From memory, the SNP stated it would cost £200 million to set up the entire apparatus of independence. It turns out it costs £600 million just to set up a welfare payments system. That's less than oil generates a year now, isn't it?
I was in a meeting yesterday with some contractors with long experience of the industry (as I do as well) and they stated that up to 85k jobs had been lost in the Aberdeen area ( this includes those who previously flew in to work) , restaurant takings down 50% , taxi takings down 40% and the housing market in extreme difficulties and virtually stagnant. Of course that is not indicative of Scotland as a whole but it is a major revenue stream for them as it also is further south.
This will not improve for this this years offshore season and it is very unlikely it will improve next year to any great extent even if the oil price should start an early recovery. A sustained period of 60 to 70 plus on Brent crude will be required just to start companies even considering the unstacking of rigs and assets now warm and even cold stacked.
There is too much previous investment out there for some recovery not to occur but the use of the word "decommission" is becoming more and more commonplace than previously. The landscape for the North Sea and in particular for Scotland is going to look considerably different by the time this is over as many of the previous players may not return or may no longer be in existence. I would have thought this has to shape the approach of the SNP to any immediate and even mid term demands and aspirations they may have. Secretly the SNP would be breathing a collective sigh of relief as this would have been the wrong time, there will be better moments in the future for what they wish to achieve.
This highlights the real risk for the North Sea. There is some very expensive infrastructure that needs a lot of maintenance in place on which many of the smaller fields in the same basin feed. If the providers of that pull the plug a huge amount of the output is never coming back.
In Aberdeen house prices do not seem to have fallen much but volumes have collapsed. There are very few buyers and it is hard to see the resistance to lower prices continuing indefinitely. Tough times.
After your recent celebration of Ludlow's metropolitanism-I even heard rumour that the local Starbucks were thinking of taking on a Latvian-i wonderd which way Middle England was heading?
Are you an Outer or an Inner? 'What Ludlow does today'
I think remainers crowing about Galloway are being a touch complacent. All political movements make big missteps at their inceptions, it would be far more surprising if Leave were a slick integrated marketing operation right now.
With men like Gove involved, they might learn to get better.
Boris is taking too long. if he comes out for remain now it looks very weak.
Cabinet meeting starts in 5 minutes, right? If he goes for it today he can say he was unimpressed by Cameron's reassurances. He can't leave it past today, though.
Boris is taking too long. if he comes out for remain now it looks very weak.
He probably has today up to 5pm and then that's it. Announcing it now gives him the Sunday papers. Also anyone big such as Mrs May - although that looks highly unlikely.
From memory, the SNP stated it would cost £200 million to set up the entire apparatus of independence. It turns out it costs £600 million just to set up a welfare payments system. That's less than oil generates a year now, isn't it?
I was in a meeting yesterday with some contractors with long experience of the industry (as I do as well) and they stated that up to 85k jobs had been lost in the Aberdeen area ( this includes those who previously flew in to work) , restaurant takings down 50% , taxi takings down 40% and the housing market in extreme difficulties and virtually stagnant. Of course that is not indicative of Scotland as a whole but it is a major revenue stream for them as it also is further south.
This will not improve for this this years offshore season and it is very unlikely it will improve next year to any great extent even if the oil price should start an early recovery. A sustained period of 60 to 70 plus on Brent crude will be required just to start companies even considering the unstacking of rigs and assets now warm and even cold stacked.
There is too much previous investment out there for some recovery not to occur but the use of the word "decommission" is becoming more and more commonplace than previously. The landscape for the North Sea and in particular for Scotland is going to look considerably different by the time this is over as many of the previous players may not return or may no longer be in existence. I would have thought this has to shape the approach of the SNP to any immediate and even mid term demands and aspirations they may have. Secretly the SNP would be breathing a collective sigh of relief as this would have been the wrong time, there will be better moments in the future for what they wish to achieve.
Most of Scotland will not even notice. Some overpaid jerks having to sell their ferraris and rolexes and overpriced house prices dropping. majority of people will see little difference. Less erses flying in etc
I doubt you notice much through the fog of alcohol swirling around your head.
However the more intelligent in Scotland i.e. everyone else, will miss the drop in revenues.
Had Major fallen in 1995, he would have been replaced by Hezza or Clarke.
The Parliamentary Party was probably closer to the Pro-EU wing than the Sceptics.
Plus Portillo was a complete flake, vacillating and be a sneak with the installation of those phone lines.
You are probably right but he would have run in a second round had Major stood down. Given his subsequent career, I thought it more better to have him as the potential winner than Redwood, Heseltine or Clarke.
Had all four run in the second round, none would have achieved the 50% needed, and it's possible that with Redwood going backwards, Portillo might have positioned himself as being best able to unite the party against two pro-Euro candidates. Not saying it would have but it was a more interesting outcome than Clarke or Hezza.
