"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.
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.
If I were to put words into Galloways mouth it would be that he would do anything he could to recruit useful idiots to undermine the West.
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.
Indeed.
And there are plenty more like him as well.
It should come as no surprise that people who rise within and benefit from the corporatist establishment support the corporatist establishment.
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...)
But if you exclude UK wouldn't that mean Sky's "EU" market share would be lower and less likely to hit problem limit?
"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'"
That's why this weekend has *lots* of betting implications.
Watch Gove's statement very carefully later for signs of collaboration, with either Osborne or Boris. Also worth noting if more than 1/3rd of Tory MPs (111 MPs+) come out for Leave or not. Because, if they do, Osborne almost certainly can't "choose" his opponent. And I think the most credible courageous Leave Tory has a very good chance.
That means a Boris v. Osborne contest, if he doesn't cock it up.
The membership (assuming Feldman doesn't try and do over the voluntary party in his review, and I'm sure Osborne is helping him with that) will then be sorely tempted to vote for him.
Aristotle in his Rhetoric argues that in order to persuade and convince you need the right mixture of λόγος, πάθος, and έθος
Logos, pathos and ethos roughly translates as reason, emotion and authority.
It seems to me that LEAVE has a plentiful supply of emotional appeal but lacks in reason (eg what are the practical consequences of Brexit?) and authority (I discount the Daily Mail and Farage/Galloway/Gove).
On the other hand, REMAIN has reason and authority but is very lacking in emotion (though I have no doubt it will crank up fear). It's hard to be emotionally positive about the EU.
Neither side has the full three cards of successful persuasion though I suspect that LEAVE has the weaker hand. I don't think Boris will add much to the authority of the LEAVE side even though he is well liked.
"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 North Sea (and its oil) is roughly evenly split between Norway and the UK. They have 5m people and we have 60m.
Agreed. They also had a large scale power supply system based on hydroelectric so they didn't have to use so much of their oil and gas for power generation. Which all combined meant that they could almost immediately start exporting a far larger proportion of their oil to generate much larger revenues than those from production taxes alone.
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 [between Eurozone and non-Eurozone members]. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank [within the Eurozone]... 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 [to achieve further integration], while preserving the level-playing field and contributing to financial stability.
"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.
Well done, France !
Yes. Credit where credit is due. Hollande demonstrated how to represent national interest with hardline negotiating stance and willingness to walk away. Ran rings round Cameron.
"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.
Well done, France !
Yes. Credit where credit is due. Hollande demonstrated how to represent national interest with hardline negotiating stance and willingness to walk away. Ran rings round Cameron.
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...)
But if you exclude UK wouldn't that mean Sky's "EU" market share would be lower and less likely to hit problem limit?
That's a good question and I don't know the answer.
Right now, Sky Europe has two of the big four Eurozone countries. It would like to add the other two, and it would like to use its scale to revamp how all licensing deals for content (sport and movies) are written. They want no more 'country-by-country' deals, they want to be the $10bn bid for all Sony Pictures on TV across the continent, and the same for Premier League football and the like. It would then 'sublet' the rights out to Pay TV providers in countries where it does not have a presence.
I'm not sure us in, or us out makes that much difference to that vision. Having been 'helpful' to the EU "in its darkest hour" might well boost his chances.
Basically, Murdoch wants European politicians genuflecting to him as Blair did in 1996.
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
The North Sea (and its oil) is roughly evenly split between Norway and the UK. They have 5m people and we have 60m.
Agreed. They also had a large scale power supply system based on hydroelectric so they didn't have to use so much of their oil and gas for power generation. Which all combined meant that they could almost immediately start exporting a far larger proportion of their oil to generate much larger revenues than those from production taxes alone.
Much more eloquently (and accurately) put than me!
"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.
I still think that is a narrow reading. Again, is this so different to the status quo? We're already bound by MiFid, Solvency II etc. A majority of our financial services regulation is already European in origin. Our banks are already subject to some (but not all) rules.
