I think @Patrick got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning!
Maybe. Maybe I'm just feeling emboldened by the excellent run of recent political events. Those of us with an instinctive distrust of authoritarian controlling political elites and their contempt for Joe Average have experienced a spiritual liberation. The fear and horror liberal lefties are feeling these days is what the rest of us have been feeling for 40 years. Maybe I'll a thousand 'Deplorable Me' t-shirts printed up. They'd sell well.
Um. If emboldening takes the form of swearing at harmless PB contributors, do you think you might go and embolden somewhere else for a bit? I'd say the same if we had identical political views. This is a mostly friendly blog, not a brawl.
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
How the hell does that cartoon say that the PEOTUS is an imbecile to anyone (thin skinned, paranoid, victimhood seekers excepted)?
Lock cartoonists up if they're not with the Trumpian project! (Just kidding).
Trump is no more of an imbecile than Ceausescu was. He's a very smart guy. He's just insane.
I think @Patrick got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning!
Maybe. Maybe I'm just feeling emboldened by the excellent run of recent political events. Those of us with an instinctive distrust of authoritarian controlling political elites and their contempt for Joe Average have experienced a spiritual liberation. The fear and horror liberal lefties are feeling these days is what the rest of us have been feeling for 40 years. Maybe I'll a thousand 'Deplorable Me' t-shirts printed up. They'd sell well.
Um. If emboldening takes the form of swearing at harmless PB contributors, do you think you might go and embolden somewhere else for a bit? I'd say the same if we had identical political views. This is a mostly friendly blog, not a brawl.
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
How the hell does that cartoon say that the PEOTUS is an imbecile to anyone (thin skinned, paranoid, victimhood seekers excepted)?
Patrick must have some Islamist blood in him to get this enraged over a benign cartoon.
Either that or he's a snowflake
Or maybe I DID just get out of bed on the wrong side today.
Hammond is a smart guy. He's effectively said: you can give us a fair deal, in which case we will stay part of the European family, align our interests with yours, and fully support the EU in its political project. But, if you don't, we'll become an offshore Singapore, siphon off your corporate tax base, and maybe slightly less cooperative in matters of defence and security.
The talk so far has been of a lose-lose economic deal because of the political need for the EU to roger a deserter. But, if that lose-lose economic deal is seen by the EU to have political consequences, then I expect the position could change.
That's why I think, at the end of the day, there will be an ok deal.
Our level of access to the single market will be restricted, and we will have to pay more for it, so the EU can wax-lyrical about its four freedoms, but, outside of that, realpolitik should win out.
The danger is our desire to have absolutely everything sorted in a two year window. My personal view is that a five to seven year transition period would have been a far more sensible solution, because it would give businesses time to adjust on both sides of the Channel.
I can't think of a single serious trade negotiation that's taken less than five or six years. And then you need to remember that we lose - realistically - six months of our two year window due to elections this year in Europe.
With a transition period off the table, I think the risk of a major investment slowdown in 2017 and 2018 is growing by the day. This will (a) lower our GDP growth at a time when the UK economy is already dangerously over-reliant on consumption, and (b) retard our long-term growth prospects.
After having forecast 1-1.5% growth only last week, I think the risk of us slipping into recession by the end of the year has gone from negligible to meaningful.
Sounds to me like the HMG is talking very much about a transition period. I'd imagine they'd like it wrapped up by 2025GE, and go into the 2020GE with Brexit technically achieved.
That way, they can trumpet the trade deals achieved in the next parliament. I expect very few, if any (possibly NZ/Aus) wrapped up by 2020GE as there will legally be barely 12 months to sort them prior to the dissolution.
Sounds sensible - but I'd fully expect a transition deal to prevent the signing of any trade deals (but not negotiation) during the term of the transition.
One or two NA/Aus style FTAs signed before GE 2025 would make sense.
