At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
Greetings from the sandpit, hope you’re having a good time here at Arab Health?
What’s the reasoning behind not shipping things to the UK? If they’re paid for then the shipping risks would be on the buyer.
At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
Any word on the strategic popcorn reserve?
In some ways it is a laughing matter but on the front line there is a clear panic rising and a lot of stress. The number of tense calls is growing daily. By the end of the next 2 weeks I think the impact will be evident for the general population. If we are to get a hard brexit it will be under some form of martial law.
I'm wondering if we won't end up with a little pre-brexit boomlet as everybody tries to move everything forwards before Britain sets all its trading rules on fire.
I'm wondering if we won't end up with a little pre-brexit boomlet as everybody tries to move everything forwards before Britain sets all its trading rules on fire.
Think of the boom of people taking extra money out of cash machines as they are worried they won’t have money in the future and you understand that panic booms are not good
I'm wondering if we won't end up with a little pre-brexit boomlet as everybody tries to move everything forwards before Britain sets all its trading rules on fire.
Think of the boom of people taking extra money out of cash machines as they are worried they won’t have money in the future and you understand that panic booms are not good
Sure, I'm just trying to work out what's going to happen, not at all saying "bring it on"...
I'm wondering if we won't end up with a little pre-brexit boomlet as everybody tries to move everything forwards before Britain sets all its trading rules on fire.
Think of the boom of people taking extra money out of cash machines as they are worried they won’t have money in the future and you understand that panic booms are not good
Sure, I'm just trying to work out what's going to happen, not at all saying "bring it on"...
"Bring 'em on! I prefer a straight fight to all this sneaking around!" - Han Solo, Star Wars (1977).
At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
Not writing in defence of those concerned here, more a philosophical question (not a rhetorical one, either).
Given the reams of laws that modern governments seem to produce, including a small but still substantial fraction with significant constitutional import, just how much of the country's law do we expect politicians to have ever read, let alone understood or memorised?
Similarly, what about the treaties the country has signed up to? Many of which are of serious length.
Just how much of the grand and inflated body of our laws and treaties do we expect our MPs to be cognisant of, fluent in, vaguely aware of the existence of, memorised from top to bottom, able to summarise the take-aways in five bullet points, capable of making technically difficult arguments over in court? And which pieces in particular are absolutely 100% "must-have-reads"? (I'd argue there's a decent case that the Good Friday Agreement, HRA, various devolution legislation and EU treaties that would be in that category, but there's quite significant constitutional stuff in, say, the Bill of Rights of 1689, or the Acts of Union, that it would be regarded as too harsh to castigate anyone over for failing to take it as bedtime reading.)
Yup, this is a dumb attack line, non-lawyers should be reading summaries written by lawyers, and sometimes lawyers should too...
The Good Friday Agreement is a bit different in that a copy of it was sent to every household in Northern Ireland and it was approved in a referendum, and it was central to his job. It’s only 35 pages.
Perhaps the bit preventing customs checks was cut to limit the page count?
Why is it explicitly based on both countries being partners in the EU?
Because we were both members when it was signed?
We were both members of the UN but that wasn’t fundamental to the agreement in the way EU membership was.
It's not fundamental, it was just a statement about how we were partners in the EU. Unless you think the GFA is going to lapse come Brexit day?
Why does the agreement also discuss political representation of the North-South council in the EU?
Right now asking for that is the Mother of All Unicorns.
Maybe that's telling us the betting markets are overestimating the likelihood of an extension (implied probability currently 70%).
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
3/1 is a probability of 25% assuming no overround. Does that sound right?
Sounds about right to me.
Others might disagree, but if it gets close to March 29th with no deal signed, neither the EU or May are going to want to accept the blame for the outcome. Therefore the EU will want o be seen as bending over backwards to give the UK a chance of reaching an agreement, even if it looks unlikely. May, even if she thinks further time futile will want to be seen as not giving up on reaching a deal. Also even if she thinks there is no chance of a deal, it will at least give us 3 months preparation time for a crash out.
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
Right now asking for that is the Mother of All Unicorns.
Maybe that's telling us the betting markets are overestimating the likelihood of an extension (implied probability currently 70%).
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
3/1 is a probability of 25% assuming no overround. Does that sound right?
Sounds about right to me.
Others might disagree,
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
If it's No Deal Brexit, I wouldn't expect an extension for legislative tidying up.
Leaving March 29th and No Deal are rapidly becoming synonyms though.
Just as well our MPs are not squandering the remaining time!
Not writing in defence of those concerned here, more a philosophical question (not a rhetorical one, either).
Given the reams of laws that modern governments seem to produce, including a small but still substantial fraction with significant constitutional import, just how much of the country's law do we expect politicians to have ever read, let alone understood or memorised?
Similarly, what about the treaties the country has signed up to? Many of which are of serious length.
