There is no such thing as "international law". There is ad hoc adherence to various treaties, often abrogated. Show me the Supreme Court of the World, and I will change my mind.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's probably brinkmanship, which can work,but often doesn't. Of course the problem with daring other people to call your bluff is that sometimes they do, even if it would be dumb of them as well. Nations do dumb things all the time.
Sounds entirely reasonable to me. The agreement will still be there but UK courts will need to abide by UK law? So they absolutely should, that is part of being a sovereign country.
If the EU thinks we're in breach of the treaty then that is for them to deal with, not UK courts.
Lol, of course you do
What part of what I wrote do you disagree with?
The UKs going to be a sovereign country from 1/1/21 - whose law should the UK courts follow other than the UKs laws?
Hypothetically if we were to sign a trade deal with the USA then do you think US courts would follow US law or our trade deal first and foremost?
If countries think agreements have been breached that's their responsibility to take up, not our courts.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
This bill - if it happens - will have no direct impact on UK-Japan negotiations.
However, it will undoubtedly raise the question in the minds of the Japanese, of the extent to which we will abide by treaty commitments. Now, I suspect that people accept that Brexit is fundamentally different and unusual. But I also suspect that the Japanese will be quite shocked that it isn't a different UK government going back on the word of a previous one, it is the same PM that signed the agreement who is proposing something different.
Sounds entirely reasonable to me. The agreement will still be there but UK courts will need to abide by UK law? So they absolutely should, that is part of being a sovereign country.
If the EU thinks we're in breach of the treaty then that is for them to deal with, not UK courts.
We will have to await details, but if UK f*cks up the NI issue then a hard border will end up within the island of Ireland and then all hell could break lose.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
OK. Lets work on that assumption - that this is a feint to force the perfidious Europeans to finally yield. They won't. They were never ever going to bend on their absolute red lines. They aren't going to bend now that we are threatening to shoot off our own testicles.
So yes. All trade deals will be undermined if we demonstrate to the world that the word of Her Majesty's Government is worthless.
There is no such thing as "international law". There is ad hoc adherence to various treaties, often abrogated. Show me the Supreme Court of the World, and I will change my mind.
Boris's move sounds poor annd self defeating to me, but agreed people vastly overstate what is meant by the phrase international law. The things many countries do which they claim (sometimes truthfully) is no breach of any international law, is mind boggling.
... When it is the Prime Minister who signed the treaty who also proposes a law that is in breach of it, then you can expect other leaders to doubt the sincerity of his word in future.
That should not pose a problem for Boris, given his employment history....
Why would Johnson want to re-write the NI protocol when it was fine, or perhaps the Tories lied again and didn't know what they had signed
I wonder what truth there is to these "rumours".
Johnson's supporters by and large don't care if its No Deal. Most of us would like a deal if a good one is available, but we're not afraid of No Deal like Johnson's opponents are terrified by it.
I resist the temptation to ascribe everythintg to Cummings, but reneging on signed agreements does have the anarchist "constructive destruction" flavour which he (and sometimes LadyG here) really like.
I suspect we will see some well-known Tory->Lab switchers at the (virtual) Labour conference in October.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
Why won't it be? We're - seemingly - going to undermine the EU agreement we signed.
There's an element of karmic justice if that happens. The EU were the ones who insisted on sequencing and claiming they got everything they wanted in perpetuity while we were left with only what we wanted for a year.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
Why won't it be? We're - seemingly - going to undermine the EU agreement we signed.
There's an element of karmic justice if that happens. The EU were the ones who insisted on sequencing and claiming they got everything they wanted in perpetuity while we were left with only what we wanted for a year.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
Sounds entirely reasonable to me. The agreement will still be there but UK courts will need to abide by UK law? So they absolutely should, that is part of being a sovereign country.
If the EU thinks we're in breach of the treaty then that is for them to deal with, not UK courts.
All treaties limit the abilities of governments - and parliaments - to do things. Every single one, if adhered to, reduces sovereignty because they are fundamentally negative. So, joining the WTO limits your ability to set tariffs on a country-by-country basis. Entering in to a free trade agreement limits your ability to pass laws in many, many ways.
Now, a sovereign nation can pass all the laws they like. However, if doing so causes them to be in breach of their treaty obligations, then the treaty will be essentially voided. When it is the Prime Minister who signed the treaty who also proposes a law that is in breach of it, then you can expect other leaders to doubt the sincerity of his word in future.
Of course! I entirely agree with that.
But that's for those other leaders to deal with. Its not for our courts to deal with. And if those other leaders aren't signing a deal with us then it won't make that much difference anyway. If those other leaders have got a deal with us then they normally come with arbitration procedures . . . again for them to deal with not our courts.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
Outstanding macro economics. What did they teach Sunak on that PPE course?
1. The pandemic is nowhere near finished. A LOT of financial support is still needed before we are through this unless we want 5m or 6m unemployed. 2. The size of the UK debt isn't really a problem right now. Its increased by a trillion pounds in a decade and we're still here. So its not an economic problem 3. The issue Sunak is talking to is political. Tory MPs will not allow him to keep printing money. Reality won't let him stop spending. Which only leaves tax rises.
Its the wrong call economically in normal times. But as we're about to castrate ourselves the economic harm of tax rises will be hidden, and politically its the right call from his perspective..
Announcing no deal at this point seems a fairly predictable step in the context of logjammed negotiations and an imminent deadline. What it means in the overall scheme of things remains to be seen.