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
Sun has similar readership numbers AFAIK and they will be for Leave. Will hurt the key working class vote of Labour.
(1) The EU can't discriminate against the pound, but we mustn't stop the eurozone integrating (2) Banking union only applies to the eurozone. But a single rulebook is needed for the whole EU and for financial stability. These rules may require non-euro member states to change theirs and specific provisions may be necessary (doesn't say what) (3) We don't have to bail out the eurozone (4) Subject to the requirements of the EU, financial regulations of non-euro member states are up to them provided it doesn't clash with the single rulebook or threaten financial stability of the EU (5) Informal meetings of non-euro member states can't be used to get round this and do over non-euro members (6) Any member state can ask the President of the European Council for it to be discussed, if they have an issue with how this agreement is interpreted (7) We'll put it in a future treaty
B - Competitiveness
We all agree the single markets is a wonderful thing. We will all make efforts to fully implement and strengthen the internal market, as well as to adapt it as needed. We'll aim for better regulation, lowering bureaucracy on small and medium businesses and repeal unnecessary legislation as agreed by the Commission. The EU will pursue an active and ambitious trade policy
C - Sovereignty
(1) In a future treaty it will be clear that ever-closer union does not apply to the UK, and existing treaties can't be used to legally extend EU competencies. Increasing or decreasing them requires all EU members states to agree in a treaty revision. (2) Subsidiarity means taking decisions as close to the citizen as possible but if it has clear transnational aspects and EU level would produce benefits then the EU may choose to do it. If there's a reasonable objection by a national parliament, the EU may listen (3) If there is an objection to subsidiarity, within 12 weeks of the draft, if 55% of national parliaments vote as such, the council presidency will include it for a discussion and withdraw unless amended to suit the concerns. (4) Protocols annexed to treaties must be equal force - e.g. a measure adopted via Lisbon on freedom, security and justice doesn't apply if the member state has an opt-out, unless they want it to (5) National security is up to the EU member state
1a) Member states have broad discretion to define their own social security systems - on matters of overriding public interest, on a case-by-case basis, measures can be adopted proportionate to aim being pursued on public policy, health or security grounds 1b) If you are economically non-active free movement only applies if you can support yourself. If you are doing it just for benefits member states have possibility to refuse social benefits, unless they have residency. 1c) all persons exercising free movement must abide by law of member state. Public policy, security or criminal (e.g. shame marriages to 3rd country nationals) grounds can be used to take restrictive measures specific to individual concerned. 2a) Proposal for indexing of child benefits to member state where child resides for new claimants (date unspecified) and will apply to all claimants from 2020. But just child benefits; nothing else (e.g. pensions) 2b) Alert and safeguard mechanism for inflows of exceptional magnitude for member states, including due to past policies on EU enlargement. Member state must notify EU council and commission to show exceptional situation affecting primary purpose of social security system, in-work benefits or on public services. If council agrees, it may authorise access of new EU workers for up to 4 years with progressive "phase-in" - graduated up to match domestic levels - and apply for a maximum of 7 years. 2c) We note the UK is worried about future EU enlargement. We will cross that bridge when we come to it by all EU member states agreeing.
All the above shall take effect on the same date as the UK notifies the EU that it has decided to remain a member of the European Union.
From memory, the SNP stated it would cost £200 million to set up the entire apparatus of independence. It turns out it costs £600 million just to set up a welfare payments system. That's less than oil generates a year now, isn't it?
I was in a meeting yesterday with some contractors with long experience of the industry (as I do as well) and they stated that up to 85k jobs had been lost in the Aberdeen area ( this includes those who previously flew in to work) , restaurant takings down 50% , taxi takings down 40% and the housing market in extreme difficulties and virtually stagnant. Of course that is not indicative of Scotland as a whole but it is a major revenue stream for them as it also is further south.
This will not improve for this this years offshore season and it is very unlikely it will improve next year to any great extent even if the oil price should start an early recovery. A sustained period of 60 to 70 plus on Brent crude will be required just to start companies even considering the unstacking of rigs and assets now warm and even cold stacked.
There is too much previous investment out there for some recovery not to occur but the use of the word "decommission" is becoming more and more commonplace than previously. The landscape for the North Sea and in particular for Scotland is going to look considerably different by the time this is over as many of the previous players may not return or may no longer be in existence. I would have thought this has to shape the approach of the SNP to any immediate and even mid term demands and aspirations they may have. Secretly the SNP would be breathing a collective sigh of relief as this would have been the wrong time, there will be better moments in the future for what they wish to achieve.
This highlights the real risk for the North Sea. There is some very expensive infrastructure that needs a lot of maintenance in place on which many of the smaller fields in the same basin feed. If the providers of that pull the plug a huge amount of the output is never coming back.
