politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The punters at Betfair think Remain have this in the bag

FPT - It is true that we don't know exactly what sort of deal we'll get if vote to Leave the EU. But we never will until it's negotiated, and we all know there will be a deal. (incidentally, by the same token many Remainers are effectively implying we can never Leave, because the risks and uncertainty are too great, which conveniently reinforces this)

The UK will: want to remain in a European free trade area, safeguard the City, maintain access to sell financial services, repatriate law and justice powers, have controls on migration, and save contributions.
The EU will: want an enduring and stable political solution amongst the EU, want the UK to continue to contribute money, to continue to sell goods to the UK, not to encourage anyone else to Leave, a good level of free movement access for its citizens to the UK market.

Either way we will continue to play a strong part in Europe. We are a European country after all. Both parties (UK and EU) will want to deepen collaboration in maritime security, scientific collaborations and counter-terrorism. The EU will want something "extra" from us for this deal, and we will need to be prepared to give it to them.

It should be based on demonstrating it is good for us and for them, and us leaving gives them a stronger, more secure Europe.

And we wouldn't trigger Article 50 until the broad principles reflected above had been informally agreed.

Ideally we'd have this on the table now, in which case Leave would win hands-down, but we don't, so we have to vote based upon the parameters of what we know would be on the table.

Pulpstar said:

I wouldn't call 67% implied probability "in the bag".

It's in the bag, but the bag has a great big bastard hole in the bottom.

They say that markets don't react, they overreact. But this market is bizarrely unresponsive to news of any type despite being very active. You could lay a spirit level on those charts.

What news would shift this market?

AlastairMeeks said:

They say that markets don't react, they overreact. But this market is bizarrely unresponsive to news of any type despite being very active. You could lay a spirit level on those charts.

What news would shift this market?

Consistent, clear Leave leads in the phone polls, probably.

AlastairMeeks said:

They say that markets don't react, they overreact. But this market is bizarrely unresponsive to news of any type despite being very active. You could lay a spirit level on those charts.

What news would shift this market?

Grexit perhaps? Which is why any market on Greece still being in the Euro at the end of June is value. The EU will not allow it to blow up before we vote.

A migrant crisis probably wouldn't affect us directly and its impact is unlikely to be large.

A major scandal involving the EU might do it, but there's currently no sign of one.

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

They say that markets don't react, they overreact. But this market is bizarrely unresponsive to news of any type despite being very active. You could lay a spirit level on those charts.

What news would shift this market?

It's really weird isn't it? There have been any number of contributions and movements in the polling and the odds just don't change. And yet the market is liquid. Don't recall seeing anything quite like it.

I think it's the Trump effect. Punters are betting that the establishment will simply not contemplate a certain outcome becoming a reality, and will use every single means at their disposal to stop it. They may still be right, in both instances.

Casino_Royale said:

And we wouldn't trigger Article 50 until the broad principles reflected above had been informally agreed.

...and free unicorns for everybody.

Back in the Real World, negotiations don't begin until we trigger Article 50, which in the event of a Leave vote will be early the next morning.

Luckyguy1983 said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

They say that markets don't react, they overreact. But this market is bizarrely unresponsive to news of any type despite being very active. You could lay a spirit level on those charts.

What news would shift this market?

It's really weird isn't it? There have been any number of contributions and movements in the polling and the odds just don't change. And yet the market is liquid. Don't recall seeing anything quite like it.

I think it's the Trump effect. Punters are betting that the establishment will simply not contemplate a certain outcome becoming a reality, and will use every single means at their disposal to stop it. They may still be right, in both instances.

I think it is more of a polling effect. No one believes the polls anymore so why should they move the markets?

And some of us have bets on Trump :-)

FPT, all those criticising Osborne for stating the bleeding obvious with regard to EU conditions for free market access, I would refer them to the "Sermon on the Pound" where the Zoomers got equally upset when he stated the bald truth.

He was right then. He is right now.

Casino_Royale said:

FPT - It is true that we don't know exactly what sort of deal we'll get if vote to Leave the EU. But we never will until it's negotiated, and we all know there will be a deal. (incidentally, by the same token many Remainers are effectively implying we can never Leave, because the risks and uncertainty are too great, which conveniently reinforces this)

The UK will: want to remain in a European free trade area, safeguard the City, maintain access to sell financial services, repatriate law and justice powers, have controls on migration, and save contributions.
The EU will: want an enduring and stable political solution amongst the EU, want the UK to continue to contribute money, to continue to sell goods to the UK, not to encourage anyone else to Leave, a good level of free movement access for its citizens to the UK market.