Just how much of the grand and inflated body of our laws and treaties do we expect our MPs to be cognisant of, fluent in, vaguely aware of the existence of, memorised from top to bottom, able to summarise the take-aways in five bullet points, capable of making technically difficult arguments over in court? And which pieces in particular are absolutely 100% "must-have-reads"?
Yup, this is a dumb attack line, non-lawyers should be reading summaries written by lawyers, and sometimes lawyers should too...
The Good Friday Agreement is a bit different in that a copy of it was sent to every household in Northern Ireland and it was approved in a referendum, and it was central to his job. It’s only 35 pages.
Perhaps the bit preventing customs checks was cut to limit the page count?
Why is it explicitly based on both countries being partners in the EU?
Because we were both members when it was signed?
We were both members of the UN but that wasn’t fundamental to the agreement in the way EU membership was.
It's not fundamental, it was just a statement about how we were partners in the EU. Unless you think the GFA is going to lapse come Brexit day?
Why does the agreement also discuss political representation of the North-South council in the EU?
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
Rising? We import less food than 20, 50, or 100 years ago.
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
Yes - just look at our Parliament, do you really think it's likely that every piece of legislation without a single argument taking place and no one throwing spanners in the works.
Even if most items are just Statutory Instruments it only takes a single MP to object and things will be delayed.
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
3/1 is a probability of 25% assuming no overround. Does that sound right?
Sounds about right to me.
Others might disagree,
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
If it's No Deal Brexit, I wouldn't expect an extension for legislative tidying up.
Leaving March 29th and No Deal are rapidly becoming synonyms though.
Just as well our MPs are not squandering the remaining time!
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
Rising? We import less food than 20, 50, or 100 years ago.
(see my video)
Talking of which are you suffering from the British disease of low productivity or have you just not been linking them to here?
No it isn't.. I recall Ken Clarke saying he had not read the Maastricht treaty in full. No fool would unless they were a civil servant. You get the bullet points and that's all you need.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
Rising? We import less food than 20, 50, or 100 years ago.
(see my video)
Nevertheless I believe the current short term trend is slowly upward. Happy to be proved wrong.
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, y is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
3/1 is a probability of 25% assuming no overround. Does that sound right?
Sounds about right to me.
Others might disagree,
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
If it's No Deal Brexit, I wouldn't expect an extension for legislative tidying up.
Leaving March 29th and No Deal are rapidly becoming synonyms though.
Just as well our MPs are not squandering the remaining time!
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
For sure. I don't think it's been value for some time.
One of the donkeys will bottle it Alan, when they realise the trough will be taken away it will focus the donkeys minds. PS: loking like a double , election and referendum though election may make referendum superflous. Ruth the Mooth might be out of a job before she gets back from her holidays.
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
This isn't true. Palestinians are somewhat integrated into Jordanian society. There are and have been Palestinians in the cabinet and the king is married to one!
Sorry - Jordan is the only Arab country that has done the right thing and allowed integration. 374,000 (wiki) still live in refugee camps 70 years after the way though
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably .
3/1 is a probability of 25% assuming no overround. Does that sound right?
Sounds about right to me.
Others might disagree,
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
If it's No Deal Brexit, I wouldn't expect an extension for legislative tidying up.
Leaving March 29th and No Deal are rapidly becoming synonyms though.
Just as well our MPs are not squandering the remaining time!
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
I am staying on the bet. Any extension (as opposed to retraction) of A50 requires EU27 unanimity, and I dont think that either swift or easy. We are running out of time to extend.
At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
Yes. Who is going to send a shipload of stuff, not knowing what the customs arrangements and trade terms will be when it arrives?
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
3/1 is a probability of 25% assuming no overround. Does that sound right?
Sounds about right to me.
Others might disagree,
I put a hundred quid on us leaving on time in March, the above article states it "now seems impossible to enact all the legislation" required for the deal by march 29th.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
If it's No Deal Brexit, I wouldn't expect an extension for legislative tidying up.
Leaving March 29th and No Deal are rapidly becoming synonyms though.
Just as well our MPs are not squandering the remaining time!
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
The No Deal [by 29 March] market is probably better value, though the gap between the odds for that and leaving by 29 March have narrowed over the last day or so.
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
This isn't true. Palestinians are somewhat integrated into Jordanian society. There are and have been Palestinians in the cabinet and the king is married to one!
Sorry - Jordan is the only Arab country that has done the right thing and allowed integration. 374,000 (wiki) still live in refugee camps 70 years after the way though
There are benefits to being in a refugee camp, and Palestinian refugee status is inheritable. For example UN funds healthcare. Quite apart from politics, there are practical reasons to remain a refugee.