In Aberdeen house prices do not seem to have fallen much but volumes have collapsed. There are very few buyers and it is hard to see the resistance to lower prices continuing indefinitely. Tough times.
Very depressing. Future generations will ask why we didn't follow the Norwegian model for our North Sea bounty.
Fantastic.. I love Rees Mogg. Made me quite pleased that he walks on the traffic side of a lady, and gives her the best seat in a restaurant.. I thought all men did that?
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
Sun has similar readership numbers AFAIK and they will be for Leave. Will hurt the key working class vote of Labour.
In spite of all the claims that there's nothing of substance in it, I disagree. There is real meat on economic governance and sovereignty. I'm pleasantly surprised.
The one issue that really concerns me is TTIP. It is such a big issue for me that it could swing my vote. In an earlier draft there was reference to speedily concluding international trade deals (though TTIP was not mentioned by name). Thankfully that is now replaced in the final version by "The European Union will also pursue an active and ambitious trade policy." I can live with that.
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Regardless of the outcome I'm surprised and disappointed how the referendum has developed into such a personality contest, especially among supposed political thinkers on here. So many people seem to be basing their vote on the stance of individuals which I find extraordinary.
99% of those actively involved are self serving, ignore them, make your judgement on the issues not the personalities involved.
The scenario is playing out exactly as predicted so far, it will be interesting when the smoking gun from the negotiations is found. I still refuse to predict the outcome and I'm not a trader but I'd suggest backing Leave today, the price between now and June will tighten at some stage.
Agreed about the personal contest aspect but it is a very complex issue and all the media spin (or more often than not lie) and distort the facts to suit their political agenda so most people will ultimately make their decision based on the politicians they trust most.
I am currently politically homeless having left Labour post-Corbyn and have moved into the remain camp. For me it is significant who lines up on each side and the leave side does not impress me at all - Farage and UKIP, Galloway, the Daily Mail & Express, the fox-hunting maverick that is Kate Hoey etc etc.. Accepting that it is subjective opinion but it seems to me all the sane political forces are on the side of remain.
Boris is taking too long. if he comes out for remain now it looks very weak.
Cabinet meeting starts in 5 minutes, right? If he goes for it today he can say he was unimpressed by Cameron's reassurances. He can't leave it past today, though.
Boris won't be attending apparently, so one less spurious excuse available to him.
Very depressing. Future generations will ask why we didn't follow the Norwegian model for our North Sea bounty.
The Norwegian didn't have to use so much of the reward remodelling the economy which was built on heavy industry that was no longer competitive. The success of Britain over the last 30 years in remaining competitive in the world is based upon oil money.
Regardless of the outcome I'm surprised and disappointed how the referendum has developed into such a personality contest, especially among supposed political thinkers on here. So many people seem to be basing their vote on the stance of individuals which I find extraordinary.
99% of those actively involved are self serving, ignore them, make your judgement on the issues not the personalities involved.
The scenario is playing out exactly as predicted so far, it will be interesting when the smoking gun from the negotiations is found. I still refuse to predict the outcome and I'm not a trader but I'd suggest backing Leave today, the price between now and June will tighten at some stage.
Agreed about the personal contest aspect but it is a very complex issue and all the media spin (or more often than not lie) and distort the facts to suit their political agenda so most people will ultimately make their decision based on the politicians they trust most.
I am currently politically homeless having left Labour post-Corbyn and have moved into the remain camp. For me it is significant who lines up on each side and the leave side does not impress me at all - Farage and UKIP, Galloway, the Daily Mail & Express, the fox-hunting maverick that is Kate Hoey etc etc.. Accepting that it is subjective opinion but it seems to me all the sane political forces are on the side of remain.
Why might it be "sane" for us to remain part of the EU?
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Tim Stanley Belgian PM on Cameron's deal: "We are very, very far from the original British position."
He would say that wouldn't he. But everyone on all sides will say what they would say. What is written on a piece of paper is just dismissed as a few words that can be twisted or alternatively be gospel. We are reduced to fatuous idiocy.
Presumably Boris will finally pronounce today. Given the change of mood since Cameron's deal I am suspecting he will head for the In camp which given he has a europhile father , brother and sister is probably his natural home.
His wife won't be happy then. Could make for an interesting discussion across the breakfast table.
Sajid Javid will campaign for Britain to stay in the EU. The Business Secretary’s decision is a blow to the Leave camp which had been hopefully of recruiting him...
@JGForsyth: Sajid Javid backing IN a blow to the Out campaign. It had hoped that he would help persuade voters that Brexit wouldn't be bad for business
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
My sister reads the Mail. Frankly she thinks its garbage. She likes the puzzle pages. You need to get out into the real world more.