I'd be very surprised if we ever manage a FTA with the US. I'm not sure it would be in either's interest - and they're already a huge export market for us.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
I'm sure those Scottish readers of the Telegraph, Mail, Express etc have had that question asked of them repeatedly. It still couldn't get Leave much more than a third of the vote, or stop UKIP & Farage being a total irrelevance north of the border.
Boston Bobblehead Clinton Global Initiative is closing its doors for good after @HillaryClinton LOST & there's no influence to peddle https://t.co/XD50khdmxB
Well I for one am not shocked because it was announced in September. Oh hold on, that was *before* Hillary lost.
@Pulpstar - don't know what the "proper" value of the pound should be but, if accept the economic forecasts of OECD, PwC and OpenEurope, for a hard Brexit as the UK grows more slowly, but still getting richer overall, then by 2030 the economy might be 29% larger compared to 37%.
So, very crudely, you could argue the pound should be 20% cheaper than its nominal rate, which is probably around the 1.5$/£ mark, and that 1.2$/£ is correct. But I suspect it's lower than its stable value, now, due to the uncertainty. I'd hope to see it at around 1.3-1.35$/£ following a transition deal. Though Lord knows what the global economy will look like by then.
Longer term, it's perfectly possibly the pound becomes a form of safe-haven currency, and could be well above 1.5$/£ again in the 2030s.
Right now, I think Brexit and the Pound are acting as a bit of a Trojan horse for uncertainty in the existing international order, which is probably driving it lower.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
I'm sure those Scottish readers of the Telegraph, Mail, Express etc have had that question asked of them repeatedly. It still couldn't get Leave much more than a third of the vote. or stop UKIP & Farage being a total irrelevance north of the border.
I'm really looking forward to the next Scottish Indy vote. Next generation - so 2050?
Boston Bobblehead Clinton Global Initiative is closing its doors for good after @HillaryClinton LOST & there's no influence to peddle https://t.co/XD50khdmxB
Well I for one am not shocked since it was announced in September. Oh hold on, that was *before* Hillary lost.
Shenanigans in Stormont latest: Paul Givan fresh from finding £50k in his sofa for the Irish-learners has found £7m for street smartening in Lisburn (his constituency) and Enniskillen (Arlene's).
If you are a whistleblower, you accept that what you are doing is misconduct, in this case gross misconduct. What you are saying is that because of X, Y and Z you cannot nevertheless be dismissed.
Boston Bobblehead Clinton Global Initiative is closing its doors for good after @HillaryClinton LOST & there's no influence to peddle https://t.co/XD50khdmxB
Well I for one am not shocked because it was announced in September. Oh hold on, that was *before* Hillary lost.
I think @Patrick got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning!
Maybe. Maybe I'm just feeling emboldened by the excellent run of recent political events. Those of us with an instinctive distrust of authoritarian controlling political elites and their contempt for Joe Average have experienced a spiritual liberation. The fear and horror liberal lefties are feeling these days is what the rest of us have been feeling for 40 years. Maybe I'll a thousand 'Deplorable Me' t-shirts printed up. They'd sell well.
Um. If emboldening takes the form of swearing at harmless PB contributors, do you think you might go and embolden somewhere else for a bit? I'd say the same if we had identical political views. This is a mostly friendly blog, not a brawl.
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
How the hell does that cartoon say that the PEOTUS is an imbecile to anyone (thin skinned, paranoid, victimhood seekers excepted)?
Patrick must have some Islamist blood in him to get this enraged over a benign cartoon.
Either that or he's a snowflake
I remain to be convinced that this "cartoonist" could portray anything that looked like an identifiable human, still less the Prophet....
A good point. Congress vs Trump will be the order of the day by looks of things. He doesn't have any political capital there, thanks in part to some of the people he has insulted being in key position (e.g. 'liddle' Marco).
We are going to see the famed 'balance of powers' tested to its limits in next couple of years I suspect.
@Pulpstar - don't know what the "proper" value of the pound should be but, if accept the economic forecasts of OECD, PwC and OpenEurope, for a hard Brexit as the UK grows more slowly, but still getting richer overall, then by 2030 the economy might be 29% larger compared to 37%.