Outstanding macro economics. What did they teach Sunak on that PPE course?
I can see a case for introducing some additional taxes that will be accepted now but wont be in the future. The most obvious ones in that group are increasing rates of CGT, cutting pension tax relief for the very well off, and a land value tax - none of which would be at all popular with tory backbenchers.
An online sales tax is slightly different in that it will happen sooner or later anyway, its needed as business rates become less viable. Now seems a sensible time to introduce it.
The signposting has been an increase in CGT and an online sales tax - I think thats about right, and neither will hurt the economy too much. Other ideas are being floated mostly as expectations management imo.
Outstanding macro economics. What did they teach Sunak on that PPE course?
1. The pandemic is nowhere near finished. A LOT of financial support is still needed before we are through this unless we want 5m or 6m unemployed. 2. The size of the UK debt isn't really a problem right now. Its increased by a trillion pounds in a decade and we're still here. So its not an economic problem 3. The issue Sunak is talking to is political. Tory MPs will not allow him to keep printing money. Reality won't let him stop spending. Which only leaves tax rises.
Its the wrong call economically in normal times. But as we're about to castrate ourselves the economic harm of tax rises will be hidden, and politically its the right call from his perspective..
If the tax rises make things a lot worse, especially as we No Deal, then even the currently laid-back bond markets may begin to wonder about the UK.
I have no idea on these rumours but it has certainly stirred up the remainer's tonight
It should stir up the leavers as well. Hard as nails no deal. Having torn up a legally binding trade deal. With no hope of signing any trade deal with anyone without a change of government. I know that the faithful think England is exceptional and will prevail. That delusion is about to splat against the wall of reality.
Outstanding macro economics. What did they teach Sunak on that PPE course?
I can see a case for introducing some additional taxes that will be accepted now but wont be in the future. The most obvious ones in that group are increasing rates of CGT, cutting pension tax relief for the very well off, and a land value tax - none of which would be at all popular with tory backbenchers.
An online sales tax is slightly different in that it will happen sooner or later anyway, its needed as business rates become less viable. Now seems a sensible time to introduce it.
The signposting has been an increase in CGT and an online sales tax - I think thats about right, and neither will hurt the economy too much. Other ideas are being floated mostly as expectations management imo.
The Tories won't increase taxes where it actually matters, not that I think this very moment is a good time to do it anyway. Longer term, yes let's talk about tax rises on the richest
I admit that a WTO terms Brexit makes a Yes vote a 50% chance if not more yes. Which is why I would still prefer a FTA with the EU.
However if Boris did go to WTO terms Brexit then granted indyref2 and Yes won with the UK outside the EEA and CU and without even an EU FTA that means customs posts at the Scottish border, tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa, a surge of nationalism on both sides of the border and if Scotland rejoins the EEA no prospect of free trade in GB for years unless there is a rUK EU agreement.
English and Scottish relations would be at their lowest since Bannockburn and Flodden, it is a nightmare and division within these islands I would prefer to avoid
You have, however, frequently stated Boris Johnson will not offer a second independence referendum in Scotland in this Parliament so the issue is moot. Scotland will have to go along with whatever the UK Government get sor doesn't get from the negotiations with the EU.
The question then becomes IF we go to WTO and the economic impact is sub-optimal, how and in what ways will the voters express their displeasure?
Clearly, one option is to hand Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP a thumping majority probably by ousting Tory MSPs and marginalising Unionist representation.
There are only six Scottish Conservative MPs at Westminster so they will be no great loss if ousted in 2024. That won't stop a Conservative majority in the RUK but were that not to be the case, I think we all know what the price of the SNP support for a minority Labour Government would be.
Yes which is why I think if the SNP win a majority next year at Holyrood they will have to wait for a Starmer premiership in 2024 to be granted an indyref2, though given Starmer would agree to an EEA style FTA with the EU unlike Boris and probably throw in devomax too that would make a Yes vote less likely anyway
If the Scots elect by a landslide the SNP on a mandate of having a referendum . . .
. . . and if the response by the Government is basically "f**k off no, you're not having a referendum, we don't care what you vote for" (as you want it to be) . . .
. . . then by the time Starmer is elected it won't matter what he does with regards to Devomax, EEA or anything else, it would all be too little, too late.
Well if Starmer grants indyref2 that is a risk he will have to take, if even EEA and devomax won't save the Union then at that point it is dead, Labour will have lost the Union and the Tories will have gained a larger majority in the remainder of seats at Westminster
Its not a risk he will have to take, it will be what the Scots have voted for. If the Scots vote for a referendum next year, it will be what they have voted for.
What gives you or any English MP the moral right to deny the Scots the right to make the decision themselves?
But if turnout next May is in the region of 50% , it will be clear evidence that the issue is not exciting voters in Scotland in the way the commentariat is inclined to assume. Many will have shown their indifference.
You are in complete denial by the looks of it
You are in hundred.
All and any kind of politicking will be done to avoid it, Royal Commissions on Devomax etc.
You may say this will stoke Scots grievance and guarantee indy in the end, but if that is almost inevitable, anyway, HMG has nothing to lose by denying a vote and hoping for a miracle.
Also: will it stoke Scottish grievance? Madrid basically invaded Catalunya and locked up all the Catalan leaders, to prevent secession, and yet polls show Catalan independence has not gained in popularity. It is as it was.
Re your last paragraph you sound like HYUFD
Any attempt at anything like that will guarantee independence.