We have a Prime Minister who has done a deal on behalf of our country which she has totally failed to get ratified, even by very many of her own colleagues. How is she still in office? (rhetorical question)
One of the donkeys will bottle it Alan, when they realise the trough will be taken away it will focus the donkeys minds. PS: loking like a double , election and referendum though election may make referendum superflous. Ruth the Mooth might be out of a job before she gets back from her holidays.
thanks malc
thats the problem with all the non stop brexit bollocks, anything else worth discussing is getting shut out
Similarly, what about the treaties the country has signed up to? Many of which are of serious length.
This is complicated by the fact that a plain reading of the text of these documents is insufficient to determine their legal implications. This is particularly the case when they must be read in the light of other laws, e.g. the HRA, which can force quite a different meaning to what a "lay" reading would suggest - even a reasonably intelligent MP who performs a diligent and thorough reading couldn't be expected to grasp all the fine points, unless he or she happens to be a QC in the relevant area, perhaps. And legal implications are quite separate from e.g. economic or social implications, for which appropriate policy analysis documents would also have to be read.
In another example, there was quite an interesting BBC piece about whether the GFA actually says anything about a "hard border", since we are constantly being told that such a border would "violate" it. Overall, they couldn't find any words where it actually says so, but on the other hand there seemed to be a "spirit" to the agreement that had taken on a life of its own and which there's a perfectly reasonable case for it being inconsistent with a hard border (depending on how one defines such a beast, which seems to be a good fraction of the problem here).
Just how much of the grand and inflated body of our laws and treaties do we expect our MPs to be cognisant of, fluent in, vaguely aware of the existence of, memorised from top to bottom, able to summarise the take-aways in five bullet points, capable of making technically difficult arguments over in court? And which pieces in particular are absolutely 100% "must-have-reads"? (I'd argue there's a decent case that the Good Friday Agreement, HRA, various devolution legislation and EU treaties that would be in that category, but there's quite significant constitutional stuff in, say, the Bill of Rights of 1689, or the Acts of Union, that it would be regarded as too harsh to castigate anyone over for failing to take it as bedtime reading.)
The other point is that “have you read it in full” is a stupid question just like “yes or no answer” it’s designed for political gain
For example there will probably be schedules in the GFA dealing with agricultural trading in 2000-02 or transitional arrangements. Not relevant today but still part of “in full”
At a major trade show in Dubai this week. When even the Chinese think your government are crazy you know you are in trouble. Hard brexit will hit before March 29th. Chinese already saying they will not ship orders until after that date and things are clear. This means basics such as medical swabs and drapes are going to be much harder to find. These items are as important as the fancy drugs in terms of performing an operation. The economy is beginning to go into deep freeze.
Yes. Who is going to send a shipload of stuff, not knowing what the customs arrangements and trade terms will be when it arrives?
I suspect payment in advance with the customer to arrange shipping and customs would be required.
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
I am staying on the bet. Any extension (as opposed to retraction) of A50 requires EU27 unanimity, and I dont think that either swift or easy. We are running out of time to extend.
I have a bet on No Deal [by 29 March], more as insurance than speculation.
But actually if kyf wants to bet on a last-minute deal, there is a Betfair market on when the deal will pass the Commons, and people can bet on March 1-29.
On the GFA. I don’t buy that the EU was that key a player or that it hinges on our membership.
BUT it was underpinned by at least the fact of our membership, and I suspect at that time the possibility of further integration (given Blair and Mandelson were in their first flush).
Which meant none of the economic, regulatory and citizenship stuff was much of an issue, and now is more so. Now, Ireland’s EU membership and our leaving actually complicates the CTA which survived the troubles.
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
This isn't true. Palestinians are somewhat integrated into Jordanian society. There are and have been Palestinians in the cabinet and the king is married to one!
From what I know (limited), you're both right (in terms of the posts shown - I don't know the context because I didn't see the original discussion). There is (I believe) some disquiet in certain circles that the next King will effectively be half Palestinian and therefore much more inclined to accelerate the integration process. If given full rights, they make up a (slight) majority of the Jordanian population.
The context was a tweet saying refugees have no impact on wages in Jordan (and therefore are not a bad thing). I was asking whether they could work & therefore whether they were included in the stats. It was an intellectual curiousity nothing more so anybinput welcome
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
I am staying on the bet. Any extension (as opposed to retraction) of A50 requires EU27 unanimity, and I dont think that either swift or easy. We are running out of time to extend.
I have a bet on No Deal [by 29 March], more as insurance than speculation.
But actually if kyf wants to bet on a last-minute deal, there is a Betfair market on when the deal will pass the Commons, and people can bet on March 1-29.
Interesting. So I can bet on the deal passing before March 29th, but if an extension is required for the legislation to be enacted, I would still win. Might check that one out. Thanks!
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
I am staying on the bet. Any extension (as opposed to retraction) of A50 requires EU27 unanimity, and I dont think that either swift or easy. We are running out of time to extend.
I have a bet on No Deal [by 29 March], more as insurance than speculation.
