hope it's the "sold a pup" narrative that becomes the dominant narrative and not the "we're being victimised by those bitter Europeans" narrative.

I think it can still very much go either way.

On the many sane political social pages I follow, I find myself correcting many a propaganda twitch in folks who should know better. The EU are taking our film industry away is a recent one which not many correct/call-up the lie.

One of my points I repeat on these pages is how people cherry-pick which EU news stories to believe or react to. The establishment-loving guardian is doing its master's bidding and fueling the panic and anger, I notice.

Not having an independent press on any side of the political spectrum is indeed a worry.

Igotadose

Larbre34 wrote: »

That'd make you laugh, from his accent he's South African or Rhodesian or some such.

What he's stating really is, "I won't admit to having made a mistake." At most they might not vote Conservative.

By the time it 'sorts itself out,' that fellow likely won't be around to enjoy the sunlit uplands.

Leroy42

Igotadose wrote: »

What he's stating really is, "I won't admit to having made a mistake." At most they might not vote Conservative.

By the time it 'sorts itself out,' that fellow likely won't be around to enjoy the sunlit uplands.

What does he think will do this 'sort itself out?' That is another way of saying that he hasn't a clue how its going to be resolved but Hope!

And that is all Brexit is. Hope. Still no plan, no ideas, no timelines or goals. Just hope that it all just works out.

And what if it doesn't? Was the risk worth it? Was the time effort and stress worth it?

It is people like him, the fishing lady who sold her heard of cows that was previously linked, and millions of others all around the UK that are keeping the entire thing from collapsing. They are rolling their sleeves up and making the best of what is a terrible strain and unneeded complications.

But they should be asking the question why? Why are they being asked by the government to take all this extra work and hassle on? To what end? What is the goal, what is the likely benefits?

Covid is the most recent example that people are willing to go to extraordinary lengths to help. I find it ironic that some of the biggest Brexit supporters are also the people calling for an end to the lockdowns as people can't be expected to put up with all the restrictions and hassle with no clear end in sight. Yet that is exactly what they are landed the entire country with for years to come because of Brexit.

Professor Moriarty

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

On the many sane political social pages I follow, I find myself correcting many a propaganda twitch in folks who should know better. The EU are taking our film industry away is a recent one which not many correct/call-up the lie.

One of my points I repeat on these pages is how people cherry-pick which EU news stories to believe or react to. The establishment-loving guardian is doing its master's bidding and fueling the panic and anger, I notice.

Not having an independent press on any side of the political spectrum is indeed a worry.

In what way is The Guardian an 'establishment-loving' paper?

54and56

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Not having an independent press on any side of the political spectrum is indeed a worry.

Define "Independent"? What type of ownership is "Independent"? A trust like the Irish Times?

For a newspaper to be truly independent would it not have to cease publishing opinion pieces and just report the factual news without any form of commentary whatsoever? As far as I can see as soon as someone expresses an opinion they cease to be independent unless of course there is some sort of arbitrary rule followed where any expression of opinion must be counter balanced by an opposite opinion being given equal coverage / column inches etc which sounds reasonable until you see some of the loopers who have to be given air time in order to provide "balance"!!

Mr.Wemmick

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

In what way is The Guardian an 'establishment-loving' paper?

It's been a long time since Peter Preston was editor and the paper was passionate about its independence and holding power to account.

It continues to ride on that image of the golden days, with some writers remaining true to form, but it's shocking the change in the way the paper falls in behind the main-stream established narrative.

Akrasia

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

On the many sane political social pages I follow, I find myself correcting many a propaganda twitch in folks who should know better. The EU are taking our film industry away is a recent one which not many correct/call-up the lie.

One of my points I repeat on these pages is how people cherry-pick which EU news stories to believe or react to. The establishment-loving guardian is doing its master's bidding and fueling the panic and anger, I notice.

Not having an independent press on any side of the political spectrum is indeed a worry.

The Guardian is a non profit owned by a 'limited company' formerly the Scott Trust but maintains the same constitution, ie, to be an independent media organisation that is not beholden to shareholders or owners

I'm not sure how much more independent a press can be than that?

I have found the Guardian's coverage to be much better than the other UK media, such as the Telegraph, (owned by the Barclay Brothers) and the Times (Owned by Murdoch)
and the BBC, which is beholden to the government of the day, and always seems to back the current political establishment, although this seems to be becoming more extreme than in the recent past under the Johnson administration

L1011

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

falls in behind the main-stream established narrative.

When something is contrary to the viewpoints of the bulk of the UK press, it can't be the "main-stream established narrative".