So, very crudely, you could argue the pound should be 20% cheaper than its nominal rate, which is probably around the 1.5$/£ mark, and that 1.2$/£ is correct. But I suspect it's lower than its stable value, now, due to the uncertainty. I'd hope to see it at around 1.3-1.35$/£ following a transition deal. Though Lord knows what the global economy will look like by then.
Longer term, it's perfectly possibly the pound becomes a form of safe-haven currency, and could be well above 1.5$/£ again in the 2030s.
Right now, I think Brexit and the Pound are acting as a bit of a Trojan horse for uncertainty in the existing international order, which is probably driving it lower.
In the past 30 years , the trading range has been between $1.05 and $2.00 (approx) so I expect that to continue for the next 30 (unless we declare war on the US)
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
Ah well! You're actually alienating people who normally agree with you, as you may have noticed. Carry on! The "you're evil or stupid" meme is tedious but not the preserve of lefties (cf. SeanT and your good self).
Incidentally, I don't think we know yet what sort of President Trump will be. I suspect he will turn out more pragmatic, and probably in some respects liberal, than people respectively hope or fear. Whether he'll be able to carry Congress if he is may be a different question - the combination of partisan Democrats and dubious Republicans may prove difficult to overcome. I think he's a bit dim not to realise that and start building bridges, but he's won so he's entitled to try whatever he thinks will work.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
An average of the Opinium, Survation and Yougov polls we have seen in the last few days suggests a Tory lead of circa 10% . That would imply a Tory majority of circa 40.
An average of the Opinium, Survation and Yougov polls we have seen in the last few days suggests a Tory lead of circa 10% . That would imply a Tory majority of circa 40.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
Through the EU's EAC free trade agreement, there is already free trade between the EU and Burundi.
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
Ah well! You're actually alienating people who normally agree with you, as you may have noticed. Carry on! The "you're evil or stupid" meme is tedious but not the preserve of lefties (cf. SeanT and your good self).
Incidentally, I don't think we know yet what sort of President Trump will be. I suspect he will turn out more pragmatic, and probably in some respects liberal, than people respectively hope or fear. Whether he'll be able to carry Congress if he is may be a different question - the combination of partisan Democrats and dubious Republicans may prove difficult to overcome. I think he's a bit dim not to realise that and start building bridges, but he's won so he's entitled to try whatever he thinks will work.
Interesting article in yesterday's Sunday Times by Nial Fergusan, asking whether the Left will be able to cope if Trump's policies actually turn out to work.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
Through the EU's EAC free trade agreement, there is already free trade between the EU and Burundi.
There's one with South Korea and now Canada too but that didn't stop Gisela Stuart and Michael Gove's 'Change Britain' from claiming these as benefits of leaving the EU.
The 'I agree with Nick' voting block is poised to take the lead. The Lib Dems have a credible alternative PM - at some point they should take the opportunity to bring him back.
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
Ah well! You're actually alienating people who normally agree with you, as you may have noticed. Carry on! The "you're evil or stupid" meme is tedious but not the preserve of lefties (cf. SeanT and your good self).
Incidentally, I don't think we know yet what sort of President Trump will be. I suspect he will turn out more pragmatic, and probably in some respects liberal, than people respectively hope or fear. Whether he'll be able to carry Congress if he is may be a different question - the combination of partisan Democrats and dubious Republicans may prove difficult to overcome. I think he's a bit dim not to realise that and start building bridges, but he's won so he's entitled to try whatever he thinks will work.
Interesting article in yesterday's Sunday Times by Nial Fergusan, asking whether the Left will be able to cope if Trump's policies actually turn out to work.
All administrations solves some things, but in doing so creates new problems. It's the latter that usually creates the oxygen for what comes next. Trump will not be immune from that.
The 'I agree with Nick' voting block is poised to take the lead. The Lib Dems have a credible alternative PM - at some point they should take the opportunity to bring him back.