Post next May the SNP will make the governance of Scotland almost impossible for a Boris led government without a referendum and the irony is that by agreeing oneitwill give the union the best chance of winning
I do expect a drawn out process in agreeing a referendum and I do not expect it before mid summer 2022
I accept your moral, logical and emotional argument. You are right there will be huge pressure on the Tories to grant a vote, and the pressure will have a persuasive moral case behind it.
But will any UK PM grant a vote they are likely to lose, a vote which - if the polls stay as they are - will destroy their own career, destroy their 300 year old country, and severely damage the economy of all four nations? No. Simply not going to happen.
I am very close to Scotland and the Scots having had a near lifetime of association through marriage and actually spending my young years on the border at Berwick and then moving to Edinburgh
There has always been an anti English undercurrent current which I have experienced personally on occasions, even though I am half Welsh, and covid has been a springboard for Scotland to show how they can be different and they want more
Unless covid destroys the SNP economic competence over the next six months expect a solid win next May which will make Boris task of winning the Scots round to the union very difficult and saying no the indy 2 until post 2024 is certain to fracture any cooperation between Westminster and Edinburgh and make the divide near impossible to bridge
I agree with much of this, and I know you have strong Scots connections and you know whereof you speak.
You are ignoring the realpolitik for a British PM, however. No Tory leader will agree to a vote which will end the UK (and his career, instantly and forever). And if the vote is likely to be lost, does it matter if it is - theoretically - even likelier to be lost in five years if it is denied now?
Something might just come along and change things. A week is a long time, etc.
Boris will say No and pray to Kali for forgiveness.
The thing is that I believe there is a very good case to be made for the union and won
Anything that antagonises this case needs to be considered very carefully and a blunt 'not in this Parliament' is antagonistic unless of course the polls move towards the union.
I think there's a very good argument, for the welfare of every UK citizen, for letting the dust settle on Brexit - I'd say not less than 5 years subsequently to actually leaving, before opening the possibility of firing the starting pistol on another huge constitutional and economical upheaval. I find it deeply irresponsible to even suggest it should happen before then.
I disagree competely. The Brexiters are producting such a hideous mess that it is unfair to expect anyone to wait 5 years - or five weeks - before sorting it out.
And it is none of the business of the English if the Scots wish to depart the UK (and vice versa).
This is shite. Of course it the business of the English if the Scots depart. For a start you want to use the £ and the Bank of England for quite a while. And your departure will ensure a deep, deep recession in England (and probably a Depression in Scotland)
Likewise it is the business of the Scots if the English decide to leave the UK. This would have massive ramifications for Scotland, and you deserve to be consulted.
This is why referenda are not devolved matters, but reserved to Westminster, the parliament of the entire UK.
Exactly and Scottish independence on WTO terms Brexit means tariffs on exports to and from Scotland and border posts from Gretna to Berwick having a huge effect on England as well as Scotland
To be honest with COVID and no EU deal it might be the best time to get all this stuff over with in one go.
The impact of the Covid lockdown plus WTO terms Brexit and tariffs on exports to and from the UK and EU plus Scottish independence and tariffs on exports to and from Scotland and England will lead to the biggest economic recession in the British Isles since the 1930s Depression, if not worse.
Well, young HY, is this really what the moderate and respectable Conservatives were working for all this time?
Or were you deceived by your leaders?
Don't blame me, I voted Remain, however I also respect referendum results unlike the SNP
If you voted remain, you are NOT a True Conservative.
If you "respect referendum results" you are not a true Conservative. The intellectual tergiversations involved in promoting Unionism to an eternal absolute while abandoning proper parliamentary democracy in favour of nasty unBritish demagogic ochlocracy are simply unfathomable.
I admit that a WTO terms Brexit makes a Yes vote a 50% chance if not more yes. Which is why I would still prefer a FTA with the EU.
However if Boris did go to WTO terms Brexit then granted indyref2 and Yes won with the UK outside the EEA and CU and without even an EU FTA that means customs posts at the Scottish border, tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa, a surge of nationalism on both sides of the border and if Scotland rejoins the EEA no prospect of free trade in GB for years unless there is a rUK EU agreement.
English and Scottish relations would be at their lowest since Bannockburn and Flodden, it is a nightmare and division within these islands I would prefer to avoid
You have, however, frequently stated Boris Johnson will not offer a second independence referendum in Scotland in this Parliament so the issue is moot. Scotland will have to go along with whatever the UK Government get sor doesn't get from the negotiations with the EU.
The question then becomes IF we go to WTO and the economic impact is sub-optimal, how and in what ways will the voters express their displeasure?
Clearly, one option is to hand Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP a thumping majority probably by ousting Tory MSPs and marginalising Unionist representation.
There are only six Scottish Conservative MPs at Westminster so they will be no great loss if ousted in 2024. That won't stop a Conservative majority in the RUK but were that not to be the case, I think we all know what the price of the SNP support for a minority Labour Government would be.
Yes which is why I think if the SNP win a majority next year at Holyrood they will have to wait for a Starmer premiership in 2024 to be granted an indyref2, though given Starmer would agree to an EEA style FTA with the EU unlike Boris and probably throw in devomax too that would make a Yes vote less likely anyway
If the Scots elect by a landslide the SNP on a mandate of having a referendum . . .
. . . and if the response by the Government is basically "f**k off no, you're not having a referendum, we don't care what you vote for" (as you want it to be) . . .