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Bit about differences has been removed. We will have to apply single rulebook in same way as ECB. Eurozone can add whatever it wants to single rulebook unilaterally.
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
Technically, I think mailonline is the Leave's strongest asset.
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
My sister reads the Mail. Frankly she thinks its garbage. She likes the puzzle pages. You need to get out into the real world more.
May's chances of being on the winning side are largely tied to whether ISIS manages another spectacular before the Referendum. If it is in the UK, she is toast anyway as Home Secretary. If there is another in mainland Europe before we vote, that is going to risk a backlash against the deal Cameron has negotiated regarding our borders.
The outcome of this Referendum is less down to what George Galloway does, more what some face-shrouded figures in Raqqa do...
While there will be some unprincipled people voting against their consciences for such concerns, its odd to me how accepted the view that must be the case for most senior people is. It's like a comfort blanket for some people, that all these people would have voted Leave, they would have dammit, but were too cowardly. When it seems more likely they were never Leavers in the first place. I wish more were, and based off the reported deal I'm unhappy so many think it is a good deal, but if they say they think it is one, I accept that, rather than assume they are doing it solely or principally to save their career or be on the winning side.
This highlights the real risk for the North Sea. There is some very expensive infrastructure that needs a lot of maintenance in place on which many of the smaller fields in the same basin feed. If the providers of that pull the plug a huge amount of the output is never coming back.
In Aberdeen house prices do not seem to have fallen much but volumes have collapsed. There are very few buyers and it is hard to see the resistance to lower prices continuing indefinitely. Tough times.
Very depressing. Future generations will ask why we didn't follow the Norwegian model for our North Sea bounty.
Only if they are economically illiterate. North Sea production completely dominated Norway's economy transforming it. The effect on the UK, in comparison, was relatively minor. There was an apparent improvement in out balance of trade for a while but this was offset by the petro-currency pushing the £ too high greatly damaging our onshore manufacturing. The government books were improved for a time but at the margins, not fundamentally like Norway. And we managed to improve our national debt ratios considerably until Brown blew it.
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Bit about differences has been removed. We will have to apply single rulebook in same way as ECB. Eurozone can add whatever it wants to single rulebook unilaterally.
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
George Galloway. What were they thinking? I have friends who would rather cut off their own testicles than be on the same side of the argument at him.
Well they can always move over and cosy up with Gerry Adams and John McDonnell
Snip
That's not the risk. The risk that our campaign continues to be utterly tone deaf.
Middle England is full of vague Remain-ers. Our task is to keep them at home. Putting George Galloway on stage makes that task harder.
It is profoundly depressing that your task is to keep them at home rather than convert them to the cause.
What cause? The promotion of Nigel Farage? Keeping the odious gurning twat in the limelight so he can pursue his later career as a celebrity reality shock jock? There I've said it.
In spite of all the claims that there's nothing of substance in it, I disagree. There is real meat on economic governance and sovereignty. I'm pleasantly surprised.
The one issue that really concerns me is TTIP. It is such a big issue for me that it could swing my vote. In an earlier draft there was reference to speedily concluding international trade deals (though TTIP was not mentioned by name). Thankfully that is now replaced in the final version by "The European Union will also pursue an active and ambitious trade policy." I can live with that.
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Bit about differences has been removed. We will have to apply single rulebook in same way as ECB. Eurozone can add whatever it wants to single rulebook unilaterally.
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
I don't think that's right. Here's the text in full:
The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, including the single rulebook as regards prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner than corresponding rules to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, specific provisions within the single rulebook and other relevant instruments may be necessary, while preserving the level-playing field and contributing to financial stability.
I actually have more respect for the Anna Soubrys of the world who always supported Remain. People like Javid and May who say they have been persuaded by this meagre deal just come over as dishonest careerists hoping to please their leader.
I actually have more respect for the Anna Soubrys of the world who always supported Remain. People like Javid and May who say they have been persuaded by this meagre deal just come over as dishonest careerists hoping to please their leader.
It will be interesting to see how tory members, many of whom campaigned for these people, take this.
Personally, I think some MPs are sitting on a powder keg.
@JGForsyth: Sajid Javid backing IN a blow to the Out campaign. It had hoped that he would help persuade voters that Brexit wouldn't be bad for business
A bigger blow to Out I'd suggest than losing our authoritarian Home Secretary. Remain's day is getting better all the time.
This highlights the real risk for the North Sea. There is some very expensive infrastructure that needs a lot of maintenance in place on which many of the smaller fields in the same basin feed. If the providers of that pull the plug a huge amount of the output is never coming back.
In Aberdeen house prices do not seem to have fallen much but volumes have collapsed. There are very few buyers and it is hard to see the resistance to lower prices continuing indefinitely. Tough times.
Very depressing. Future generations will ask why we didn't follow the Norwegian model for our North Sea bounty.