The text mentions 'specific provisions' (clearly not the same as uniform) and Eurozone rules 'may need to be more uniform'. This allows for variation.
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
"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.
Well done, France !
Yes. Credit where credit is due. Hollande demonstrated how to represent national interest with hardline negotiating stance and willingness to walk away. Ran rings round Cameron.
Life imitating art. Hacker: Don't we ever get our own way with the French? Sir Humphrey: Well, sometimes. Hacker: When was the last time? Sir Humphrey: Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
I didn't pick up before but text referring to "further legislative measures" on finance makes it clear Eurozone wants to go further in bringing in new EU wide law.
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...)
But if you exclude UK wouldn't that mean Sky's "EU" market share would be lower and less likely to hit problem limit?
That's a good question and I don't know the answer.
Right now, Sky Europe has two of the big four Eurozone countries. It would like to add the other two, and it would like to use its scale to revamp how all licensing deals for content (sport and movies) are written. They want no more 'country-by-country' deals, they want to be the $10bn bid for all Sony Pictures on TV across the continent, and the same for Premier League football and the like. It would then 'sublet' the rights out to Pay TV providers in countries where it does not have a presence.
I'm not sure us in, or us out makes that much difference to that vision. Having been 'helpful' to the EU "in its darkest hour" might well boost his chances.
Basically, Murdoch wants European politicians genuflecting to him as Blair did in 1996.
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 hope that REMAIN make good use of Anna Soubry. She's one of the very few pro-EU high profile politicians who has the guts and integrity to promote rather than just defend the cause. She's easily my favourite present day politician.
Its very much starting to look as if Sajid Javed's rise is far more down to his background than his character and talents.
Very, very unfortunate.
When I have seen him being interviewed I have been underwhelmed and wondered what all the fuss was about. Whereas Priti Patel and Andrea Leadsom have far more in the way of verbal cojones.
"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?
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.
I still think that is a narrow reading. Again, is this so different to the status quo? We're already bound by MiFid, Solvency II etc. A majority of our financial services regulation is already European in origin. Our banks are already subject to some (but not all) rules.
The text mentions 'specific provisions' (clearly not the same as uniform) and Eurozone rules 'may need to be more uniform'. This allows for variation.
Leavers are adopting the Queen of Hearts policy of words meaning what they want them to mean. Absolutely anything could be out on paper and it would mean what they say it does.
'Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.'
Indeed. She's only interested in her own advancement.
That handover of power also of course involved sidestepping the so-called 'referendum lock'. A clue to just how seriously the government takes the supposed safeguards it has just 'negotiated'.
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 hope that REMAIN make good use of Anna Soubry. She's one of the very few pro-EU high profile politicians who has the guts and integrity to promote rather than just defend the cause. She's easily my favourite present day politician.
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
I never liked May. Good riddance.
The Boo'ers are not in a good mood ! Wait for Boris come lately. He may come out with something in Latin.
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.
The North Sea (and its oil) is roughly evenly split between Norway and the UK. They have 5m people and we have 60m.
Agreed. They also had a large scale power supply system based on hydroelectric so they didn't have to use so much of their oil and gas for power generation. Which all combined meant that they could almost immediately start exporting a far larger proportion of their oil to generate much larger revenues than those from production taxes alone.
Leavers are adopting the Queen of Hearts policy of words meaning what they want them to mean. Absolutely anything could be out on paper and it would mean what they say it does.
No that is the policy adopted by the ECJ. Remember them? The ones who interpret the rulebook in favour of Ever Closer Union. You really think they are going to look at what has been agreed and not side with the Eurozone?
Across the pond, Rubio's in to 2.9. Trump should win a comfortable victory and Rubio might pull a rabbit to get the momentum despite coming second or even third.
Not sure if I'll be able to stay up, but third on <20% should mean a sell for Rubio.
@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.
What do you guys see in him ? He is a non-entity.
Being a Liberal Democrat I don't see anything in him but he is business secretary and as such will be useful for the Remain campaign.