But actually if kyf wants to bet on a last-minute deal, there is a Betfair market on when the deal will pass the Commons, and people can bet on March 1-29.
Yes 3.3 at present for a March Deal. Not much value I think.
Barclays is moving €190bn (£166bn) of assets to Dublin because it "cannot wait any longer" to implement its Brexit contingency plan. The High Court, which has approved the move, says the move involves 5,000 clients. However, few jobs in London are expected to be affected.
The business amounts to around 15% of the bank's £1.2 trillion in total assets and was previously conducted in the UK through branches across the EU. The plans will be in place by 29 March. The bank's Dublin operation is expected to double in size to 300 people as a result of the business being channelled though the Irish capital.
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
This isn't true. Palestinians are somewhat integrated into Jordanian society. There are and have been Palestinians in the cabinet and the king is married to one!
From what I know (limited), you're both right (in terms of the posts shown - I don't know the context because I didn't see the original discussion). There is (I believe) some disquiet in certain circles that the next King will effectively be half Palestinian and therefore much more inclined to accelerate the integration process. If given full rights, they make up a (slight) majority of the Jordanian population.
Am off to Israel and Palestine next week for a fortnight, should be interesting to see the situation at first hand for the first time
Recommend a half day guided walking tour of Jerusalem
Barnier's statement a week ago seems pretty close to that: "It needs a stable majority in London for all laws related to Brexit that need to be adopted."
Right now asking for that is the Mother of All Unicorns.
Maybe that's telling us the betting markets are overestimating the likelihood of an extension (implied probability currently 70%).
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
Care is needed, because in the small print the Betfair No Deal market actually means "No Deal on 29 March". It wouldn't cover No Deal after an extension.
Barnier's statement a week ago seems pretty close to that: "It needs a stable majority in London for all laws related to Brexit that need to be adopted."
Right now asking for that is the Mother of All Unicorns.
Maybe that's telling us the betting markets are overestimating the likelihood of an extension (implied probability currently 70%).
I don't think an extension is that improbable: it keeps being mentioned. This is discomfiting to me as I have just placed a £500bet at 9/4 on departure by the 29th. But there y'go.
I think a 3 month extension is fairly likely. After all, if May's (probably unchanged deal) does not pass in two weeks time and it looks like we are crashing out, what is the downside to the EU offering us a 3 month extension, regardless of the chances of it producing a positive outcome. They have nothing to lose by offering the extension and May is not going to want to be seen as giving up and making no deal crash out a certainty, by refusing the extension.
She wants to come out of this as blameless as possible and spurning the chance of a 3 month extension is unlikely.
How would you rate the probability of an extension AND no deal? My arse is hanging out on that one.
Probably about the same odds as the Betfair no deal market which is currently just a bit higher than 3/1.
I cannot see us leaving on March 29th with no deal, because, as explained earlier, the EU would have nothing to lose by offering us a 3 month extension and May would have to be very brave to turn it down, if offered.
Care is needed, because in the small print the Betfair No Deal market actually means "No Deal on 29 March". It wouldn't cover No Deal after an extension.
As I said before, Betfair is being very naughty just calling this bet "No Deal Brexit - Yes or No?"; there are bound to be complaints if there is a delayed no deal.
I doubt it. Its part of the posturing in the budget negotiations. As far as I can work out they are arguing about tuppence ha'penny.
avoiding the legal stuff - is the Sturgeon Salmond split a real issue for the Nats or a storm in a tea cup ?
I think it will certainly weaken them both because Salmond has been a brilliantly effective campaigner and because Sturgeon has, perhaps understandably given their long relationship, bent the rules quite badly in how she has dealt with it. Without Salmond winning back the tartan Tories is going to be very difficult for Sturgeon which makes the overall majority that he achieved look a distant prospect.
It would be a mistake to underestimate their strength though. SLAB are in a pitiful place with a leader who 90%+ couldn't pick out from an ID parade, Ruth Davidson has done phenomenally well but must be pushing the ceiling of those in Scotland that would ever vote Tory and the Lib Dems are getting lost in the noise as usual.
The Greens are playing with fire because they only have their current representation because the SNP encouraged their members to think about whether a second vote for the SNP on the list vote was going to achieve anything if they were winning the constituencies and it might be better to vote for another pro independence party instead. They need to behave or they will get slapped. The SNP will remain the largest party for the foreseeable although the talent pool below Nicola is somewhat depleted.
Hmm. My assumption was that May would push this as far as possible, to the point where enough MPs were scared of no deal to pass whatever deal she put in front of them.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
I am staying on the bet. Any extension (as opposed to retraction) of A50 requires EU27 unanimity, and I dont think that either swift or easy. We are running out of time to extend.
I have a bet on No Deal [by 29 March], more as insurance than speculation.
