Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why I’m betting that it’ll be next July at the earliest bef
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why I’m betting that it’ll be next July at the earliest before Article 50 is inovoked
Several bookies, including Betfair, have got markets up on when, if ever, Article 50 will be invoked. This is, of course, the formal process that would see the exit of the UK from the EU.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Membership of the Common Fisheries policy? Freedom of Movement? Tariff free trade?
A couple more plusses for her is that she sunk Gove and Osborne without trace.
Can she go on like this?
So no point starting negotiations in earnest till then.
And as to the Sturgeon question, who cares? Nobody will ask her to "accept" the negotiated settlement. That's not her job nor will it ever be.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnWvDz6W8AAI1Y3.jpg
FPT:
1. I'm a Mark Carney fan. He should stay. He's not perfect (I love the 'unreliable boyfriend' moniker) but he's very competent and calming.
2. Getting obsessed about Obama's choice of words is getting very close to tinfoil territory. Sad to see on PB. The US has always had its Anglophile/phobe split. We may or may not be at the front/back of the queue/line.
3. We project anything we like on to our opposition re EUref. In the interests of fairness, I'm sure there are a body of Leavers who can't wait to deport all the muslims, based on some fairly loopy half-logic. How many? No idea. PB is awash with free trade sovereignistas. Can't believe we're representative of the populace at large.
On topic. May originally said end of year. Davis has said end of the year, beginning of next. Don't think we'll get away with anything longer.
Hence the pissed off *unreliable boyfriend* moniker.
I'm AMAZED you think this is either big or clever behaviour.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-14/uk-now-front-queue-america-rushes-pass-trade-deal
You are Scott_P and I claim 5Euros
Perhaps you can cite Rupert Myers and a host of Guardian journalists plus David Aaronovitch as well.
Seriously. Do you want our country to fail or to make the best of the democratic wish of the people?
Pravda reported that Khrushchev came in second. Nixon was next to last.
Mr. StClare, I agree.
* Have informal chats with Merkel and any other leader who seems like they might have something useful to add.
* Make a point of publicly and repeatedly snubbing Juncker and Tusk and Schultz, and make sure they know, and everybody knows they know they will have no part in the talks.
* Wait for Hollande and (maybe Merkel) to die.
* Invoke A50 late next year, start formal negotiations.
* After two years, call a general election to approve the terms of the negotiated settlement.
I totally understand the desire for SIndy. I fail to grasp why they'd want EU membership at all.
Freedom of Movement is one of those utopian schemes, like abolishing private property, that doesn't end well.
Like it or not, Brexit creates economic uncertainty. The governor is right to point that out, to not do so would be farcical. You call it "talking down the economy" I call it realism. I voted to leave, but was under no impression that it would be easy or with no cost. People who pretend that it is are kidding themselves and not to be trusted. It makes me very, very nervous about David Davis as Minister for Brexit. We need cold hard realism, not unrealistic optimism.
Now we've had the result, he seems to be saying mostly sensible things (granted this month's MPC report is odd), and doing sensible things. Our banks are in much better shape than before. His challenge is that there just aren't many tools left in the box.
Mild mannered soul that I am, I reserve my ire for Osborne and the terrible Treasury model that gave us the £4,300 per household nonsense.
Surprised he has lasted so long.
The vast majority of the country aren't so interested in your personal pay packets. We want a good balanced economy - not one that suits ones who already earn a huge living.
Hopefully it will drive them to have another referendum, but I doubt Nicola, will ever reach a high enough level of certainty to raise the courage to try and trigger one.
I believe that the UK's current CFP set up was negotiated as part of the UK's EU rebate. Since Scotland possesses the majority of the UK's fishing waters, I'm sure it would play a part in any hypothetical future negotiation of Scottish EU membership. However it's not something I've thought obsessively about.
I can take a view that they would be mad to join the EU, but it really isn't my business, any more than Albania's accession is.
I guess we're about to find out just how real the average Tory's attachment to the Union truly is.
Seeking the Cruz vote whilst he goes for NY liberals?
I expected a black woman a la Condi.
For all the obsession with culture wars/identity politics I still believe that the economics will be the determining factor.
One career path for girls.
What matters is having the right person for the job, I'm certain that Carney is the right person. Everyone else I know also thinks that. You don't like him becauae he backed remain. He's a central banker, they will always back economic security over uncertainty. The leave vote makes his job of holding the UK banking system together much more difficult. Yet he's managing it with great confidence and very few problems. The £150bn stimulus was a great innovation that the likes of Merve wouldn't have come up with, the forward guidance on reactivating the fund for lending is another one that will help banks continue to have confidence to keep lending to UK businesses.
Carney has produced tangible monetary policies since the vote that will keep the banking sector healthy and keep our show on the road until we have a firm policy position. He has done a good job, what you call negativity is realism, nothing more. You don't like that he is calling Brexit as economically sub-optimal. Well it is and I say that having voted and campaigned for leave.