. . . then by the time Starmer is elected it won't matter what he does with regards to Devomax, EEA or anything else, it would all be too little, too late.
Well if Starmer grants indyref2 that is a risk he will have to take, if even EEA and devomax won't save the Union then at that point it is dead, Labour will have lost the Union and the Tories will have gained a larger majority in the remainder of seats at Westminster
Its not a risk he will have to take, it will be what the Scots have voted for. If the Scots vote for a referendum next year, it will be what they have voted for.
What gives you or any English MP the moral right to deny the Scots the right to make the decision themselves?
But if turnout next May is in the region of 50% , it will be clear evidence that the issue is not exciting voters in Scotland in the way the commentariat is inclined to assume. Many will have shown their indifference.
You are in complete denial by the looks of it
You are in denial of the political reality, Big G.
No Tory PM is ever going to allow a referendum on the Union that they seem likely to lose. It would mean instant resignation, for a start, and historic infamy- and the end of the Union, causing an immense recession on both sides of the border (much worse in Scotland). It would guarantee economic and political chaos for half a decade or more. Brexit times a hundred.
All and any kind of politicking will be done to avoid it, Royal Commissions on Devomax etc.
You may say this will stoke Scots grievance and guarantee indy in the end, but if that is almost inevitable, anyway, HMG has nothing to lose by denying a vote and hoping for a miracle.
Also: will it stoke Scottish grievance? Madrid basically invaded Catalunya and locked up all the Catalan leaders, to prevent secession, and yet polls show Catalan independence has not gained in popularity. It is as it was.
Indeed, people forget the Tories under Churchill refused to even grant India independence and ignored Gandhi's 'Quit India' campaign begun in 1942, it took Attlee's Labour government for that to happen in 1948 and it was a Liberal PM Lloyd George who agreed the Irish Free State.
Which UK party granted Independence to the following?
Libya (1951) Sudan (1956) Ghana (1957) Malaya (1957) Nigeria (1960) Somalia (1960) Cyprus (1960) Sierra Leone (1961) Tanganyika (1961) Kuwait (1961) Uganda (1962) Jamaica (1962) Trinidad and Tobago (1962) Barbados (1962) Kenya (1963) Zanzibar (1963) Sarawak and North Borneo (1963) Singapore (1963) Malawi (1964) Malta (1964) Fiji (1970) UAE (1971) Qatar (1971) Bahrain (1971) Oman (1971) Bahamas (1973) Grenada (1974) St. Vincent and the Grenadines (1979) Kiribati (1979) Zimbabwe (1980) Vanuatu (1980) Belize (1981) Antigua and Barbuda (1981) Saint Kitts and Nevis (1983) Brunei (1984)
And I guess we could also mention Hong Kong (Sino-British joint declaration in 1984).
The population of all those nations combined is less than that of India and Pakistan, it was the granting of Indian independence and the concurrent creation of an independent Pakistan by Attlee that started the ball rolling on making decolonisation inevitable.
The Hong Kong handover to China technically happened when Blair was PM, though we only had it on a lease anyway
Yes which is why I think if the SNP win a majority next year at Holyrood they will have to wait for a Starmer premiership in 2024 to be granted an indyref2, though given Starmer would agree to an EEA style FTA with the EU unlike Boris and probably throw in devomax too that would make a Yes vote less likely anyway
I'm sure Starmer will grant the SNP their vote on the condition of their support in Westminster and the recognition he will campaign for Scotland to remain in the Union.
I imagine the LDs will support that but as for the Conservatives, here's the thing - publicly they may stand four-square behind the Union but will they want to be on the same platform as Starmer and Labour and of course we all know IF Scotland leaves the Union, Conservative prospects in RUK will be much improved.
Let me ask you as an activist - if you were able, would you go to Scotland and campaign for the retention of the Union in a second referendum and would you campaign alongside Labour and Lib Dem activists if that were the case?
Exactly. HYUFD and his like are treating Scotland like an imperial English colony, and driving it away, yet will blame SKS and Labour while reaping the electoral benefit.
It's worth bearing in mind, however, that in most elections Scotland made no difference to the largely ENglish overall result - either it got what it voted for (usually Labour pre 1950s) or not at all (Tories) and the result would have been the same even if there had not been a Great War and Scotland had gone indy in the 1920s.
"Most" is doing a lot of lifting there.
2019 - England Tory landslide, UK large Tory majority (some argument as to whether to call it a landslide or not, I would) 2017 - England healthy Tory majority, UK hung Parliament. 2015 - England Tory landslide, UK unstable Tory majority. 2010 - England Tory landside, UK hung Parliament. 2005 - England small Labour majority, UK large Labour majority.
IIRC in 2005 the Conservatives got more votes in England than Labour did.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
Why won't it be? We're - seemingly - going to undermine the EU agreement we signed.
There's an element of karmic justice if that happens. The EU were the ones who insisted on sequencing and claiming they got everything they wanted in perpetuity while we were left with only what we wanted for a year.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
You're completely out to lunch, off the deep end
I dunno about that IncorrectHB. The sequencing of the talks agreed to by May has been noted even by ardent remainers as incomprehensible. The withdrawal agreement was predicated on a good faith negotiations for a free trade agreement. It’s hard to see what access to biological natural resources (fish) has to do with that. Seems to me that both sides have been happy for many months for these talks to fail.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
Nothing that happened in the plague over last few months affected the supply side of foods, meds and so on in a major way. There was a demand spike when everyone rushed to buy extra loo roll. The supply was basically ok.