Thought that Salmond made a great point on breakfast time in scale of child benefit concessions at £30 million compared to the £3,000 million being negotiated between the Scottish Government and the Treasury and also that what people say before a referendum and afterwards can be two entirely different things.
If Cameron can't keep his pre-referendum commitments to Scotland why should 27 other EU Governments keep their pre-referendum commitments on future Treaty change to Cameron?
"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.
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.
I still think that is a narrow reading. Again, is this so different to the status quo? We're already bound by MiFid, Solvency II etc. A majority of our financial services regulation is already European in origin. Our banks are already subject to some (but not all) rules.
The text mentions 'specific provisions' (clearly not the same as uniform) and Eurozone rules 'may need to be more uniform'. This allows for variation.
Specific was done to remove different. It just means language of laws might have to be changed to achieve the same things in different legal systems. Yes, we're boundby some international rules already, but the big ones require unanimity and only applied to banks. Now anything included in rulebook or even "other legislative measures" on finance can be pushed through by Eurozone. And it hits all the smaller non bank outfits that really achieve success for City.
I see lots of self serving politicians acting in their own, rather than the Nation's interests today. Suckered into keeping their current jobs, or picking up new ones. No doubt the dithering Boris Johnson will follow them down the path later.
Galloway signing up to Leave is the kiss of death to that campaign.
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
I never liked May. Good riddance.
I think that is a mistake. LEAVE would have benefited hugely from having May on board and whilst I don't think it was ever realistic to think she would be in favour of LEAVE, it is still a loss.
Thought that Salmond made a great point on breakfast time in scale of child benefit concessions at £30 million compared to the £3,000 million being negotiated between the Scottish Government and the Treasury and also that what people say before a referendum and afterwards can be two entirely different things.
If Cameron can't keep his pre-referendum commitments to Scotland why should 27 other EU Governments keep their pre-referendum commitments on future Treaty change to Cameron?
Stopping the child benefit was giving raw meat to the scavengers [ the Boo'ers ].
I read somewhere that it was only 34000 cases. Really pathetic to take in on children.
Even Cameron knows that Poles and other East Europeans are not coming here to get an extra £20 quid per week.
I don't know why everyone is so concerned. If you'd read the link hunchman put up on Thursday, you'd know that the euro is going to end on august 9th this year.
And I can't see the EU surviving the destruction of the Euro
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
I never liked May. Good riddance.
I think that is a mistake. LEAVE would have benefited hugely from having May on board and whilst I don't think it was ever realistic to think she would be in favour of LEAVE, it is still a loss.
But look at his comment. He is more interested in civil war. Dear oh lord it's too pathetic for words. The venom will only just have got started if Leave win. Under those circumstances it might make sense to join the EEA, but the hysterical venom and prejudice will only have gotten started.
I don't know why everyone is so concerned. If you'd read the link hunchman put up on Thursday, you'd know that the euro is going to end on august 9th this year.
And I can't see the EU surviving the destruction of the Euro
Is that 84 year Pork Pie or 72 year Apple Turnover cycle?
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
I never liked May. Good riddance.
I think that is a mistake. LEAVE would have benefited hugely from having May on board and whilst I don't think it was ever realistic to think she would be in favour of LEAVE, it is still a loss.
The referendum is forcing senior politicians to lay some cards on the table.
For that, at least, we should I suppose be grateful.
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.
Not sure why anyone is too surprised about May going for Remain. She was after all in charge of one of the largest handovers of sovereignty in the last few years when she signed up to much of the EU Justice and Policing programme.
I never liked May. Good riddance.
I think that is a mistake. LEAVE would have benefited hugely from having May on board and whilst I don't think it was ever realistic to think she would be in favour of LEAVE, it is still a loss.
But look at his comment. He is more interested in civil war. Dear oh lord it's too pathetic for words. The venom will only just have got started if Leave win. Under those circumstances it might make sense to join the EEA, but the hysterical venom and prejudice will only have gotten started.