Only if they are economically illiterate. North Sea production completely dominated Norway's economy transforming it. The effect on the UK, in comparison, was relatively minor. There was an apparent improvement in out balance of trade for a while but this was offset by the petro-currency pushing the £ too high greatly damaging our onshore manufacturing. The government books were improved for a time but at the margins, not fundamentally like Norway. And we managed to improve our national debt ratios considerably until Brown blew it.
Its all a question of scale really.
On balance I think we would have kept more of our manufacturing industry if we'd invested the proceeds in overseas assets rather than spending it at home. Then again, we might have needed even higher interest rates to conquer inflation in that scenario.
"Any politician who’s ever described themselves as a 'Eurosceptic' will have a serious credibility problem if they claim they’ve had a change of heart because of this 'deal'"
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Bit about differences has been removed. We will have to apply single rulebook in same way as ECB. Eurozone can add whatever it wants to single rulebook unilaterally.
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
I don't think that's right. Here's the text in full:
The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, including the single rulebook as regards prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner than corresponding rules to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, specific provisions within the single rulebook and other relevant instruments may be necessary, while preserving the level-playing field and contributing to financial stability.
Exactly. Language about different provisions has been notably changed. France also has got the rulebook applied to not just banks but all financial institutions. So Eurozone can now regulate asset managers, hedge funds and privaty equity firms.
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
Sun has similar readership numbers AFAIK and they will be for Leave. Will hurt the key working class vote of Labour.
The Sun (and The Times) are somewhat difficult to call, for two reasons. Firstly, they always like to be on the winning side, and will therefore defer a decision until the last possible moment. Secondly, the Murdochs are in the process of trying to build out Sky across Europe; they're the number one Pay TV platform in the UK, Germany and Italy, and they want to buy up assets in Spain and France too. Beyond a certain continent-wide market share, you start getting into EU Competition Authority territory. For this reason, I suspect they may huff and puff, and then - once the EU has caved - reluctantly come out for Remain. (Thus, indirectly, showing David Cameron how a negotiation should be handled...)
On topic, I'm impervious to Galloway's charms, and don't understand those who aren't, but I don't think his GO starring role amounts to a + or - hill of beans. GG's barking debating performance during the Indy campaign didn't change anything after all, though it was entertaining seeing Yoons spin him as an asset. Agree with others that Leave needs some likeable star quality plus intellectual depth; perhaps (hideous thought) a genetic mash up of Boris and Gove?
The PM's deal on the face of it looks quite good for Remain. If I wasn’t paying attention and just heard the soundbites - I'd be reassured.
How long it takes to be picked apart by the press/and voters will notice... Who knows.
It sounds good. But actually it's a rehash of the status-quo on the pound, "ever-closer union" and the single market.
The social security aspect is very highly limited and a one-off. Child benefit is the only real win. The red-card is meaningless in practice as the threshold is so high it'll never be used.
If it does get past the EU parliament and make it, intact, into a future treaty it will (at best) move the de-facto status quo to a de-jure status quo and require the rest of the EU to take due account of the concerns of the UK in any future decisions, without committing them to do anything.
While there will be some unprincipled people voting against their consciences for such concerns, its odd to me how accepted the view that must be the case for most senior people is. It's like a comfort blanket for some people, that all these people would have voted Leave, they would have dammit, but were too cowardly. When it seems more likely they were never Leavers in the first place. I wish more were, and based off the reported deal I'm unhappy so many think it is a good deal, but if they say they think it is one, I accept that, rather than assume they are doing it solely or principally to save their career or be on the winning side.
Was anyone ever convinced by Javid's euroscepticism, it never seemed genuine to me. Would be interesting to hear what part of Cameron's negotiations caused him to change his position of thinking the costs of staying in outweighed the benefits.
Has the deal been published on the web yet? It deserves the same foresic analysis the draft agreement got.
Questions such as, which parts will never in practice see the light of day, have protections for the City been weakened, are British citizens worse off, will the courts strike most of it down anyway, etc, All the points that have been raised on PB since the draft agreement was revealed.
The Daily Mail are in a bad mood and ripping Cameron and the deal to shreds already. Who cares? I hear it said.
Like it or not the Mail is read in paper form and online form by one hell of a lot of people and they won't be interested in the detail one way or another only the headline.
The Daily Wail would have opposed the deal whatever Cameron achieved. Editor Paul Dacre is upset because Cam doesn't think he deserves a knighthood.
All possibly true, and all completely irrelevant. 10 million people are still reading it.
I think the Mail is Leave's strongest asset. It's the newspaper of choice for middle England.
Sun has similar readership numbers AFAIK and they will be for Leave. Will hurt the key working class vote of Labour.