The 'I agree with Nick' voting block is poised to take the lead. The Lib Dems have a credible alternative PM - at some point they should take the opportunity to bring him back.
He passed away in 2015 didn't he?
In 2015 Nick Clegg won his own parliamentary constituency seat in Sheffield - despite everything.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It also undermines the credibility of the threat if the EU27 can see that the UK becoming a greater Singapore is not remotely politically possible.
Random Monday morning work from home wandering - do many of our exporters source entirely from UK?
Movement away from the GBP is good for the mid-level antiques trade, as most of what is sold is UK sourced. I'm aware we're likely the exception - but would be useful to know how much of an exception....
Does sounds hypocritical from a Labour MEP, but has the benefit of testing the Glassman/Crudas theory of Blue Labour - family, faith, flag and all that.
An average of the Opinium, Survation and Yougov polls we have seen in the last few days suggests a Tory lead of circa 10% . That would imply a Tory majority of circa 40.
Corbynism sweeping the nation!
We are certainly a long way from that ! Some sign though that the gap has narrowed a bit - certainly when compared with the 17 point gap Yougov was showing in early December!
Random Monday morning work from home wandering - do many of our exporters source entirely from UK?
Movement away from the GBP is good for the mid-level antiques trade, as most of what is sold is UK sourced. I'm aware we're likely the exception - but would be useful to know how much of an exception....
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
You clearly don't understand how to negotiate.
Put down a marker from a subordinate so his boss can say "well that's not my position and what I hope to avoid,,,, but if I don't do a deal acceptable to people like Hammond, that's the kind of pressure I'll be under".
No different from the pronouncements of various EU leaders...
An average of the Opinium, Survation and Yougov polls we have seen in the last few days suggests a Tory lead of circa 10% . That would imply a Tory majority of circa 40.
Corbynism sweeping the nation!
We are certainly a long way from that ! Some sign though that the gap has narrowed a bit - certainly when compared with the 17 point gap Yougov was showing in early December!
Any slight improvement is a disaster for Labour as it keeps Corbyn in place for longer.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies. We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
Your 500 million EU population includes 65m UK population.
99% of the world has access to the EU 'single market'. In what circumstances would the EU ban imports from the UK?
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
Economic logic can be and often is avoided. We are as likely, if not more, to return to being the dysfunctional 'sick man of Europe', lurching from failed intervention to failed intervention.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
Your 500 million EU population includes 65m UK population.
99% of the world has access to the EU 'single market'. In what circumstances would the EU ban imports from the UK?
I hope you will make the same argument with equal conviction when SindyRef 2 comes around.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies. We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
Logged on the site to try and get some guidance for what comes next and realise that still no-one knows.
We are a medical device manufacturer making core items such as vasectomy kits that keep the NHS going. Most of what we make is exported and we buy in a lot internationally.
At the ground level you can see how Brexit has added to the chaos of the NHS. Our industry is governed by the MEDDEV a massive tome prepared by the European Parliament. When a change is made industry has a 2 year period to adopt the updated standard. Any change is a massive cost in terms of manpower and external audit fees. We need to comply as the EC is our biggest customer.
So if the UK is to set up its own Medical Device regulatory set up it will need to get someone to assist. We can outsource to USA (no way), Australia (complicated) or maybe Canada. The transition phase will be ... who knows. Who will pay the cost?
The UK is a net importer of medical devices and many core items such as cardiac catheters are almost fully imported. Will we stop procedures until these devices meet the new guidelines?
So what to do? Well like many other companies I am diverting my efforts from supporting NHS customers to international customers and putting my domestic prices up. In the meantime things are good. My staff get less on a global basis. Demand is high and the NHS has nowhere to go when I put my prices up. Sometimes they complain and then I stop supply at which point they come back.
I am not a great believer in EC but I am not sure our politicians understand the difference between what works and what does not. The present crisis in the NHS is probably an inevitable casualty of Brexit. One day it will all settle down but I would say a hard Brexit would create 5 years of chaos. Will Theresa May be honest in her speech?