I don't know why everyone is so concerned. If you'd read the link hunchman put up on Thursday, you'd know that the euro is going to end on august 9th this year.
And I can't see the EU surviving the destruction of the Euro
August 9th is a Tuesday. I wonder what is the significance. This has really got me thinking.
'Now anything included in rulebook or even "other legislative measures" on finance can be pushed through by Eurozone. And it hits all the smaller non bank outfits that really achieve success for City.'
I agree - this looks like a very serious defeat for the government and the City.
It's incredible that the PM and FO can be so desperate for a deal that they are willing to sell out our most successful industry.
This is Ted Heath's fishing sell-out multiplied by a factor of 50. Not just City workers but anyone owning property in the SE of England should be terrified by this.
I see lots of self serving politicians acting in their own, rather than the Nation's interests today. Suckered into keeping their current jobs, or picking up new ones. No doubt the dithering Boris Johnson will follow them down the path later.
Galloway signing up to Leave is the kiss of death to that campaign.
Morning all,
I suppose Boris is timing his return from the mount with his final decision for maximum PR effect. In time for the Sunday morning politics shows? Or hit the new first thing on Monday?
I see lots of self serving politicians acting in their own, rather than the Nation's interests today. Suckered into keeping their current jobs, or picking up new ones. No doubt the dithering Boris Johnson will follow them down the path later.
Galloway signing up to Leave is the kiss of death to that campaign.
It's not that Galloway wants the UK to leave the EU. He has his motives. It's that Leave invited him as a special headline speaker. Anyone heard from David Davis this morning? Where was Carswell? Why are no Leavers asking about Carswell? Is it that he actually supports immigration?
'Now anything included in rulebook or even "other legislative measures" on finance can be pushed through by Eurozone. And it hits all the smaller non bank outfits that really achieve success for City.'
I agree - this looks like a very serious defeat for the government and the City.
It's incredible that the PM and FO can be so desperate for a deal that they are willing to sell out our most successful industry.
This is Ted Heath's fishing sell-out multiplied by a factor of 50. Not just City workers but anyone owning property in the SE of England should be terrified by this.
It will be interesting to see how certain PBers who for years emphasised the importance of protection for the City now justify there EVERCLOSERUNION support.
@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.
What do you guys see in him ? He is a non-entity.
Being a Liberal Democrat I don't see anything in him but he is business secretary and as such will be useful for the Remain campaign.
He is no more anonymous than Cable. The business dept is a non dept with not much eye catching to say.
It will be interesting to see how certain PBers who for years emphasised the importance of protection for the City now justify there EVERCLOSERUNION support.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less'
The North Sea (and its oil) is roughly evenly split between Norway and the UK. They have 5m people and we have 60m.
Agreed. They also had a large scale power supply system based on hydroelectric so they didn't have to use so much of their oil and gas for power generation. Which all combined meant that they could almost immediately start exporting a far larger proportion of their oil to generate much larger revenues than those from production taxes alone.
I hadn't thought of that. Interesting.
More like bollox, they did not have a shedload of nuclear power stations that provided all their energy needs. UK just pissed it up a wall on unemployment and refurbishing London and South East.
It has been a while since I ventured into the noisy Tory echo chamber, but FWIW, I think two things have happened. Firstly Cameron has realised that there is literally no good way to leave the EU and has therefore decided some time ago to put all his political capital on remain. The second is that there really are a significant number of mostly poorly educated and mostly English voters who could vote leave and break the EU and indeed the UK. Cameron is, however a very lucky politician, and even though it is a gamble, it is one that he certainly can win. With the possible exception of Gove, those lining up with Leave are the usual suspects. In fact the Leave camp are shaping up as a bunch of total losers. Murdoch will not go with the flapping of the white coats brigade, and in the end Cameron's luck will hold.
I see lots of self serving politicians acting in their own, rather than the Nation's interests today. Suckered into keeping their current jobs, or picking up new ones. No doubt the dithering Boris Johnson will follow them down the path later.