Either way we will continue to play a strong part in Europe. We are a European country after all. Both parties (UK and EU) will want to deepen collaboration in maritime security, scientific collaborations and counter-terrorism. The EU will want something "extra" from us for this deal, and we will need to be prepared to give it to them.

It should be based on demonstrating it is good for us and for them, and us leaving gives them a stronger, more secure Europe.

And we wouldn't trigger Article 50 until the broad principles reflected above had been informally agreed.

Ideally we'd have this on the table now, in which case Leave would win hands-down, but we don't, so we have to vote based upon the parameters of what we know would be on the table.

If we accept that neither side in a negotiation will want trade tariffs, what levers does the UK have to protect the City's interests given that both Frankfurt and Paris stand to benefit significantly from restricting free movement of capital and from denying passporting rights?

Cameron has already said that Article 50 would be triggered immediately after a Leave vote:

I want to spell out this point very carefully. If the British people vote to leave there is only one way to bring that about – and that is to trigger Article 50 of the Treaties and begin the process of exit.
And the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-commons-statement-on-eu-reform-and-referendum-22-february-2016

Scott_P said:

FPT, all those criticising Osborne for stating the bleeding obvious with regard to EU conditions for free market access, I would refer them to the "Sermon on the Pound" where the Zoomers got equally upset when he stated the bald truth.

He was right then. He is right now.

Like Moses ?

Pulpstar said:

Like Moses ?

Maybe he should get it carved on a giant stone tablet...

Scott_P said:

FPT, all those criticising Osborne for stating the bleeding obvious with regard to EU conditions for free market access, I would refer them to the "Sermon on the Pound" where the Zoomers got equally upset when he stated the bald truth.

He was right then. He is right now.

Your village is looking for you

Scott_P said:

Pulpstar said:

Like Moses ?

Maybe he should get it carved on a giant stone tablet...

I'm not sure he needs any further ideas on how to waste tax payers' money.

One of the reasons I got involved in political betting was a perception that the smart money which moved the markets would have inside information from the campaigns which was not generally available.

And then I read that tweet from Ladbrokes. Ed odds on favourite. What were the markets thinking? Was the smart money simply drowned out by the stupid?

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

-

If we accept that neither side in a negotiation will want trade tariffs, what levers does the UK have to protect the City's interests given that both Frankfurt and Paris stand to benefit significantly from restricting free movement of capital and from denying passporting rights?

Cameron has already said that Article 50 would be triggered immediately after a Leave vote:

I want to spell out this point very carefully. If the British people vote to leave there is only one way to bring that about – and that is to trigger Article 50 of the Treaties and begin the process of exit.
And the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-commons-statement-on-eu-reform-and-referendum-22-february-2016

Informal negotiations, yes.

Formal negotiations immediately with a two year timescale? Not necessarily.

Vote Leave is not campaigning on that basis, and it won't be Cameron's decision to make. If we do vote Leave, the Government, with Michael Gove right at the centre of it, would be obliged to follow it:

"First, there will be informal negotiations. No rational government would immediately begin any legal process to withdraw so there is no issue of an immediate use of Article 50, the EU’s preferred legal route for a member to leave that imposes a basic two-year timetable. The government will explore how the other EU countries and the Commission want to proceed."

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal

Remember: everything Cameron is currently saying and doing is designed to reinforce the uncertainty of Leave, and encourage a vote for Remain, not to accurately reflect what would really happen.

Indigo said:

There is the slight possibility that he is... now what was that word again... oh yes, lying.

So the day after a Leave vote he stands on the steps of Downing Street and says to the nation "I know you voted for Leave, and the only way to do that is invoke Article 50, but I have decided not to..."

FFS, at least try to keep it within shouting distance of reality.

Indigo said:

I'll just drop this in here

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/6263/merkel_would_force_fair_deal_for_britain_under_brexit

The German government, according to reliable sources, has made provisions for Brexit.

These include:

1) Immediately toning down any reference to "punishing" Britain for leaving;

2) Forging a UK-EU cooperation agreement to deal with all strategic, economic and migration issues;

3) Including, as a top priority, the United States, to be an honest broker.

Which would indeed be the only sane way for Germany to approach Brexit, although I am not sure that Anglo-German relations, even in those circumstances, would need a US chaperone.

Scott_P said:

Indigo said:

There is the slight possibility that he is... now what was that word again... oh yes, lying.

So the day after a Leave vote he stands on the steps of Downing Street and says to the nation "I know you voted for Leave, and the only way to do that is invoke Article 50, but I have decided not to..."

FFS, at least try to keep it within shouting distance of reality.