The Sun (and The Times) are somewhat difficult to call, for two reasons. Firstly, they always like to be on the winning side, and will therefore defer a decision until the last possible moment. Secondly, the Murdochs are in the process of trying to build out Sky across Europe; they're the number one Pay TV platform in the UK, Germany and Italy, and they want to buy up assets in Spain and France too. Beyond a certain continent-wide market share, you start getting into EU Competition Authority territory. For this reason, I suspect they may huff and puff, and then - once the EU has caved - reluctantly come out for Remain. (Thus, indirectly, showing David Cameron how a negotiation should be handled...)
Murdoch's vision is also bigger than just owning newspapers and tv platforms and requires size / scale and access to as many markets as possible.
We'll see what Boris does. If he were the face and Gove the brains, it might work.
That said, Boris is on the record saying we should vote to leave, then stay in. It was bloody stupid and would seriously weaken his credibility if he campaigned to leave.
Regardless of the outcome I'm surprised and disappointed how the referendum has developed into such a personality contest, especially among supposed political thinkers on here. So many people seem to be basing their vote on the stance of individuals which I find extraordinary.
99% of those actively involved are self serving, ignore them, make your judgement on the issues not the personalities involved.
The scenario is playing out exactly as predicted so far, it will be interesting when the smoking gun from the negotiations is found. I still refuse to predict the outcome and I'm not a trader but I'd suggest backing Leave today, the price between now and June will tighten at some stage.
Agreed about the personal contest aspect but it is a very complex issue and all the media spin (or more often than not lie) and distort the facts to suit their political agenda so most people will ultimately make their decision based on the politicians they trust most.
I am currently politically homeless having left Labour post-Corbyn and have moved into the remain camp. For me it is significant who lines up on each side and the leave side does not impress me at all - Farage and UKIP, Galloway, the Daily Mail & Express, the fox-hunting maverick that is Kate Hoey etc etc.. Accepting that it is subjective opinion but it seems to me all the sane political forces are on the side of remain.
Why might it be "sane" for us to remain part of the EU?
The "sane" option for me is to remain within a 26 country trading block until such time that Leave can articulate a credible;e alternative. The type of independent UK envisaged by UKIP and Galloway has no appeal to me whatsoever.
From memory, the SNP stated it would cost £200 million to set up the entire apparatus of independence. It turns out it costs £600 million just to set up a welfare payments system. That's less than oil generates a year now, isn't it?
I was in a meeting yesterday with some contractors with long experience of the industry (as I do as well) and they stated that up to 85k jobs had been lost in the Aberdeen area ( this includes those who previously flew in to work) , restaurant takings down 50% , taxi takings down 40% and the housing market in extreme difficulties and virtually stagnant. Of course that is not indicative of Scotland as a whole but it is a major revenue stream for them as it also is further south.
This will not improve for this this years offshore season and it is very unlikely it will improve next year to any great extent even if the oil price should start an early recovery. A sustained period of 60 to 70 plus on Brent crude will be required just to start companies even considering the unstacking of rigs and assets now warm and even cold stacked.
There is too much previous investment out there for some recovery not to occur but the use of the word "decommission" is becoming more and more commonplace than previously. The landscape for the North Sea and in particular for Scotland is going to look considerably different by the time this is over as many of the previous players may not return or may no longer be in existence. I would have thought this has to shape the approach of the SNP to any immediate and even mid term demands and aspirations they may have. Secretly the SNP would be breathing a collective sigh of relief as this would have been the wrong time, there will be better moments in the future for what they wish to achieve.
This highlights the real risk for the North Sea. There is some very expensive infrastructure that needs a lot of maintenance in place on which many of the smaller fields in the same basin feed. If the providers of that pull the plug a huge amount of the output is never coming back.
In Aberdeen house prices do not seem to have fallen much but volumes have collapsed. There are very few buyers and it is hard to see the resistance to lower prices continuing indefinitely. Tough times.
Very depressing. Future generations will ask why we didn't follow the Norwegian model for our North Sea bounty.
The North Sea (and its oil) is roughly evenly split between Norway and the UK. They have 5m people and we have 60m.
What decision the Electoral Commission makes doesn't matter to me much, but I sincerely hope it doesn't choose GO.
I think the whole point of Galloway is to encourage the Electoral Commission to choose GO. One of their tests is about representing the cause from all strands of the political spectrum (or some such).
@JGForsyth: Sajid Javid backing IN a blow to the Out campaign. It had hoped that he would help persuade voters that Brexit wouldn't be bad for business
A bigger blow to Out I'd suggest than losing our authoritarian Home Secretary. Remain's day is getting better all the time.
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Bit about differences has been removed. We will have to apply single rulebook in same way as ECB. Eurozone can add whatever it wants to single rulebook unilaterally.
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
Yes. Status quo was better than this reform. The idea UK could have its own banking regulation has been settled definitively in France's favour and they've also managed to extend that control to entire UK finance sector, not just banks.