The chaos at the border and the mess over lorry drivers passes and custom officers and IT systems that don't exist will mess up supply big time. As every major organization involved in trade and customs and supply has been warning for months.
Hopefully you have stocked up on paints for the portraits.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
Why won't it be? We're - seemingly - going to undermine the EU agreement we signed.
There's an element of karmic justice if that happens. The EU were the ones who insisted on sequencing and claiming they got everything they wanted in perpetuity while we were left with only what we wanted for a year.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
You're completely out to lunch, off the deep end
I dunno about that IncorrectHB. The sequencing of the talks agreed to by May has been noted even by ardent remainers as incomprehensible. The withdrawal agreement was predicated on a good faith negotiations for a free trade agreement. It’s hard to see what access to biological natural resources (fish) has to do with that. Seems to me that both sides have been happy for many months for these talks to fail.
Did you just notice my profile picture? It's fantastic isn't it
Is nobody suspicious that the same day Boris is going to give it only 30 days to get a deal somebody talks to the FT that the government is willing to bypass the WA?
Is there are market on which nations will participate in the successor GE to 2019?
A double of England & Wales plus Kier Starmer wins looks tempting this evening.
The Tories have a majority of well over 100 in England and Wales, if Scotland goes so most likely does the chances of a Starmer premiership and English voters will want a hardnosed Tory as PM to take a tough line with the SNP in independence negotiations and ensure England gets the best divorce deal possible while still standing up to Brussels much as EU voters are behind Barnier to take as tough a line with the UK as possible during the Brexit divorce deal
I have no idea on these rumours but it has certainly stirred up the remainer's tonight
It should stir up the leavers as well. Hard as nails no deal. Having torn up a legally binding trade deal. With no hope of signing any trade deal with anyone without a change of government. I know that the faithful think England is exceptional and will prevail. That delusion is about to splat against the wall of reality.
What will you say if England does prevail?
And how will we do that? Phase 2 of a global pandemic. No trade deal with anyone. Chaos at the border. Counter-parties in proposed replacement deals slapping our tearing up of the NI Protocols on the table saying "we don't trust you".
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
You miss the point. Fish is insignificant to Britain, but it is somewhat more significant to Europe (tho still not that salient east of Frankfurt), and in fisheries - unusually - Britain has the upper hand
eg Macron faces a potentially difficult election in 2022. French fishermen (like their farmers, like British coalminers in the 60s and 70s) are known for their persuasive political power. No deal Brexit totally destroys French fishing.
What does Macron do?
Under No Deal Brexit, all UK fishing waters return to the UK, and no French boats will be allowed in UK waters. Legally.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
Why won't it be? We're - seemingly - going to undermine the EU agreement we signed.
There's an element of karmic justice if that happens. The EU were the ones who insisted on sequencing and claiming they got everything they wanted in perpetuity while we were left with only what we wanted for a year.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
You're completely out to lunch, off the deep end
I dunno about that IncorrectHB. The sequencing of the talks agreed to by May has been noted even by ardent remainers as incomprehensible. The withdrawal agreement was predicated on a good faith negotiations for a free trade agreement. It’s hard to see what access to biological natural resources (fish) has to do with that. Seems to me that both sides have been happy for many months for these talks to fail.
Did you just notice my profile picture? It's fantastic isn't it
Is that something else with vast regional cost differences ?
Hers was £260 month. (Plenty of gyms available in central London from £25pm, £20pm the rest of London).
Interesting worldview. Gifted 30% and she paid 70%. However the bit she "paid" was 60% family trust fund and 10% her savings. Surely that is gifted 90% and paid 10% by anyone with self respect.
There's a rather basic rule in negotiation. Trust is critical. Yes sometimes things change after signing a deal which can affect it. Yes, sometimes the counter party seems less bothered by this than they should be. Broken trust always damages future negotiations and in a world where dirty laundry gets aired in public the damage done goes way beyond just the deal in question.
Yet apparently in Brexit world the best way to get a counter party to give you a better deal as a smaller player than the one you have as a big player is to take a big shit on the negotiating table.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
Reneging on commitments made in an international treaty signals clearly that the UK cannot be trusted. If you’re going to do deals with an untrustworthy partner you’re going to need diamond hard guarantees they’ll be honoured or you’ll not bother.
I wonder how Japan feels about having their trade deal undermined by UK law
How does this effect a UK - Japan trade deal
If we're going to undermine EU agreements, why not do the same for an agreement we sign with Japan?
The UK - Japan trade deal will not be undermined
I am not commenting on these rumours but I do think no deal is very near
Why won't it be? We're - seemingly - going to undermine the EU agreement we signed.
There's an element of karmic justice if that happens. The EU were the ones who insisted on sequencing and claiming they got everything they wanted in perpetuity while we were left with only what we wanted for a year.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
You're completely out to lunch, off the deep end
I dunno about that IncorrectHB. The sequencing of the talks agreed to by May has been noted even by ardent remainers as incomprehensible. The withdrawal agreement was predicated on a good faith negotiations for a free trade agreement. It’s hard to see what access to biological natural resources (fish) has to do with that. Seems to me that both sides have been happy for many months for these talks to fail.
Did you just notice my profile picture? It's fantastic isn't it
An accomplished use of MS paint
Thank you, I've been practicing, you're a month or so late though
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
Premier League Football is very valuable to this country. I don't think this point is as strong as you think it is.