It is VERY hard to read what May really wants. Her remarks on not invoking A50 until Scotland agrees (indicating EEA type brexit) flies in the face of her cabinet brexit appointments (indicating Full English Brexit).
The voters of England and Wales have given a very clear message what they want to happen and it's at odds with the very clear message Scotland has given. This means, regrettably, that the circle can't be squared so we're going to have to break up the UK.
The only other way to proceed is to ignore the clear message given by voters in one or other parts of the Union, but the political price for that isn't worth contemplating for either Nicola (if Scotland is ignored) or Theresa (if England is ignored)
Being British was more important to both.
I'm baffled as to why the PM appointed DD to this role. Surely Liam Fox would have been a better candidate? He seems much more grounded and realistic.
For my part I want to make the best of the democratic wish of the people. Given they have rejected by far the best option, full membership of the EU, we have now to choose between two really quite poor basic options. I don't think it's helpful to fold my arms and say they are both bad and I wouldn't have chosen either of them. We have to trade off the negatives and select the best, or least damaging, remaining option
Essentially the options can be described as Hard Brexit, bilateral, FTA, "Canada" on the one hand and Soft Brexit, multilateral, EEA, "Norway" on the other.
As a supporter of full EU membership you might expect me to favour soft Brexit as being least change. The problem is, I don't think it will work. It has all the features that people object to in the EU with a couple of extra disadvantages. On the other hand, hard exit is very uncertain. Bilateral arrangements are very hard work and much less effective than multilateral one when you can get them. "Canada" doesn't even exist yet. The CETA has hit headwinds with a number of EU states raising legitimate, if minor, issues. Imagine what will happen with a UK deal, which is much more controversial. It could get bogged down forever, unless we say, fine we will fold on your every issue. If we go for hard exit we possibly need to plan for WTO outer orbit and any deal we get is a bonus. But that's going to be a major shock for a trading nation. Alternatively go for EEA as is and suck it up. Alternatively stay in the EU departure lounge until something shows up, if it does.
As I say, they are all worse than what we had and which we have rejected. We need to choose one of the options and make the best of it. But it isn't a straightforward and obvious choice.
http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/07/meet-the-new-team-at-number-ten.html
Brexit is his one and only chance to shape the countries destiny for decades, maybe centuries to come... And he'll be able to do it while Cameron looks on from the sidelines.
This is an entirely different scenario to when he was the "runt of litter" in Cameron and Osborne's shadow cabinet.
Boris and Fox may leave but Davis will still be "there" in 2020, IMO.
It would probably suit both sides if the UK took more responsibility for European security - increased UK defence capability would suit our more global role, and make us more interesting to the US. We could even support the upcoming EU army.
It made sense to me.
'Independence' meaning a harder border with rUK and accepting the euro, Schengen and all the political integration to come is not going to fly.
Getting out the CFP will conceivably be a problem for the SNP too, ultimately, in the NE/
Brexit strengthens the union if we plough ahead with it.
www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/14/mike-pence-bring-trump-pence-ticket/
It's written from a very positive point of view - but if you discount that tone the article lists his positions accurately, leaving you only to decide if you agree with them.
One showed someone trying to resuscitate an obviously lost cause. I thought they were very poignant and needed to be shown. Terrorist attacks shouldn't be sanitised - they aren't a video game.
Never underestimate the stupidity of posters on here who fear their dream of back to the 1950s might not be going to happen.
The paradox is that the more the extreme Brexiteer's push the less likely it will happen. It will only happen if it is seen as a compromise that is in the best interest of the whole nation, but it must guarantee sovereignty and some action on free movement
Obviously has turned from the party in recent times.
But Scotland does matter. The question is how much it matters. The UK government won't want some deal which clearly rubs the Scots' nose in their lack of involvement in Whitehall; on the other hand, May won't let Sturgeon hold her hostage. There is a game of bluff to be played on both sides because the outcome of a second referendum is uncertain and neither will be that keen to go all-in on three sixes.
FWIW, I think May has the stronger hand. Apart from the institutional advantages of the UK being the EU member and conducting negotiations, hence having much more flexibility, is a second referendum really likely to be turned on EU membership when there was quite a large Leave vote north of the border, when the European question has never been that big a deal, when leaving to (re)join the EU might mean all sorts of problems for trade with England (though there may be a model available in Ireland), and - above all - when oil is less than half the price it was and was projected to remain at back in 2014? A second No really would kill the SIndy question for a generation.
I don;t see why Brexiteers should compromise to keep remainers happy.
If it had been a narrow remainer victory, the feelings of leavers would have been totally ignored thereafter.
She's had a load of abuse for this and forced into a bizarre apology on Facebook. She went on holiday to go shopping, felt it meant nothing now and been vilified for it within minutes.
I can't see anything wrong with it bar the Offense Police bullying.
Exactly what Cam did to Clegg.
Chortle.