He would put a timetable in place, appoint the team responsible for negotiating and so on. The exact timing of Article 50 is only important in so much as it has to happen with a reasonable time to satisfy the Leavers. Or do you think he will just push the button out of spite on day 1?

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

-

If we accept that neither side in a negotiation will want trade tariffs, what levers does the UK have to protect the City's interests given that both Frankfurt and Paris stand to benefit significantly from restricting free movement of capital and from denying passporting rights?

Cameron has already said that Article 50 would be triggered immediately after a Leave vote:

I want to spell out this point very carefully. If the British people vote to leave there is only one way to bring that about – and that is to trigger Article 50 of the Treaties and begin the process of exit.
And the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-commons-statement-on-eu-reform-and-referendum-22-february-2016

Informal negotiations, yes.

Formal negotiations immediately with a two year timescale? Not necessarily.

Vote Leave is not campaigning on that basis, and it won't be Cameron's decision to make. If we do vote Leave, the Government, with Michael Gove right at the centre of it, would be obliged to follow it:

"First, there will be informal negotiations. No rational government would immediately begin any legal process to withdraw so there is no issue of an immediate use of Article 50, the EU’s preferred legal route for a member to leave that imposes a basic two-year timetable. The government will explore how the other EU countries and the Commission want to proceed."

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal

Remember: everything Cameron is currently saying and doing is designed to reinforce the uncertainty of Leave, and encourage a vote for Remain, not to accurately reflect what would really happen.

Cameron will still be Prime Minister. It will be his call about when to invoke Article 50, surely. This may be one reason why the leavers saying they believe he will stay on and that they want him to may not be telling the full truth.

Casino_Royale said:

OllyT said:

justin124 said:

OllyT said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yesterday Boris said that David Cameron will continue as PM post a leave vote and today on Marr both David Davis and Chris Grayling re-affirmed that Ken Clarke was wrong in his statement that David Cameron would be gone within 30 seconds of a leave vote and Chris Grayling went further by saying that his contacts throughout Europe would be invaluable as part of an exit team in negotiations with the EU. Is the leave campaign trying to re-assure the undecided conservatives that it is safe to vote leave and that a civil war will not follow any such vote

I think they are just calling it as they see it. To be honest it would probably serve their cause better if they could persuade the country that voting Leave was voting to get rid of Cameron but the fact that they are not playing that card shows me that they genuinely believe Cameron can and should stay. In spite of my occasional bouts of doubt and disdain for Cameron over the EU question it is a view I share.

Whatever they think in private, they cannot publicly say Cameron's job is on the line. They are members of the government, after all; or aspire to be, in Boris's case. In practice, how on earth could Cameron lead exit negotiations when he doesn't want to leave? It would be a recipe for permanent friction, at the very least. His authority would be utterly shot - both inside Parliament and with EU member states.

It is in vote LEAVE's best interest for the 2/3 or more of voters that do not want Cameron, to believe that voting LEAVE will kick Cameron out because some of them will use that as their main reason to vote LEAVE. The fact that Conservative LEAVE people are saying the opposite is down to party loyalty. Admirable, but not in best interests of LEAVE.

No left of centre voter is going to vote Leave in order to kick Cameron out when they will get Gove/Boris/Farage/IDS instead. It's a pipe dream.

Oh yes they will! I shall be one of them .

OK, poetic licence. There will not be many left of centre voting Leave primarily to kick out Cameron because they know what will follow will be worse.

So you are genuinely making your decision on the EU referendum based on wanting to remove one Tory politician for another. doesn't make any sense at all to me but each to his own.

Some may calculate a "worse" Tory leader makes Corbyn in GE2020 a shoe-in.

Nothing would make Corbyn a shoe-in, although a worse Tory leader and helpful economic conditions would give even him a shout.

Scott_P said:

MarkHopkins said:

He would put a timetable in place, appoint the team responsible for negotiating and so on. The exact timing of Article 50 is only important in so much as it has to happen with a reasonable time to satisfy the Leavers. Or do you think he will just push the button out of spite on day 1?

I think he would push the button on Day 1 out of respect for the vote.

Why you think that would be spiteful is not clear. If we voted for it, why wouldn't anyone want it?

"respect"?

Leave would be voting to leave the EU in the best and safest way for GB, over a reasonable time frame.

Leave are not voting to dive into Article 50 without a plan in place.

Indigo said:

...Forging a UK-EU cooperation agreement to deal with all strategic, economic and migration issues...

Told you...

MarkHopkins said:

Scott_P said:

MarkHopkins said:

He would put a timetable in place, appoint the team responsible for negotiating and so on. The exact timing of Article 50 is only important in so much as it has to happen with a reasonable time to satisfy the Leavers. Or do you think he will just push the button out of spite on day 1?

