Personally, I would rather delay the triggering of Article 50 until we have at least agreed a trade deal with the American and have the broad outline of potential deals with China, India and the larger commonwealth countries like Canada and Australia. The more cards we have to play, the better the opportunity to get a good deal from the rest of Europe.
Totally agree on the second part, I think we need a lot more cards but the obvious worry is May and her slightly insane team
I've stated before I admire Richard North - http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86347 - it's an analogy he's made himself. And more - http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86348
Its time for May to get smart, starting with the EU nationals issue, she is stupid beyond measure here and is missing a major trick.
We all know that she'll have to and should concede on the EU nationals here in the UK, the EU will have to do the same with our migrants living and working abroad, so what better way to handle it than announce now that she intends to protect and maintain our EU nationals/citizens.
This will allow her to take a moral high ground, force the EU in to doing the same or look morally weak, thus opening up a better platform for negotiations and giving the UK some actual real strength at the table, not just weak posturing.
There has been a lot of hot air over this, but I've always thought it was best to deal with this at the time of triggering.
The Lords amendment didn't promise anything except to aim to bring proposals forward within 3 months to deal with it...
It is the number one priority...but it needs to be done properly, in agreement with the EU.
It's far from straightforward as we have many living here who are not 100% "legal" due to the lack of insurance...and they need to be able to stay imo.
There is also the prison situation to sort out.
Better to wait and make it crystal clear, than to promise things that end up not being the actual reality of it.
it still beggars belief that we would knowingly and intentionally cut ourselves off from our biggest market (by leaving the single market/customs union). Ask business people, ask financial people from the city of london..its truly madness. My daughter's boyfriend works for a big bank in the city. They are being told all bets are off about their futures. This would not be the case if we stayed in customs union/single market. But never mind the architects of this madness (the rw press/Farage/Johnson/May/Fox etc) will be ok. Theyve no need for jobs, theyve no need to use public services. Take back control and give it to these people is laughable if it werent so serious.
As for the city - I am here and many friends work in the banks - they already say they aint going anywhere - they will refuse. So some jobs will go, but lets not pretend it will end. Those jobs certainly won't go to europe but instead to the Far East or NYC if anywhere.
So Article 50 to be triggered on....................
Last edited by Mysteron; 20-3-17 at 17:52.
For me it's the austerity. Or rather the debt that underpins it.
Ultimately the markets don't care about us, the EU or any of that political razzle dazzle. They only care about the trade deals. EU, RoW, doesn't matter. So long as they think our debt repayments can be met it'll all work out. For them. If they start to doubt that, the price of brexit will increase. Could get really ugly.
Whatever the price there's only one lot going to pay it. Courtesy of the antiquated model.
Tory Parliamentarians are unhappy with the BBC again, don't feel its being neutral enough in its coverage and focuses too much on leave voters with regret etc
Article from The Guardian, but covered elsewhere, what I find bizarre is the lack of examples they site in their letter and why protest like that, does them more harm than good. Seems we have hints of Trumps 'fake news' at play again here which is really of course stamping out things we don't want to hear.
Anyways, here it is:
They did, to me, take a position prior to the vote...as they did...and still do...over Trump.
It wasn't bias as such...just a natural swing toward the politics of the people who edit their news programs...basic human nature.
They were certainly guilty of not taking the possibility of a leave vote or Trump win, seriously.
The letter is ridiculous, however, and there is no justification for it.
But it doesn't do any harm to remind the BBC about it's need to stay impartial...because if it does lose that perception...it will also lose the license fee money.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|