I admit that a WTO terms Brexit makes a Yes vote a 50% chance if not more yes. Which is why I would still prefer a FTA with the EU.
However if Boris did go to WTO terms Brexit then granted indyref2 and Yes won with the UK outside the EEA and CU and without even an EU FTA that means customs posts at the Scottish border, tariffs on Scottish exports to England and vice versa, a surge of nationalism on both sides of the border and if Scotland rejoins the EEA no prospect of free trade in GB for years unless there is a rUK EU agreement.
English and Scottish relations would be at their lowest since Bannockburn and Flodden, it is a nightmare and division within these islands I would prefer to avoid
You have, however, frequently stated Boris Johnson will not offer a second independence referendum in Scotland in this Parliament so the issue is moot. Scotland will have to go along with whatever the UK Government get sor doesn't get from the negotiations with the EU.
The question then becomes IF we go to WTO and the economic impact is sub-optimal, how and in what ways will the voters express their displeasure?
Clearly, one option is to hand Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP a thumping majority probably by ousting Tory MSPs and marginalising Unionist representation.
There are only six Scottish Conservative MPs at Westminster so they will be no great loss if ousted in 2024. That won't stop a Conservative majority in the RUK but were that not to be the case, I think we all know what the price of the SNP support for a minority Labour Government would be.
Yes which is why I think if the SNP win a majority next year at Holyrood they will have to wait for a Starmer premiership in 2024 to be granted an indyref2, though given Starmer would agree to an EEA style FTA with the EU unlike Boris and probably throw in devomax too that would make a Yes vote less likely anyway
If the Scots elect by a landslide the SNP on a mandate of having a referendum . . .
. . . and if the response by the Government is basically "f**k off no, you're not having a referendum, we don't care what you vote for" (as you want it to be) . . .
. . . then by the time Starmer is elected it won't matter what he does with regards to Devomax, EEA or anything else, it would all be too little, too late.
Well if Starmer grants indyref2 that is a risk he will have to take, if even EEA and devomax won't save the Union then at that point it is dead, Labour will have lost the Union and the Tories will have gained a larger majority in the remainder of seats at Westminster
Its not a risk he will have to take, it will be what the Scots have voted for. If the Scots vote for a referendum next year, it will be what they have voted for.
What gives you or any English MP the moral right to deny the Scots the right to make the decision themselves?
But if turnout next May is in the region of 50% , it will be clear evidence that the issue is not exciting voters in Scotland in the way the commentariat is inclined to assume. Many will have shown their indifference.
You are in complete denial by the looks of it
You are in denial of the political reality, Big G.
No Tory PM is ever going to allow a referendum on the Union that they seem likely to lose. It would mean instant resignation, for a start, and historic infamy- and the end of the Union, causing an immense recession on both sides of the border (much worse in Scotland). It would guarantee economic and political chaos for half a decade or more. Brexit times a hundred.
All and any kind of politicking will be done to avoid it, Royal Commissions on Devomax etc.
You may say this will stoke Scots grievance and guarantee indy in the end, but if that is almost inevitable, anyway, HMG has nothing to lose by denying a vote and hoping for a miracle.
Also: will it stoke Scottish grievance? Madrid basically invaded Catalunya and locked up all the Catalan leaders, to prevent secession, and yet polls show Catalan independence has not gained in popularity. It is as it was.
Indeed, people forget the Tories under Churchill refused to even grant India independence and ignored Gandhi's 'Quit India' campaign begun in 1942, it took Attlee's Labour government for that to happen in 1948 and it was a Liberal PM Lloyd George who agreed the Irish Free State.
Which UK party granted Independence to the following?
Libya (1951) Sudan (1956) Ghana (1957) Malaya (1957) Nigeria (1960) Somalia (1960) Cyprus (1960) Sierra Leone (1961) Tanganyika (1961) Kuwait (1961) Uganda (1962) Jamaica (1962) Trinidad and Tobago (1962) Barbados (1962) Kenya (1963) Zanzibar (1963) Sarawak and North Borneo (1963) Singapore (1963) Malawi (1964) Malta (1964) Fiji (1970) UAE (1971) Qatar (1971) Bahrain (1971) Oman (1971) Bahamas (1973) Grenada (1974) St. Vincent and the Grenadines (1979) Kiribati (1979) Zimbabwe (1980) Vanuatu (1980) Belize (1981) Antigua and Barbuda (1981) Saint Kitts and Nevis (1983) Brunei (1984)
And I guess we could also mention Hong Kong (Sino-British joint declaration in 1984).
The population of all those nations combined is less than that of India and Pakistan, it was the granting of Indian independence and the concurrent creation of an independent Pakistan by Attlee that started the ball rolling on making decolonisation inevitable.
The Hong Kong handover to China technically happened when Blair was PM, though we only had it on a lease anyway
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
You miss the point. Fish is insignificant to Britain, but it is somewhat more significant to Europe (tho still not that salient east of Frankfurt), and in fisheries - unusually - Britain has the upper hand
eg Macron faces a potentially difficult election in 2022. French fishermen (like their farmers, like British coalminers in the 60s and 70s) are known for their persuasive political power. No deal Brexit totally destroys French fishing.
What does Macron do?
Under No Deal Brexit, all UK fishing waters return to the UK, and no French boats will be allowed in UK waters. Legally.
You are a mass of contradictions. If the "rona" is as disastrous as you keep telling us, then Macron wont give much thought at all to the French fishing industry and its dispute with the UK, as he will be trying to keep France out of catastrophe.