But actually if kyf wants to bet on a last-minute deal, there is a Betfair market on when the deal will pass the Commons, and people can bet on March 1-29.
Yes 3.3 at present for a March Deal. Not much value I think.
Hmm. If anyone is convinced that an extension will happen only if a deal has been agreed by 29 March, and is convinced revocation isn't going to happen, then they can bet on No Deal and place a smaller bet on the deal passing by 29 March to cover their stake.
Barclays is moving €190bn (£166bn) of assets to Dublin because it "cannot wait any longer" to implement its Brexit contingency plan. The High Court, which has approved the move, says the move involves 5,000 clients. However, few jobs in London are expected to be affected.
The business amounts to around 15% of the bank's £1.2 trillion in total assets and was previously conducted in the UK through branches across the EU. The plans will be in place by 29 March. The bank's Dublin operation is expected to double in size to 300 people as a result of the business being channelled though the Irish capital.
So hang on, few jobs lost in London, but 300 extra in Dublin. Are these jobs being lost in "branches across the [non-UK] EU then?
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
This isn't true. Palestinians are somewhat integrated into Jordanian society. There are and have been Palestinians in the cabinet and the king is married to one!
From what I know (limited), you're both right (in terms of the posts shown - I don't know the context because I didn't see the original discussion). There is (I believe) some disquiet in certain circles that the next King will effectively be half Palestinian and therefore much more inclined to accelerate the integration process. If given full rights, they make up a (slight) majority of the Jordanian population.
The context was a tweet saying refugees have no impact on wages in Jordan (and therefore are not a bad thing). I was asking whether they could work & therefore whether they were included in the stats. It was an intellectual curiousity nothing more so anybinput welcome
Oh, ok. Definite impact on wages, and definite impact sociopolitically as well.
Edit: I have no idea whether the impacts are positive or negative, just that they will exist!
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
I doubt it. Its part of the posturing in the budget negotiations. As far as I can work out they are arguing about tuppence ha'penny.
avoiding the legal stuff - is the Sturgeon Salmond split a real issue for the Nats or a storm in a tea cup ?
I think it will certainly weaken them both because Salmond has been a brilliantly effective campaigner and because Sturgeon has, perhaps understandably given their long relationship, bent the rules quite badly in how she has dealt with it. Without Salmond winning back the tartan Tories is going to be very difficult for Sturgeon which makes the overall majority that he achieved look a distant prospect.
It would be a mistake to underestimate their strength though. SLAB are in a pitiful place with a leader who 90%+ couldn't pick out from an ID parade, Ruth Davidson has done phenomenally well but must be pushing the ceiling of those in Scotland that would ever vote Tory and the Lib Dems are getting lost in the noise as usual.
The Greens are playing with fire because they only have their current representation because the SNP encouraged their members to think about whether a second vote for the SNP on the list vote was going to achieve anything if they were winning the constituencies and it might be better to vote for another pro independence party instead. They need to behave or they will get slapped. The SNP will remain the largest party for the foreseeable although the talent pool below Nicola is somewhat depleted.
Yes Id been thinking AS had probably a decent personal following up in the NE of Scotland while NS had been better at picking up votes in the central belt. The Nats have always been a bit of a shaky house since they coalesce round a single issue but if the personalities are causing cracks it's one to watch.
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
I was gobsmacked yesterday when one of the Labour lot ( Rachel Reeves from memory ) said we had until the 29 March to decide. Nuts.
Barclays is moving €190bn (£166bn) of assets to Dublin because it "cannot wait any longer" to implement its Brexit contingency plan. The High Court, which has approved the move, says the move involves 5,000 clients. However, few jobs in London are expected to be affected.
The business amounts to around 15% of the bank's £1.2 trillion in total assets and was previously conducted in the UK through branches across the EU. The plans will be in place by 29 March. The bank's Dublin operation is expected to double in size to 300 people as a result of the business being channelled though the Irish capital.
So hang on, few jobs lost in London, but 300 extra in Dublin. Are these jobs being lost in "branches across the [non-UK] EU then?
LK on R4 saying lots of people now talking about extension behind the scenes
Is it an extension for any particular purpose, or just to give more time? And which side of the English Channel are the people in question?
Here. And she says there are two ideas knocking about; a short technical extension for preparation, and a longer one for rethink.
I really wonder whether the EU would be willing to agree to anything but a short extension for a definite purpose. Guy Verhofstadt said an extension past the Euro elections was "unthinkable". The other consideration is the likely effect on British politicians of telling them there isn't a fixed deadline after all.
An extension will serve only one purpose because nothing will ever be settled in Europe until the last minute. All an extension will do is to delay the implementation of the referendum result.
What sort of Brexit did we vote for?. It's quite simple. You know you've left a club when you stop paying the fees. If we continue paying the fees, we haven't left. We had a simple question on the ballot paper and we had a simple answer. This isn't rocket science, the delay is due to MPs refusal to honour their promises. Get rid of them if they keep refusing.