Interesting post. Thanks. I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
A good point. Congress vs Trump will be the order of the day by looks of things. He doesn't have any political capital there, thanks in part to some of the people he has insulted being in key position (e.g. 'liddle' Marco).
We are going to see the famed 'balance of powers' tested to its limits in next couple of years I suspect.
BMW would just source car parts in the USA, provide specs for engineering and tool-making firms - and increase the number of jobs in the USA and reduce those in Europe. Foot shoot by Germany.
The 'I agree with Nick' voting block is poised to take the lead. The Lib Dems have a credible alternative PM - at some point they should take the opportunity to bring him back.
He passed away in 2015 didn't he?
In 2015 Nick Clegg won his own parliamentary constituency seat in Sheffield - despite everything.
I’m not sure Charlie Kennedy would have been a good PM. He’d have been a great LoTO, though. If ever someone died of a broken heart, both meanings ........
I think @Patrick got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning!
Maybe. Maybe I'm just feeling emboldened by the excellent run of recent political events. Those of us with an instinctive distrust of authoritarian controlling political elites and their contempt for Joe Average have experienced a spiritual liberation. The fear and horror liberal lefties are feeling these days is what the rest of us have been feeling for 40 years. Maybe I'll a thousand 'Deplorable Me' t-shirts printed up. They'd sell well.
Um. If emboldening takes the form of swearing at harmless PB contributors, do you think you might go and embolden somewhere else for a bit? I'd say the same if we had identical political views. This is a mostly friendly blog, not a brawl.
It's NOT harmless Nick. The endless drip drip drip of condescension towards those not in the project is damaging. Righties tend to disparage lefties because 'such and such a policy is insane' (salary caps being last weeks' example). Lefties tend to disparage righties by saying 'you're evil or stupid' (most of what comes out of any given lefty's gob). Yes I'm a political nerd as are most on here. Delighted to have a feisty debate about content. Less delighted to start the day with a 'harmless' cartoon saying that the new POTUS is an imbecile just because. He's obviously a smarter guy than all the loser lefties in the USA! Can we please put identity politics and disdain back in their box.
How the hell does that cartoon say that the PEOTUS is an imbecile to anyone (thin skinned, paranoid, victimhood seekers excepted)?
I keep looking again at the cartoon to see if I have missed something....
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies. We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
Yep - this is why I voted Remain. Brexit almost inevitably means a race to the bottom - lower wages, less job security, more public spending cuts, longer working lives.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies. We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
Finkelstein wrote that as a Remainer not a Leaver. He was campaigning furiously for Remain in his articles.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
Actually the question you should be asking is whether it is worth having barriers to trade with 93% of the world so that we can have barrier free trade with the 6% in the EU.
I agree. But the price of reacquiring control over our own affairs was never going to be zero. For sure there will be some financial impact in the early years. I don't think most Leave voters thought otherwise. It wasn't really about the money. It is interesting, though, that the EU side have this morning a couple of nuggets to chew on (Hammond's tax warning and Trump's position). IF they do go for being beastly to us there will be blowback. Being beastly to us is tantamount to admitting that the EU is a prison. 'Try to leave in a democratic fashion for your own interests and we'll try to screw you' is not the mantra of a winning organisation.
Are they being beastly to us?
Some politicians have said some things, other politicians have said others. There's been a lot of kite flying, but has anyone really been beastly?
Many are suggesting they should be in order to discourage others from leaving.
'In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
Right to leave 47%
Wrong to leave 43%'
Hardly the enthusiastic embrace of Leave by pragmatic Remainers that's touted on here.
Otoh in Scotland it's 30-59 which suggests the will of the Scots is fairly settled.
They should have asked people in Scotland
"Do you think unrestricted immigration to Scotland from Romania, Bulgaria and Poland is a price worth paying for Scotland to continue to be able to send 10% of its exports outside of Britain to countries in the EU?"
Or an equally unbiased question:
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
Actually the question you should be asking is whether it is worth having barriers to trade with 93% of the world so that we can have barrier free trade with the 6% in the EU.