I think he would push the button on Day 1 out of respect for the vote.

Why you think that would be spiteful is not clear. If we voted for it, why wouldn't anyone want it?

"respect"?

Leave would be voting to leave the EU in the best and safest way for GB, over a reasonable time frame.

Leave are not voting to dive into Article 50 without a plan in place.

Those voting Leave are voting to do so under the parameters set by the PM, aren't they?

Good afternoon, everyone.

F1: my post-race piece, following a very interesting Chinese Grand Prix, is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/china-post-race-analysis-2016.html

On-topic: I agree with the majority that Remain will win at a canter. That said, the majority thought we'd have a hung Parliament and Miliband as PM...

Scott_P said:

MarkHopkins said:

Leave are not voting to dive into Article 50 without a plan in place.

Oh dear, how can I break this to you...?

I know the gov has refused to set out what they would do - that's why there would need to be a timetable put in place. Don't blame me for Cameron's failures here.

SouthamObserver said:

MarkHopkins said:

Scott_P said:

MarkHopkins said:

He would put a timetable in place, appoint the team responsible for negotiating and so on. The exact timing of Article 50 is only important in so much as it has to happen with a reasonable time to satisfy the Leavers. Or do you think he will just push the button out of spite on day 1?

I think he would push the button on Day 1 out of respect for the vote.

Why you think that would be spiteful is not clear. If we voted for it, why wouldn't anyone want it?

"respect"?

Leave would be voting to leave the EU in the best and safest way for GB, over a reasonable time frame.

Leave are not voting to dive into Article 50 without a plan in place.

Those voting Leave are voting to do so under the parameters set by the PM, aren't they?

Leave would hope that the PM is reasonable and not stupid in the way he carried out their wishes.

Scott_P said:

edmundintokyo said:

I'm not sure what he would do but as far as what he could do goes, couldn't he say, "I'll be resigning and leaving the formalities to my successor"?

Only if he says, I have triggered article 50, I am now resigning and will leave the negotiations to my successor

You act as if there is only one set of rules. Tell that to Putin or Trump. Or any successful negotiator.

If the rules don't favour you, make up new ones.

There is absolutely no reason we have to accept Article 50 as the only way out. That is what the treaty says. But if we leave the treaty, we are not bound by it.

SouthamObserver said:

Scott_P said:

And Rangers are in the Cup final

Blimey.

Leicester look like they'll win the league today as well.

No; they could still finish third, but they’d have to lose everything after this game and Spurs and City win all theirs.

Casino_Royale said:

"First, there will be informal negotiations. No rational government would immediately begin any legal process to withdraw so there is no issue of an immediate use of Article 50, the EU’s preferred legal route for a member to leave that imposes a basic two-year timetable. The government will explore how the other EU countries and the Commission want to proceed."

If you want everything signed by the May 2020 election, your informal negotiation period would have to end by mid-2017 at the latest. If you want it done before the election campaign starts, you're looking at Xmas this year. Bear in mind the French and German elections in 2017: I assume that those elections will see votes go to the parties wanting to screw the UK, so I assume it's best to avoid them. You really don't have a lot of time for these "informal negotiations"

Casino_Royale said:

... it won't be Cameron's decision to make...

If Cameron remains (pun!) PM, then yes, it is his decision to make. If he resigns, then presumably there has to be a Conservative Party election for Leader. How quick can you get that done and a new PM in place?

Scott_P said:

Cameron said he would hold a referendum.

He announced the referendum. He legislated for the referendum. He is campaigning in the referendum. There will be a referendum.

He said if we vote Leave he will invoke article 50.

"But he's a lying bastard, we can't trust him..."

Ummm.

Cameron said there would be a referendum before the end of 2017, implying there would be plenty of time to discuss the issues. Instead he has rushed it for his own benefit.

So I think it is clear that Cameron can change the timing for article 50 if that is appropriate.

Indigo said:

The day to day negotiations for withdrawing from the EU will be put in the very capable hands of my good friend Michael Gove, who will take all necessary step up to, if necessary invocation of Article 50. Thank you."

EU Day 1. "Have you invoked article 50 yet?" "Well, come back to us when you have" "NEXT!"

Here is the current odds.

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/eu-referendum/referendum-on-eu-membership-result

MarkHopkins said:

Scott_P said:

Cameron said he would hold a referendum.

He announced the referendum. He legislated for the referendum. He is campaigning in the referendum. There will be a referendum.

He said if we vote Leave he will invoke article 50.

"But he's a lying bastard, we can't trust him..."

Ummm.