This may sound draconian, but it's not an uncommon view around here. London? I don't know.
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
I was gobsmacked yesterday when one of the Labour lot ( Rachel Reeves from memory ) said we had until the 29 March to decide. Nuts.
Perhaps she's talking about whether or not to revoke ? (In which case, she's probably right.)
A revocation the day before Brexit would at least be amusing in the reactions it proved...
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
It might be an uncomfortable couple of years - but on the bright side, it would do wonders for the greenhouse industry. Any significant tariffs on food would see some of the Netherlands producers set up operations over here.
From Venezuela to Zimbabwe, the noise that defines failing states is the wail. It’s not our fault, their leaders cry. We are the victims of a foreign conspiracy, fifth columnists and saboteurs. The most obvious and least discussed consequence of last night’s capitulation by the British Prime Minister to the right of her party is that the Tories are building a conspiracy theory of their own, as they prepare to whine and blame everyone but themselves for the crisis they have brought on Britain. If it is teaching us nothing else, Brexit has at least shown us that ‘taking back control’ never means taking on responsibility.
The events of this week ought to have stripped the last illusions from innocents who thought the British ruling class retained a residual competence: that someone, somewhere knows what they are doing.
I suspect I’m wasting my breath. But it is still worth asking intelligent Conservatives: is this the road you want to go down? And if it is, are you sure you know where it will end?
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
I was gobsmacked yesterday when one of the Labour lot ( Rachel Reeves from memory ) said we had until the 29 March to decide. Nuts.
Perhaps she's talking about whether or not to revoke ? (In which case, she's probably right.)
A revocation the day before Brexit would at least be amusing in the reactions it proved...
are you saying we can pass all the necessary legislation etc in 24 hours.
given the way this Parlt operates we'd be lucky to get it sorted by 29 March next year
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
I was gobsmacked yesterday when one of the Labour lot ( Rachel Reeves from memory ) said we had until the 29 March to decide. Nuts.
Perhaps she's talking about whether or not to revoke ? (In which case, she's probably right.)
A revocation the day before Brexit would at least be amusing in the reactions it proved...
are you saying we can pass all the necessary legislation etc in 24 hours.
given the way this Parlt operates we'd be lucky to get it sorted by 29 Mrach next year
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
This isn't true. Palestinians are somewhat integrated into Jordanian society. There are and have been Palestinians in the cabinet and the king is married to one!
From what I know (limited), you're both right (in terms of the posts shown - I don't know the context because I didn't see the original discussion). There is (I believe) some disquiet in certain circles that the next King will effectively be half Palestinian and therefore much more inclined to accelerate the integration process. If given full rights, they make up a (slight) majority of the Jordanian population.
Am off to Israel and Palestine next week for a fortnight, should be interesting to see the situation at first hand for the first time
Recommend a half day guided walking tour of Jerusalem
Thanks, am going with a tour company so I think that is included but will see
From Venezuela to Zimbabwe, the noise that defines failing states is the wail. It’s not our fault, their leaders cry. We are the victims of a foreign conspiracy, fifth columnists and saboteurs. The most obvious and least discussed consequence of last night’s capitulation by the British Prime Minister to the right of her party is that the Tories are building a conspiracy theory of their own, as they prepare to whine and blame everyone but themselves for the crisis they have brought on Britain. If it is teaching us nothing else, Brexit has at least shown us that ‘taking back control’ never means taking on responsibility.
The events of this week ought to have stripped the last illusions from innocents who thought the British ruling class retained a residual competence: that someone, somewhere knows what they are doing.
I suspect I’m wasting my breath. But it is still worth asking intelligent Conservatives: is this the road you want to go down? And if it is, are you sure you know where it will end?
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
There is much about this whole fiasco that speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is hard to grasp, but this is close to the top of the pile.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
we eat 20% too much and throw away 30% of the food we buy uneaten
nobody is going to starve though supermarkets might sell less.
the talent pool below Nicola is somewhat depleted.
It's barely a puddle
Scotland is lucky. Sturgeon, Salmond and Davidson are substantial figures (like or loathe them).
Have you seen the talent we have got in Wales in any of the three main parties ?
Barely enough for a tear.
Weep for Wales.
Mind you 49% of Welsh voters voted against even having a Welsh Assembly in 1997 compared to just 25% of Scots who voted against having a Scottish Parliament and the independence movement has always been stronger in Scotland than in Wales.
Hence more heavyweight figures in Scotland decide to build careers at Holyrood rather than Westminster than heavyweight figures in Wales decide to build a career at Cardiff Bay than Westminster
What a marvellous idea - spend the next fortnight debating whether or not to delay and for how long, rather than trying to get a deal that will get through parliament.