And if the UK were the world's superpower that might be a question worth asking. As we aren't, and the US and China are more protectionist in instinct than the EU, it seems nothing more than a pipe dream.
Boston Bobblehead Clinton Global Initiative is closing its doors for good after @HillaryClinton LOST & there's no influence to peddle https://t.co/XD50khdmxB
Losing the election must have cost Clan Clinton hundreds of millions of dollars in lost "influence" revenues.
A good point. Congress vs Trump will be the order of the day by looks of things. He doesn't have any political capital there, thanks in part to some of the people he has insulted being in key position (e.g. 'liddle' Marco).
We are going to see the famed 'balance of powers' tested to its limits in next couple of years I suspect.
BMW would just source car parts in the USA, provide specs for engineering and tool-making firms - and increase the number of jobs in the USA and reduce those in Europe. Foot shoot by Germany.
Yes, the US single and common market is large enough to have the scale to be able to provide all of what it needs internally if necessary and resist trade pressure from other nations.
It's strange the Germans don't understand that since so much of the EU common market was about replicating the US single market and provide Europe with the same scale and strength.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies. We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
Finkelstein wrote that as a Remainer not a Leaver. He was campaigning furiously for Remain in his articles.
Yes and now what he predicted is coming to pass. Hammonds threat to the EU about the UKs future economic model was well received by most of the Leavers on here.
Mr. Rog, it was murmured about some time ago, either last year or even the year before.
There are also plans for a new Farscape film with a following series if it's a success, and a new Star Trek series, due to start filming soon. The Star Trek series is entitled Discovery, producing a rather unfortunate acronym.
I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
Once again, that's not the issue. It's certification.
We can make things to the standard, but they must be certified by an independent and ratified body. Currently in the EU. Replicating that is the problem, not making the widgets.
Mr. Rog, it was murmured about some time ago, either last year or even the year before.
There are also plans for a new Farscape film with a following series if it's a success, and a new Star Trek series, due to start filming soon. The Star Trek series is entitled Discovery, producing a rather unfortunate acronym.
I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
Once again, that's not the issue. It's certification.
We can make things to the standard, but they must be certified by an independent and ratified body. Currently in the EU. Replicating that is the problem, not making the widgets.
Yes - but in the interim we will presumably just continue to use the EU body and presumably pay them?
Edit - I may have misunderstood. I'm not sure what you mean.
I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
Once again, that's not the issue. It's certification.
We can make things to the standard, but they must be certified by an independent and ratified body. Currently in the EU. Replicating that is the problem, not making the widgets.
Yes - but in the interim we will presumably just continue to use the EU body and presumably pay them?
In other words, as we have no choice they have us over a barrel in the negotiations.
I'm not sure what Hammond was trying to achieve with his tax-haven remarks. This could be an absolute gift to the Tories' enemies. A Brexit that principally benefits oligarchs and foreign millionaires will still infuriate most of the Remain community, but will any Leavers be particularly enthused either? Seems to me that's it's courting all the political problems of Brexit but none of the benefits. All right, Labour may not be currently equipped to exploit it, but what about the Lib Dems or even UKIP? This has got to go down as the first blot on Hammond's copybook.
It's the unavoidable economic logic of Brexit - and probably what a few of Leave's wealthier backers were banking on... As Finkelstein wrote before the referendum:
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies. We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
Finkelstein wrote that as a Remainer not a Leaver. He was campaigning furiously for Remain in his articles.
Yes and now what he predicted is coming to pass. Hammonds threat to the EU about the UKs future economic model was well received by most of the Leavers on here.
So it should be. Because we believe in low tax rates encouraging competition and ultimately boosting efficiency and productivity and causing economic growth. Which results in higher tax revenues and higher wages.
Fink mistakenly claimed there would be lower revenues and lower wages. That is where he was wrong. We don't believe that and we don't want that. We do want lower tax rates. Look up the Laffer Curve.
Mr. Rog, it was murmured about some time ago, either last year or even the year before.