There's a rather basic rule in negotiation. Trust is critical. Yes sometimes things change after signing a deal which can affect it. Yes, sometimes the counter party seems less bothered by this than they should be. Broken trust always damages future negotiations and in a world where dirty laundry gets aired in public the damage done goes way beyond just the deal in question.
Yet apparently in Brexit world the best way to get a counter party to give you a better deal as a smaller player than the one you have as a big player is to take a big shit on the negotiating table.
Under No Deal Brexit, all UK fishing waters return to the UK, and no French boats will be allowed in UK waters. Legally.
As we are tearing up legal agreements I assume we are also tearing up the majority of English fishing quotas we flogged to foreign types? Yes, they own the rights to fish our waters. But we're untrustworthy shits so will ban the owner of said rights from using them.
Clearly this will absolutely make foreign countries want to do deals with us.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
Premier League Football is very valuable to this country. I don't think this point is as strong as you think it is.
Both are about 0.1% of our economy depending how its measured. They are important but not something you base a whole trade relationship on.
Is that something else with vast regional cost differences ?
I was a member of the Tottenham Court YMCA, and used to swim and use the machines there. It was GREAT. And it was about £55/month. Which seemed like a reasonable price for a Central London gym.
(By contrast, membership of Equinox in LA is about $250/month.)
There's a rather basic rule in negotiation. Trust is critical. Yes sometimes things change after signing a deal which can affect it. Yes, sometimes the counter party seems less bothered by this than they should be. Broken trust always damages future negotiations and in a world where dirty laundry gets aired in public the damage done goes way beyond just the deal in question.
Yet apparently in Brexit world the best way to get a counter party to give you a better deal as a smaller player than the one you have as a big player is to take a big shit on the negotiating table.
Obviously.
Recall, we are negotiating with the EU (not the 27 nations). The EU is a body which wrote a Constitution, which was democratically rejected, in referenda, by both the French and the Dutch.
The legal and political reaction of the EU was not to dump the Constitution, but to slyly repackage it, as merely a Treaty, and thereby ram it through national parliaments, without the need for public votes. It was tantamount to a coup. It was an outrage. Even the architect of the Constitution, Giscard d'Estaing, admitted this:
"Public opinion will be led - without knowing it - to adopt the policies we would never dare present to them directly. All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden or disguised in some way."
The idea that in negotiating with the EU we are negotiating with some saintly body of law abiding paragons is infantile twaddle. The EU, as a whole, is a devious, lying, nasty, power-grabbing piece of shit, just like most national governments, but with less democratic validation.
What quarantine? As they aren't enforcing even taking the details of where passengers will self-isolate saying "we will halve the time" is meaningless.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
You miss the point. Fish is insignificant to Britain, but it is somewhat more significant to Europe (tho still not that salient east of Frankfurt), and in fisheries - unusually - Britain has the upper hand
eg Macron faces a potentially difficult election in 2022. French fishermen (like their farmers, like British coalminers in the 60s and 70s) are known for their persuasive political power. No deal Brexit totally destroys French fishing.
What does Macron do?
Under No Deal Brexit, all UK fishing waters return to the UK, and no French boats will be allowed in UK waters. Legally.
It would turn into a mess just like the governments myriad virus policies - all presentation and no enforcement.
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
You miss the point. Fish is insignificant to Britain, but it is somewhat more significant to Europe (tho still not that salient east of Frankfurt), and in fisheries - unusually - Britain has the upper hand
eg Macron faces a potentially difficult election in 2022. French fishermen (like their farmers, like British coalminers in the 60s and 70s) are known for their persuasive political power. No deal Brexit totally destroys French fishing.
What does Macron do?
Under No Deal Brexit, all UK fishing waters return to the UK, and no French boats will be allowed in UK waters. Legally.
He’ll refuse to give the UK any leeway in any area where the UK needs cooperation from the EU. And French boats will continue to fish where they do now. So what do we then do, given we have no means of actually policing all of our waters?
Looks like the government is giving up on the Union and any trade deals with anyone to embrace a full rogue state strategy. It’s really tough to see how this benefits us.
It's entertaining, during a time of global gloom?
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
You do realise that fish is about as important to the UK economy as Premier League football? Imagine how apoplectic you might be if a future LD govt wanted to rejoin so that it would focus European minds on Premier League football.
Premier League Football is very valuable to this country. I don't think this point is as strong as you think it is.
Both are about 0.1% of our economy depending how its measured. They are important but not something you base a whole trade relationship on.
So if the EU were saying they'd only give us a trade deal if we abolished the Premier League and had no top football anymore then you'd say "who cares, its only 0.1%"?
Principles matter and the principle is that the fish are our sovereign natural resource, not theirs.
Comments
Brexiteers own it now, I didn't vote for this. Can't blame the EU, can't blame Labour, you made the bed, you go in it
The UKs going to be a sovereign country from 1/1/21 - whose law should the UK courts follow other than the UKs laws?
Hypothetically if we were to sign a trade deal with the USA then do you think US courts would follow US law or our trade deal first and foremost?
If countries think agreements have been breached that's their responsibility to take up, not our courts.
However, it will undoubtedly raise the question in the minds of the Japanese, of the extent to which we will abide by treaty commitments. Now, I suspect that people accept that Brexit is fundamentally different and unusual. But I also suspect that the Japanese will be quite shocked that it isn't a different UK government going back on the word of a previous one, it is the same PM that signed the agreement who is proposing something different.