The fact that the government will need an extension to implement the necessary legislation whether with the deal or indeed a no deal speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is quite hard to grasp. I mean, did they not notice that there was a deadline coming up?
There is much about this whole fiasco that speaks of a level of incompetence and mismanagement that is hard to grasp, but this is close to the top of the pile.
Partly a consequence of May's obsession with secrecy, I think.
That this is only news now doesn't speak well of media oversight, either - as on here, most have been preoccupied with arguing their favourite flavour of Brexit.
What a marvellous idea - spend the next fortnight debating whether or not to delay and for how long, rather than trying to get a deal that will get through parliament.
It plays to May's sole area of expertise. Which is why we are where we are.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
we eat 20% too much and throw away 30% of the food we buy uneaten
nobody is going to starve though supermarkets might sell less.
I must have missed the "Vote Leave - You Probably Won't Starve" campaign.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
I don't think we need to plan for long-term self-sufficiency in food. Obviously things will get sorted out over time. It's the short-term disruption when things suddenly change on 29 March that worries me. Actually, I was mildly reassured by the supermarkets' letter the other day, because it implied there wasn't a shortage of ambient temperature space for stockpiling food. Hopefully that means no one will actually go hungry even if there were a period when fresh/frozen food wasn't available. And if the stockpile is big enough and things obviously aren't working, there will be time to go cap in hand to Brussels and plead for mercy, before the stockpile is exhausted.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
we eat 20% too much and throw away 30% of the food we buy uneaten
nobody is going to starve though supermarkets might sell less.
I must have missed the "Vote Leave - You Probably Won't Starve" campaign.
at any other time - outside the Brexit prism - worthy types like yourself would be advocating eating less ( save the NHS ) or stopping food waste. Now youve turned it all on its head just to feed a scare story. Brexit is driving you mad.
Irrespective of brexit eating less and not throwing food away is a good thing and still will be whatever type of deal emerges.
I can understand other companies warning about delays to imports but the amusing thing about the supermarkets and fast food companies is they have spent years banging on about their fresh 100% British produce. How long is McDonald's 100% British Beef going to spend stuck at Calais?
I believe just because something is advertised as being British produce does not mean that it is. As long as it was processed in the UK at one point, it can be labelled as British regardless of source.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
The UK imports around 80% of its food, including 50% of meat. The largest source of meat is Irish beef.
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
we eat 20% too much and throw away 30% of the food we buy uneaten
nobody is going to starve though supermarkets might sell less.
Why not put that pithy summation on the side of public transport...
The problem with Brexit is not that we necessarily starve. It is the permanent loss of most of our remaining manufacturing and the imposition of a drag on our competitiveness that will increase costs on the surviving part of the economy by about 10%-15%. The impact is to turn the UK from a contender in the global markets into an economy that lacks the skills, the efficiency and the leadership to do more than drift out of the top ten.
A future selling scones to Chinese tourists while they admire our absurdly old fashioned ways, like our political system, is not the future I would want for my kids.
This is a turning point, and the Conservative Party which has inflicted this disaster on the country should be eviscerated. The so-called party of business has systematically trashed the business environment in the most reckless and stupid way possible.
Trump got 81% of the evangelical Christian vote, a higher share than Romney, McCain or even George W Bush got, his attacks on partial birth abortion proved particular popular
I think the proportion of food we import is about one third, not 80%.
About half and slowly rising
It's probably not that we can't produce the food ourselves, just that it's cheaper to import it at the moment.
The 'probably' in that sentence is doing a lot of work.
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
I don't think we need to plan for long-term self-sufficiency in food. Obviously things will get sorted out over time. It's the short-term disruption when things suddenly change on 29 March that worries me. Actually, I was mildly reassured by the supermarkets' letter the other day, because it implied there wasn't a shortage of ambient temperature space for stockpiling food. Hopefully that means no one will actually go hungry even if there were a period when fresh/frozen food wasn't available. And if the stockpile is big enough and things obviously aren't working, there will be time to go cap in hand to Brussels and plead for mercy, before the stockpile is exhausted.
Why would you want to go cap in hand to Brussels at the moment we have maximum leverage. Head to Berlin and by that point the government will have businesses pushing them and Ireland on the brink of surrender and we can sign a free trade deal.
Comments
What’s the reasoning behind not shipping things to the UK? If they’re paid for then the shipping risks would be on the buyer.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/andrew-sullivan-the-abyss-of-hate-versus-hate.html
- Han Solo, Star Wars (1977).
Sarah Sanders says 'God wanted Trump to be president'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47066659
Edit - and that should be 'is.' He's still an American.
Does this mean a bet on us leaving on the 29th is effectively a bet on us crashing out with no deal in March, or is a deal still possible to legislate for?
This has huge implications on the value of my bet, which I placed largely on my belief a deal close to the current withdrawal agreement will be done at the 11th hour...