There are also plans for a new Farscape film with a following series if it's a success, and a new Star Trek series, due to start filming soon. The Star Trek series is entitled Discovery, producing a rather unfortunate acronym.
I wish they'd bring back The Champions and a real life version of the cartoon Centurians
I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
Once again, that's not the issue. It's certification.
We can make things to the standard, but they must be certified by an independent and ratified body. Currently in the EU. Replicating that is the problem, not making the widgets.
Yes - but in the interim we will presumably just continue to use the EU body and presumably pay them?
Edit - I may have misunderstood. I'm not sure what you mean.
No, no. Leaving the EU means we won’t pay anything to it, or it’s bodies.
Mr. Rog, it was murmured about some time ago, either last year or even the year before.
There are also plans for a new Farscape film with a following series if it's a success, and a new Star Trek series, due to start filming soon. The Star Trek series is entitled Discovery, producing a rather unfortunate acronym.
Also I think SG Universe was a complete waste of time and the last series of SG1 likewise. After the goauld were defeated there was no need for a follow on.
The 'I agree with Nick' voting block is poised to take the lead. The Lib Dems have a credible alternative PM - at some point they should take the opportunity to bring him back.
So, it's more expensive, we have no input, and the ECJ still calls the shots.
Brexit is BRILLIANT!
Well I didn't vote for Brexit...
In the long run I am sure we will be able to set up an alternative regulatory system to replace EU institutions... But in the short to medium term I dont see how we could manage without continuing to use EU stuff to decide on disputes etc.
Mr. Rog, they had planned to end SG-1 after the eighth series, with the two-parter (or maybe it was a TV film, I forget). Then they ended up with two more series before being surprised that the 10th would be the last, so they had to cobble together an ending and then had two TV films to round things off. Little bit stop-start.
Universe was a good idea but half the characters were forgettable the sombre tone really didn't match SG-1 (or the even lighter Atlantis). I think if it had been set in a different sci-fi, er, universe it would've been rather better.
I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
Once again, that's not the issue. It's certification.
We can make things to the standard, but they must be certified by an independent and ratified body. Currently in the EU. Replicating that is the problem, not making the widgets.
Yes - but in the interim we will presumably just continue to use the EU body and presumably pay them?
Edit - I may have misunderstood. I'm not sure what you mean.
No, no. Leaving the EU means we won’t pay anything to it, or it’s bodies.
Well as a matter of fact there are countries outside the EU who pay into it. But in our specific case - I suspect we will end up paying something k some way or the other.
@SamCoatesTimes: Snr gvt figures are worried that a UK-US deal will be a "quick win" for Trump but less good for the UK, and they have capacity which we dont
Comments
Trump is no more of an imbecile than Ceausescu was. He's a very smart guy. He's just insane.
One or two NA/Aus style FTAs signed before GE 2025 would make sense.
I'd be very surprised if we ever manage a FTA with the US. I'm not sure it would be in either's interest - and they're already a huge export market for us.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-19/clinton-global-initiative-ends-run-with-some-of-shine-worn-off
So, very crudely, you could argue the pound should be 20% cheaper than its nominal rate, which is probably around the 1.5$/£ mark, and that 1.2$/£ is correct. But I suspect it's lower than its stable value, now, due to the uncertainty. I'd hope to see it at around 1.3-1.35$/£ following a transition deal. Though Lord knows what the global economy will look like by then.
Longer term, it's perfectly possibly the pound becomes a form of safe-haven currency, and could be well above 1.5$/£ again in the 2030s.
Right now, I think Brexit and the Pound are acting as a bit of a Trojan horse for uncertainty in the existing international order, which is probably driving it lower.
But of course you're right, ultimately it didn't do the Athenians a lot of good.
Fancy that!
If you are a whistleblower, you accept that what you are doing is misconduct, in this case gross misconduct. What you are saying is that because of X, Y and Z you cannot nevertheless be dismissed.
We are going to see the famed 'balance of powers' tested to its limits in next couple of years I suspect.