Galloway signing up to Leave is the kiss of death to that campaign.
Morning all,
I suppose Boris is timing his return from the mount with his final decision for maximum PR effect. In time for the Sunday morning politics shows? Or hit the new first thing on Monday?
If he does anything over than back Leave, it's game over for him now.
He's ramped expectations far too high, even if he does think he can pull off the trick I posted yesterday.
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 hope that REMAIN make good use of Anna Soubry. She's one of the very few pro-EU high profile politicians who has the guts and integrity to promote rather than just defend the cause. She's easily my favourite present day politician.
Do you think her pro-euro sentiments rule her out entirely from the leadership? BF don't even have her on the board.
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.
It's also a matter of politics - in the 60s and 70s, in the UK, the idea of putting money gained by the Treasury into a fund investing (nearly entirely) overseas would have been a political non-starter of epic proportions.
I see lots of self serving politicians acting in their own, rather than the Nation's interests today. Suckered into keeping their current jobs, or picking up new ones. No doubt the dithering Boris Johnson will follow them down the path later.
Galloway signing up to Leave is the kiss of death to that campaign.
It's not that Galloway wants the UK to leave the EU. He has his motives. It's that Leave invited him as a special headline speaker. Anyone heard from David Davis this morning? Where was Carswell? Why are no Leavers asking about Carswell? Is it that he actually supports immigration?
The fact LEAVE is in complete disarray is a point I would readily concede to you. Complete disarray.
But I think the deal is a total stinker, and extremely vulnerable to events in the next few months.
Its very much starting to look as if Sajid Javed's rise is far more down to his background than his character and talents.
Very, very unfortunate.
When I have seen him being interviewed I have been underwhelmed and wondered what all the fuss was about. Whereas Priti Patel and Andrea Leadsom have far more in the way of verbal cojones.
'Now anything included in rulebook or even "other legislative measures" on finance can be pushed through by Eurozone. And it hits all the smaller non bank outfits that really achieve success for City.'
I agree - this looks like a very serious defeat for the government and the City.
It's incredible that the PM and FO can be so desperate for a deal that they are willing to sell out our most successful industry.
This is Ted Heath's fishing sell-out multiplied by a factor of 50. Not just City workers but anyone owning property in the SE of England should be terrified by this.
I wonder how many people in the UK actually produce wealth? (Given that all labour is, in principle, replaceable by machines & computer programmes, the answer can only be entrepreneurs.) There are 600,000 business start-ups annually, of which 95% are failures.
So if we take the number of successful start-ups in the last decade as a proxy for the number of wealth creators - and I'll be glad to stand corrected if anyone has a better one - then the country would be richer if the overwhelming majority of us dropped off our perches.
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 hope that REMAIN make good use of Anna Soubry. She's one of the very few pro-EU high profile politicians who has the guts and integrity to promote rather than just defend the cause. She's easily my favourite present day politician.
Do you think her pro-euro sentiments rule her out entirely from the leadership? BF don't even have her on the board.
That's fair enough. Soubry's views are reasonably close to mine so I'm bound to be a bit biased. Though I think she'd be equally impressive even if I didn't share her views as she's quite a rarity in the 21st century as a politician who actually believes in the things that she says.
It has been a while since I ventured into the noisy Tory echo chamber, but FWIW, I think two things have happened. Firstly Cameron has realised that there is literally no good way to leave the EU and has therefore decided some time ago to put all his political capital on remain. The second is that there really are a significant number of mostly poorly educated and mostly English voters who could vote leave and break the EU and indeed the UK. Cameron is, however a very lucky politician, and even though it is a gamble, it is one that he certainly can win. With the possible exception of Gove, those lining up with Leave are the usual suspects. In fact the Leave camp are shaping up as a bunch of total losers. Murdoch will not go with the flapping of the white coats brigade, and in the end Cameron's luck will hold.
Not so sure about Murdoch. He has Gove as cover, as he tweeted pretty much this morning.