Leaving March 29th and No Deal are rapidly becoming synonyms though.
Just as well our MPs are not squandering the remaining time!
I shall get my icepick. Have a good morning.
(see my video)
Even if most items are just Statutory Instruments it only takes a single MP to object and things will be delayed.
However if we have already gone past the point of no return in terms of legislating for the deal without an extension being required, my bet on leaving by the 29th of March no longer looks like value and I should consider cashing in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II0U4NMkQz4&feature=youtu.be
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/key-snp-figures-told-by-nicola-sturgeon-to-prepare-for-possible-election-1-4865211
PS: loking like a double , election and referendum though election may make referendum superflous. Ruth the Mooth might be out of a job before she gets back from her holidays.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinians_in_Jordan
thats the problem with all the non stop brexit bollocks, anything else worth discussing is getting shut out
For example there will probably be schedules in the GFA dealing with agricultural trading in 2000-02 or transitional arrangements. Not relevant today but still part of “in full”
But actually if kyf wants to bet on a last-minute deal, there is a Betfair market on when the deal will pass the Commons, and people can bet on March 1-29.
BUT it was underpinned by at least the fact of our membership, and I suspect at that time the possibility of further integration (given Blair and Mandelson were in their first flush).
Which meant none of the economic, regulatory and citizenship stuff was much of an issue, and now is more so. Now, Ireland’s EU membership and our leaving actually complicates the CTA which survived the troubles.
The business amounts to around 15% of the bank's £1.2 trillion in total assets and was previously conducted in the UK through branches across the EU.
The plans will be in place by 29 March. The bank's Dublin operation is expected to double in size to 300 people as a result of the business being channelled though the Irish capital.
It would be a mistake to underestimate their strength though. SLAB are in a pitiful place with a leader who 90%+ couldn't pick out from an ID parade, Ruth Davidson has done phenomenally well but must be pushing the ceiling of those in Scotland that would ever vote Tory and the Lib Dems are getting lost in the noise as usual.
The Greens are playing with fire because they only have their current representation because the SNP encouraged their members to think about whether a second vote for the SNP on the list vote was going to achieve anything if they were winning the constituencies and it might be better to vote for another pro independence party instead. They need to behave or they will get slapped. The SNP will remain the largest party for the foreseeable although the talent pool below Nicola is somewhat depleted.
Edit: I have no idea whether the impacts are positive or negative, just that they will exist!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47055188
What sort of Brexit did we vote for?. It's quite simple. You know you've left a club when you stop paying the fees. If we continue paying the fees, we haven't left. We had a simple question on the ballot paper and we had a simple answer. This isn't rocket science, the delay is due to MPs refusal to honour their promises. Get rid of them if they keep refusing.
This may sound draconian, but it's not an uncommon view around here. London? I don't know.
(In which case, she's probably right.)
A revocation the day before Brexit would at least be amusing in the reactions it proved...
We could feed ourselves at pinch. The free market is an amazingly efficient way of organising production and consumption. I don't think we'd like the results much though.
Any significant tariffs on food would see some of the Netherlands producers set up operations over here.
Have you seen the talent we have got in Wales in any of the three main parties ?
Barely enough for a tear.
Weep for Wales.
The events of this week ought to have stripped the last illusions from innocents who thought the British ruling class retained a residual competence: that someone, somewhere knows what they are doing.
I suspect I’m wasting my breath. But it is still worth asking intelligent Conservatives: is this the road you want to go down? And if it is, are you sure you know where it will end?
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/01/this-is-brexits-la-la-land-moment/
given the way this Parlt operates we'd be lucky to get it sorted by 29 March next year
nobody is going to starve though supermarkets might sell less.
Hence more heavyweight figures in Scotland decide to build careers at Holyrood rather than Westminster than heavyweight figures in Wales decide to build a career at Cardiff Bay than Westminster
That this is only news now doesn't speak well of media oversight, either - as on here, most have been preoccupied with arguing their favourite flavour of Brexit.
Which is why we are where we are.
Irrespective of brexit eating less and not throwing food away is a good thing and still will be whatever type of deal emerges.
The problem with Brexit is not that we necessarily starve. It is the permanent loss of most of our remaining manufacturing and the imposition of a drag on our competitiveness that will increase costs on the surviving part of the economy by about 10%-15%. The impact is to turn the UK from a contender in the global markets into an economy that lacks the skills, the efficiency and the leadership to do more than drift out of the top ten.
A future selling scones to Chinese tourists while they admire our absurdly old fashioned ways, like our political system, is not the future I would want for my kids.
This is a turning point, and the Conservative Party which has inflicted this disaster on the country should be eviscerated. The so-called party of business has systematically trashed the business environment in the most reckless and stupid way possible.
Big changes are coming. They are needed.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/conservative-leader-evangelical-support-trump-exceeded-bush-mccain-romney