BoZo is willing to undermine deals he signed.
So yes. All trade deals will be undermined if we demonstrate to the world that the word of Her Majesty's Government is worthless.
Outstanding macro economics. What did they teach Sunak on that PPE course?
The EU aren't going to give us a better deal, on the knowledge we'll just undermine it anyway. The Government is full of thickos
Both pretty bloody awful, and both also subject to revisions in future, so I wouldn't necessarily say either has done better than the other.
"We are not planning for No Deal as we are going to get a great deal"
Yes, they'll have a few things to say on a No Surrender No Deal.
I suspect we will see some well-known Tory->Lab switchers at the (virtual) Labour conference in October.
The only use Brexit has is its entertainment value.
If the EU won't negotiate in good faith for a deal for next year onwards then frankly I don't care if the WA gets undermined. What do we get from it anymore if we've got No Deal from January anyway?
It was PB's CHB.
Aged like milk
He isn't going to want the job when the pharmacies run out of meds in January.
A double of England & Wales plus Kier Starmer wins looks tempting this evening.
FFS, you can't really be this dense?
But that's for those other leaders to deal with. Its not for our courts to deal with. And if those other leaders aren't signing a deal with us then it won't make that much difference anyway. If those other leaders have got a deal with us then they normally come with arbitration procedures . . . again for them to deal with not our courts.
I'm serious. BTW. If there is one time you could politically sneak this through, it is now. The world is roiled. This is merely another gust in a planetary storm.
There are proper benefits to No Deal. It will focus European minds, esp fisheries. It makes it us v them. It polarises, to the advantage of HMG, arguably. It cuts us free in one go, then both sides have to rebuild from first principles.
And the example of Covid shows that the idea we will all be famined for lack of roquefort is nonsense. We coped with a fecking once-in-a-century plague FFS, and no one starved. Brexit is just more red tape, in comparison.
2. The size of the UK debt isn't really a problem right now. Its increased by a trillion pounds in a decade and we're still here. So its not an economic problem
3. The issue Sunak is talking to is political. Tory MPs will not allow him to keep printing money. Reality won't let him stop spending. Which only leaves tax rises.
Its the wrong call economically in normal times. But as we're about to castrate ourselves the economic harm of tax rises will be hidden, and politically its the right call from his perspective..
I am guilty as charged then I guess.
On the rumour let's see the detail
An online sales tax is slightly different in that it will happen sooner or later anyway, its needed as business rates become less viable. Now seems a sensible time to introduce it.
The signposting has been an increase in CGT and an online sales tax - I think thats about right, and neither will hurt the economy too much. Other ideas are being floated mostly as expectations management imo.
The Hong Kong handover to China technically happened when Blair was PM, though we only had it on a lease anyway
If control is being taken back then thank you Boris. Good job well done.
Spain's fall came after an initial very sizeable fall in 1Q.
I believe in total theirs is statistically worse than ours, but I accept it is close
https://english.elpais.com/economy_and_business/2020-07-31/spains-economy-posts-historic-185-quarterly-fall-due-to-coronavirus-lockdown.html
But Labour got over 100 MPs more.
Nothing that happened in the plague over last few months affected the supply side of foods, meds and so on in a major way. There was a demand spike when everyone rushed to buy extra loo roll. The supply was basically ok.
The chaos at the border and the mess over lorry drivers passes and custom officers and IT systems that don't exist will mess up supply big time. As every major organization involved in trade and customs and supply has been warning for months.
Hopefully you have stocked up on paints for the portraits.
Is that something else with vast regional cost differences ?
yeah, it'll be fine
If we did it would have arbitration procedures etc anyway. OTOH what do we get from the old WA next year?
The EU have made this bed with their sequencing.
eg Macron faces a potentially difficult election in 2022. French fishermen (like their farmers, like British coalminers in the 60s and 70s) are known for their persuasive political power. No deal Brexit totally destroys French fishing.
What does Macron do?
Under No Deal Brexit, all UK fishing waters return to the UK, and no French boats will be allowed in UK waters. Legally.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
Its been a pretty impressive predictor.
Do try and keep up...
Interesting worldview. Gifted 30% and she paid 70%. However the bit she "paid" was 60% family trust fund and 10% her savings. Surely that is gifted 90% and paid 10% by anyone with self respect.
Yet apparently in Brexit world the best way to get a counter party to give you a better deal as a smaller player than the one you have as a big player is to take a big shit on the negotiating table.
Obviously.
But this is all "head of a pin" stuff. We both got stuffed.
And it was always thus.
The players might change but the game never does.
Clearly this will absolutely make foreign countries want to do deals with us.
(By contrast, membership of Equinox in LA is about $250/month.)
The legal and political reaction of the EU was not to dump the Constitution, but to slyly repackage it, as merely a Treaty, and thereby ram it through national parliaments, without the need for public votes. It was tantamount to a coup. It was an outrage. Even the architect of the Constitution, Giscard d'Estaing, admitted this:
"Public opinion will be led - without knowing it - to adopt the policies we would never dare present to them directly. All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden or disguised in some way."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8282241.stm
The idea that in negotiating with the EU we are negotiating with some saintly body of law abiding paragons is infantile twaddle. The EU, as a whole, is a devious, lying, nasty, power-grabbing piece of shit, just like most national governments, but with less democratic validation.
Principles matter and the principle is that the fish are our sovereign natural resource, not theirs.