As for Cameron, how the hell did he allow himself to be in this position in the first place - as Phil Collins pointed out in yesterday's Times.
Gove is a neocon. One of the big pushers for the Iraq invasion. A most dangerous man and one to be seriously frightened of if he ever gets any further up the political ladder. It's not at all surprising that he should prefer US Republicans to our European partners.
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 hope that REMAIN make good use of Anna Soubry. She's one of the very few pro-EU high profile politicians who has the guts and integrity to promote rather than just defend the cause. She's easily my favourite present day politician.
Do you think her pro-euro sentiments rule her out entirely from the leadership? BF don't even have her on the board.
She is good ! [ I hope Nick is not reading. ]
And in a safer seat than it was in May, judging by Thursday night's two Broxtowe local by-elections. Roughly 3% swing towards Tories. As far as I'm aware there were no major local factors at play, so this is a reasonable on-the-ground poll of middle england sentiments at the moment.
Do you think her pro-euro sentiments rule her out entirely from the leadership? BF don't even have her on the board.
Yes, I think they rule her out in pretty much exactly the same way as they always ruled out Ken Clarke. I think you'd be right not to waste a penny on her as a leadership prospect. I wish it were otherwise but it is how it is.
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.
Mobile phone charges !
Roaming charges can be avoided by getting a local SIM card.
I wonder how many people in the UK actually produce wealth? (Given that all labour is, in principle, replaceable by machines & computer programmes, the answer can only be entrepreneurs.) There are 600,000 business start-ups annually, of which 95% are failures.
So if we take the number of successful start-ups in the last decade as a proxy for the number of wealth creators - and I'll be glad to stand corrected if anyone has a better one - then the country would be richer if the overwhelming majority of us dropped off our perches.
Where have I misdirected myself?
Emphasis added - n the real world, plenty of people create wealth.
Do you think her pro-euro sentiments rule her out entirely from the leadership? BF don't even have her on the board.
Yes, I think they rule her out in pretty much exactly the same way as they always ruled out Ken Clarke. I think you'd be right not to waste a penny on her as a leadership prospect. I wish it were otherwise but it is how it is.
The party might change. I'm thinking time after next. If Remain wins by a decent wodge then leaving the EU is out for a generation and a waste of time debating for the foreseeable. Perhaps other matters will come to the fore with the membership?
Imo Boris is looking for an opportunity to extricate himself from the BOO losers - hence any little morsel from Cameron about sovereignty tomorrow will provide him with his cover to escape.
Comments
And there are plenty more like him as well.
It should come as no surprise that people who rise within and benefit from the corporatist establishment support the corporatist establishment.
That's why this weekend has *lots* of betting implications.
Watch Gove's statement very carefully later for signs of collaboration, with either Osborne or Boris. Also worth noting if more than 1/3rd of Tory MPs (111 MPs+) come out for Leave or not. Because, if they do, Osborne almost certainly can't "choose" his opponent. And I think the most credible courageous Leave Tory has a very good chance.
That means a Boris v. Osborne contest, if he doesn't cock it up.
The membership (assuming Feldman doesn't try and do over the voluntary party in his review, and I'm sure Osborne is helping him with that) will then be sorely tempted to vote for him.
Logos, pathos and ethos roughly translates as reason, emotion and authority.
It seems to me that LEAVE has a plentiful supply of emotional appeal but lacks in reason (eg what are the practical consequences of Brexit?) and authority (I discount the Daily Mail and Farage/Galloway/Gove).
On the other hand, REMAIN has reason and authority but is very lacking in emotion (though I have no doubt it will crank up fear). It's hard to be emotionally positive about the EU.
Neither side has the full three cards of successful persuasion though I suspect that LEAVE has the weaker hand. I don't think Boris will add much to the authority of the LEAVE side even though he is well liked.
Honestly, my heart sinks on this subject. If ever they needed good PR it's now, and they haven't.