Incidentally, I don't think we know yet what sort of President Trump will be. I suspect he will turn out more pragmatic, and probably in some respects liberal, than people respectively hope or fear. Whether he'll be able to carry Congress if he is may be a different question - the combination of partisan Democrats and dubious Republicans may prove difficult to overcome. I think he's a bit dim not to realise that and start building bridges, but he's won so he's entitled to try whatever he thinks will work.
"Do you think giving up a single market of 500m people is a price worth paying to give Westminster to ability to sign its own trade deal with Burundi?"
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/820956230399262720
https://order-order.com/2017/01/16/sion-simon-impersonating-a-brexiteer/
What would that say about Theresa May ?
Cf The Darlington by election in 1983
"Wall needs to be upgraded to a Dome"
In 2015 Nick Clegg won his own parliamentary constituency seat in Sheffield - despite everything.
http://www.sion-simon.com/
Nothing like stealing rivals' clothes.
Movement away from the GBP is good for the mid-level antiques trade, as most of what is sold is UK sourced. I'm aware we're likely the exception - but would be useful to know how much of an exception....
Put down a marker from a subordinate so his boss can say "well that's not my position and what I hope to avoid,,,, but if I don't do a deal acceptable to people like Hammond, that's the kind of pressure I'll be under".
No different from the pronouncements of various EU leaders...
"To be a success outside the single market, to be attractive to businesses and to investment, we would need to be a European offshore low-cost competitive mecca for companies.
We would have to offset the increased cost of doing business here that leaving brings (in the form of barriers, both tariff and non-tariff, to European trade) by cutting our own costs even more sharply.
We would need to have lower taxes on foreign rich people than the Continent, pay lower wages to unskilled people than elsewhere in Europe and cut public spending further to keep taxes down. We would need to make old people work longer. Oh, and we would need a huge influx of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled, to ensure that we had a very competitive workforce.
We would also need new trade deals to replace the ones we had abandoned. In Europe, for all its faults, corporate interests are balanced by those of workers but in any other trade deal we would need to overlook these. Our regulation would have to be more attractive to corporate elites, not less. It would be vital that corporate lobbying was even more successful than it has been in the past."
99% of the world has access to the EU 'single market'. In what circumstances would the EU ban imports from the UK?
http://niassembly.tv/live-stream-1/
I would imagine in the aftermath of us leaving we would leave all standards the same as currently - so nothing would change for a good while.
It's strange the Germans don't understand that since so much of the EU common market was about replicating the US single market and provide Europe with the same scale and strength.
There are also plans for a new Farscape film with a following series if it's a success, and a new Star Trek series, due to start filming soon. The Star Trek series is entitled Discovery, producing a rather unfortunate acronym.
We can make things to the standard, but they must be certified by an independent and ratified body. Currently in the EU. Replicating that is the problem, not making the widgets.
https://twitter.com/WikiGuido/status/820957658807148544
Ignoring the Greens its a 95.8% book
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/stoke-on-trent-central-by-election/winning-party
Edit - I may have misunderstood. I'm not sure what you mean.
Fink mistakenly claimed there would be lower revenues and lower wages. That is where he was wrong. We don't believe that and we don't want that. We do want lower tax rates. Look up the Laffer Curve.
https://twitter.com/samcoatestimes/status/820969067104370688
Brexit is BRILLIANT!
If we want to trade, we need a certifying body
In the long run I am sure we will be able to set up an alternative regulatory system to replace EU institutions... But in the short to medium term I dont see how we could manage without continuing to use EU stuff to decide on disputes etc.
Universe was a good idea but half the characters were forgettable the sombre tone really didn't match SG-1 (or the even lighter Atlantis). I think if it had been set in a different sci-fi, er, universe it would've been rather better.
But in our specific case - I suspect we will end up paying something k some way or the other.
@SamCoatesTimes: Snr gvt figures are worried that a UK-US deal will be a "quick win" for Trump but less good for the UK, and they have capacity which we dont