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
Is this true? I thought we were already subject to it. Isn't the more important part about differences/provisions within the single rule book?
Bit about differences has been removed. We will have to apply single rulebook in same way as ECB. Eurozone can add whatever it wants to single rulebook unilaterally.
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
I don't think that's right. Here's the text in full:
The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, including the single rulebook as regards prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner than corresponding rules to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, specific provisions within the single rulebook and other relevant instruments may be necessary, while preserving the level-playing field and contributing to financial stability.
When someone asked how Henry Moore sculpted a elephant he said 'you just chip away everything that doesn't look like an elephant.....'
If you apply the same thinking to the Leave campaign and you want to make them look like nutters and you start with Farage Gove Grayling IDS Redwood Cash and Galloway you woudn't really need to do any chipping
'As for the deal itself, the political question is whether there’s enough in it to enable politicians and activists to go out with conviction. On that score, I suspect it is.'
Rubbish - it's worth nothing and you know that perfectly well.
Comments
In Aberdeen house prices do not seem to have fallen much but volumes have collapsed. There are very few buyers and it is hard to see the resistance to lower prices continuing indefinitely. Tough times.
After your recent celebration of Ludlow's metropolitanism-I even heard rumour that the local Starbucks were thinking of taking on a Latvian-i wonderd which way Middle England was heading?
Are you an Outer or an Inner? 'What Ludlow does today'
....and Im keen to get my betting slip in early.
With men like Gove involved, they might learn to get better.
If the Minister of Silly Walk, Gove, supports the Nasties that is even better news.
However the more intelligent in Scotland i.e. everyone else, will miss the drop in revenues.
Ha ha ha ! How will he lead us out ? Walking ?
Had all four run in the second round, none would have achieved the 50% needed, and it's possible that with Redwood going backwards, Portillo might have positioned himself as being best able to unite the party against two pro-Euro candidates. Not saying it would have but it was a more interesting outcome than Clarke or Hezza.
Blair would have won in 1997 anyway.
Belgian PM on Cameron's deal: "We are very, very far from the original British position."
http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKCN0VS2SH?irpc=932
It says:
A - Economic Governance
(1) The EU can't discriminate against the pound, but we mustn't stop the eurozone integrating
(2) Banking union only applies to the eurozone. But a single rulebook is needed for the whole EU and for financial stability. These rules may require non-euro member states to change theirs and specific provisions may be necessary (doesn't say what)
(3) We don't have to bail out the eurozone
(4) Subject to the requirements of the EU, financial regulations of non-euro member states are up to them provided it doesn't clash with the single rulebook or threaten financial stability of the EU
(5) Informal meetings of non-euro member states can't be used to get round this and do over non-euro members
(6) Any member state can ask the President of the European Council for it to be discussed, if they have an issue with how this agreement is interpreted
(7) We'll put it in a future treaty
B - Competitiveness
We all agree the single markets is a wonderful thing. We will all make efforts to fully implement and strengthen the internal market, as well as to adapt it as needed. We'll aim for better regulation, lowering bureaucracy on small and medium businesses and repeal unnecessary legislation as agreed by the Commission. The EU will pursue an active and ambitious trade policy
C - Sovereignty
(1) In a future treaty it will be clear that ever-closer union does not apply to the UK, and existing treaties can't be used to legally extend EU competencies. Increasing or decreasing them requires all EU members states to agree in a treaty revision.
(2) Subsidiarity means taking decisions as close to the citizen as possible but if it has clear transnational aspects and EU level would produce benefits then the EU may choose to do it. If there's a reasonable objection by a national parliament, the EU may listen
(3) If there is an objection to subsidiarity, within 12 weeks of the draft, if 55% of national parliaments vote as such, the council presidency will include it for a discussion and withdraw unless amended to suit the concerns.
(4) Protocols annexed to treaties must be equal force - e.g. a measure adopted via Lisbon on freedom, security and justice doesn't apply if the member state has an opt-out, unless they want it to
(5) National security is up to the EU member state
D - Social Benefits and Free Movement
1a) Member states have broad discretion to define their own social security systems - on matters of overriding public interest, on a case-by-case basis, measures can be adopted proportionate to aim being pursued on public policy, health or security grounds
1b) If you are economically non-active free movement only applies if you can support yourself. If you are doing it just for benefits member states have possibility to refuse social benefits, unless they have residency.
1c) all persons exercising free movement must abide by law of member state. Public policy, security or criminal (e.g. shame marriages to 3rd country nationals) grounds can be used to take restrictive measures specific to individual concerned.