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 [between Eurozone and non-Eurozone members]. Substantive Union law to be applied by the European Central Bank [within the Eurozone]... 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 [to achieve further integration], while preserving the level-playing field and contributing to financial stability.
And with that, I must be off for a bit.
That's why there were the threats against her from D'Ancona in the Evening Standard in January, amongst other things.
Very, very unfortunate.
Boris to remain tight-lipped until Cameron's Marr appearance tomorrow, when he sets out sovereignty plan. Popcorn
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2016/02/christopher-howarth-an-analysis-of-camerons-deal-in-sum-theres-little-new-and-its-business-as-usual.html
Olly Letwin backing Remain
Boris Johnson
Right now, Sky Europe has two of the big four Eurozone countries. It would like to add the other two, and it would like to use its scale to revamp how all licensing deals for content (sport and movies) are written. They want no more 'country-by-country' deals, they want to be the $10bn bid for all Sony Pictures on TV across the continent, and the same for Premier League football and the like. It would then 'sublet' the rights out to Pay TV providers in countries where it does not have a presence.
I'm not sure us in, or us out makes that much difference to that vision. Having been 'helpful' to the EU "in its darkest hour" might well boost his chances.
Basically, Murdoch wants European politicians genuflecting to him as Blair did in 1996.
He's bottling it.
The text mentions 'specific provisions' (clearly not the same as uniform) and Eurozone rules 'may need to be more uniform'. This allows for variation.
Hacker: Don't we ever get our own way with the French?
Sir Humphrey: Well, sometimes.
Hacker: When was the last time?
Sir Humphrey: Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
Ken Clarke backing Remain
Whereas Priti Patel and Andrea Leadsom have far more in the way of verbal cojones.
The joys of watching Nats defend the Union deploying the tactics of 'Project Fear'.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35617232
Indeed. She's only interested in her own advancement.
That handover of power also of course involved sidestepping the so-called 'referendum lock'. A clue to just how seriously the government takes the supposed safeguards it has just 'negotiated'.
At least we can say the deal is rubbish. We have given up a veto in exchange for nothing.
Not sure if I'll be able to stay up, but third on <20% should mean a sell for Rubio.
If Cameron can't keep his pre-referendum commitments to Scotland why should 27 other EU Governments keep their pre-referendum commitments on future Treaty change to Cameron?
Galloway signing up to Leave is the kiss of death to that campaign.
What did Cam say ? "Fruitcakes, loonies............."
I read somewhere that it was only 34000 cases. Really pathetic to take in on children.
Even Cameron knows that Poles and other East Europeans are not coming here to get an extra £20 quid per week.
And I can't see the EU surviving the destruction of the Euro
For that, at least, we should I suppose be grateful.
I agree - this looks like a very serious defeat for the government and the City.
It's incredible that the PM and FO can be so desperate for a deal that they are willing to sell out our most successful industry.
This is Ted Heath's fishing sell-out multiplied by a factor of 50. Not just City workers but anyone owning property in the SE of England should be terrified by this.
I suppose Boris is timing his return from the mount with his final decision for maximum PR effect. In time for the Sunday morning politics shows? Or hit the new first thing on Monday?
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less'
He's ramped expectations far too high, even if he does think he can pull off the trick I posted yesterday.
But I think the deal is a total stinker, and extremely vulnerable to events in the next few months.
http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2015/09/12/it-shouldn-t-happen-to-a-radio-presenter-36-when-a-politician-insists-on-sticking-to-a-script-yes-you-priti-patel
So if we take the number of successful start-ups in the last decade as a proxy for the number of wealth creators - and I'll be glad to stand corrected if anyone has a better one - then the country would be richer if the overwhelming majority of us dropped off our perches.
Where have I misdirected myself?
A short term stop and then reinstated?
Clearly they are putting their career over principles..... or maybe it's something else?
As for Cameron, how the hell did he allow himself to be in this position in the first place - as Phil Collins pointed out in yesterday's Times.
(Posted from Tallinn using a Tele2 SIM card.)