2a) Proposal for indexing of child benefits to member state where child resides for new claimants (date unspecified) and will apply to all claimants from 2020. But just child benefits; nothing else (e.g. pensions)
2b) Alert and safeguard mechanism for inflows of exceptional magnitude for member states, including due to past policies on EU enlargement. Member state must notify EU council and commission to show exceptional situation affecting primary purpose of social security system, in-work benefits or on public services. If council agrees, it may authorise access of new EU workers for up to 4 years with progressive "phase-in" - graduated up to match domestic levels - and apply for a maximum of 7 years.
2c) We note the UK is worried about future EU enlargement. We will cross that bridge when we come to it by all EU member states agreeing.
All the above shall take effect on the same date as the UK notifies the EU that it has decided to remain a member of the European Union.
May could have rocked the boat......
Home Secretary confirms she is IN
Worried the Sunday's will have time to unravel it ?
Fantastic.. I love Rees Mogg. Made me quite pleased that he walks on the traffic side of a lady, and gives her the best seat in a restaurant.. I thought all men did that?
The fav politician of my dad and I
In spite of all the claims that there's nothing of substance in it, I disagree. There is real meat on economic governance and sovereignty. I'm pleasantly surprised.
The one issue that really concerns me is TTIP. It is such a big issue for me that it could swing my vote. In an earlier draft there was reference to speedily concluding international trade deals (though TTIP was not mentioned by name). Thankfully that is now replaced in the final version by "The European Union will also pursue an active and ambitious trade policy." I can live with that.
https://www.politicshome.com/foreign-and-defence/articles/story/jeremy-corbyn-dismisses-eu-deal-irrelevant-tinkering
"The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market."
Eurozone now controls City of London. Hollande triumphed over Cameron. UK has agreed to stand aside from Eurozone integration and only protection he got was the ability to ask them to think again
I am currently politically homeless having left Labour post-Corbyn and have moved into the remain camp. For me it is significant who lines up on each side and the leave side does not impress me at all - Farage and UKIP, Galloway, the Daily Mail & Express, the fox-hunting maverick that is Kate Hoey etc etc.. Accepting that it is subjective opinion but it seems to me all the sane political forces are on the side of remain.
How long it takes to be picked apart by the press/and voters will notice... Who knows.
But everyone on all sides will say what they would say. What is written on a piece of paper is just dismissed as a few words that can be twisted or alternatively be gospel. We are reduced to fatuous idiocy.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/spectator-exclusive-sajid-javid-backs-staying-in-the-eu/
Fair play to Hollande. He has done what French leaders since Napoleon have tried to do and failed: bring the City of London to heel.
The outcome of this Referendum is less down to what George Galloway does, more what some face-shrouded figures in Raqqa do...
While there will be some unprincipled people voting against their consciences for such concerns, its odd to me how accepted the view that must be the case for most senior people is. It's like a comfort blanket for some people, that all these people would have voted Leave, they would have dammit, but were too cowardly. When it seems more likely they were never Leavers in the first place. I wish more were, and based off the reported deal I'm unhappy so many think it is a good deal, but if they say they think it is one, I accept that, rather than assume they are doing it solely or principally to save their career or be on the winning side.
Its all a question of scale really.
As for Javid, he's been unimpressive in the few times I've seen him on TV. Seems to have the perfect backstory, and nothing else.
There I've said it.
The single rulebook is to be applied by all credit institutions and other financial institutions in order to ensure the level-playing field within the internal market. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank in the exercise of its functions of single supervisor, or by the Single Resolution Board or Union bodies exercising similar functions, including the single rulebook as regards prudential requirements for credit institutions or other legislative measures to be adopted for the purpose of safeguarding financial stability, may need to be conceived in a more uniform manner than corresponding rules to be applied by national authorities of Member States that do not take part in the banking union. To this end, specific provisions within the single rulebook and other relevant instruments may be necessary, while preserving the level-playing field and contributing to financial stability.
Gove will make a statement on the EU later: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35617843
Boris still undecided.
Mr. Blue, that appears to say the ECB decides financial regulation.
Personally, I think some MPs are sitting on a powder keg.
The social security aspect is very highly limited and a one-off. Child benefit is the only real win. The red-card is meaningless in practice as the threshold is so high it'll never be used.
If it does get past the EU parliament and make it, intact, into a future treaty it will (at best) move the de-facto status quo to a de-jure status quo and require the rest of the EU to take due account of the concerns of the UK in any future decisions, without committing them to do anything.
We'll see what Boris does. If he were the face and Gove the brains, it might work.
That said, Boris is on the record saying we should vote to leave, then stay in. It was bloody stupid and would seriously weaken his credibility if he campaigned to leave.
If you apply the same thinking to the Leave campaign and you want to make them look like nutters and you start with Farage Gove Grayling IDS Redwood Cash and Galloway you woudn't really need to do any chipping
Rubbish - it's worth nothing and you know that perfectly well.