Cameron said there would be a referendum before the end of 2017, implying there would be plenty of time to discuss the issues. Instead he has rushed it for his own benefit.

I'll actually defend him on the doing it for his own benefit issue. I do think it rushed in terms of making a deal, but clearly he calculated he wasn't going to get a good one, or other factors would make winning the referendum worse if he waited, so he called it early and talked up a crap deal.

However, that it was stated as no later than the end of 2017 does not mean it was definitely going to be then - he might have implied it, or others merely inferred it, but it's not anywhere on the list of lies or betrayals he may have made, it's just him using his position for a tactical advantage, as he sees it. That many Leavers have clamored for a vote a lot sooner than 2016, and the 2017 clause was probably intended not to suggest the vote would be late 2017 but to assure skeptics if it wasn't right away he could not hold it off even if he wanted, means I don't think we can complain he called it soon. And indeed it just enables further arguments as to why the deal is bad, so it's not all bad for Leave either.

perdix said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Cameron has already said that Article 50 would be triggered immediately after a Leave vote:

There is the slight possibility that he is... now what was that word again... oh yes, lying.

It wouldn't be the first time he had been economical with the actualite as a negotiating position, this time with the British public, just like telling everyone he was quite happy to leave and go it alone if he didn't get what he wanted from the renegotiations. I am sure in reality a few messages and phone conversations with the US and Brussels at the very least will happen because he wipes out his copy of Article 50.

The problem for Leavers is that don't trust anyone, even their own kind! Dodgy people!

Awkward isn't it? It was so much easier for politicians when people touched their forelock and trusted those who knew best.

MTimT said:

No. We say we have left the treaty.

It's legally binding in International Law.

Oh, wait, it's OK, Gordo had his fingers crossed when he signed it...

Scott_P said:

Indigo said:

There is the slight possibility that he is... now what was that word again... oh yes, lying.

So the day after a Leave vote he stands on the steps of Downing Street and says to the nation "I know you voted for Leave, and the only way to do that is invoke Article 50, but I have decided not to..."

FFS, at least try to keep it within shouting distance of reality.

Bizarre. The Leavers are advocating 'Leave but not quite yet'. They need to get a grip here. This referendum isn't a game. If we vote Leave we're out and all the consequences that entails will ensue. I get the impression the Leavers think this is merely some sort of thought experiment.

Leicester keen to shoot themselves in the foot today. Unnecessary dives and shoving in their own box too blatant even for a PL referee to ignore.

I hate West Ham

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate West Ham

Blame Southam - he called it for leicester down the thread.

Dirty underhand Spurs fan trick.

Suddenly Leicester may well need to win 3 of their last 4 games to win the league, not an easy task, particularly when they've been sneaking 1-0 wins a lot. Could be Spurs' time.

Dealing with the article instead of the usual banter for the moment, we established in UK 2015 that betting odds are absolutely useless as predictors, and this was confirmed in Greece 2015. Don't forget that PaddyPower paid out early on Ireland 2008 and Greece 2015 on the wrong result. Betting odds are rubbish predictors: we might as well throw entrails on the ground for all the good they do.

The referee is a banker.

That should have been a blatant penalty to Leicester

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate West Ham

Blame Southam - he called it for leicester down the thread.

Dirty underhand Spurs fan trick.

Don't worry, I've played my own dirty trick, I picked Lloris as my goalie in this week's fantasy football.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate West Ham

Blame Southam - he called it for leicester down the thread.

Dirty underhand Spurs fan trick.

Don't worry, I've played my own dirty trick, I picked Lloris as my goalie in this week's fantasy football.

to think my title hopes rest on Stoke !

Jon Moss was born in North London.

Stark_Dawning said:

Scott_P said:

Indigo said:

There is the slight possibility that he is... now what was that word again... oh yes, lying.

So the day after a Leave vote he stands on the steps of Downing Street and says to the nation "I know you voted for Leave, and the only way to do that is invoke Article 50, but I have decided not to..."

FFS, at least try to keep it within shouting distance of reality.

Bizarre. The Leavers are advocating 'Leave but not quite yet'. They need to get a grip here. This referendum isn't a game. If we vote Leave we're out and all the consequences that entails will ensue. I get the impression the Leavers think this is merely some sort of thought experiment.

The entire argument is a ridiculous one.

FACT: There should be (and one must presume there is) a sensible plan and timetable in place to withdraw from the EU following a Leave vote. Not to have one would be a total dereliction of duty. And to exit in the most jarring and damaging way deliberately because 'you asked for it' would be worse than dereliction of duty; it would be treasonable.

FACT: Remain will obviously not reveal this plan as it's not in their interests for the public to be reassured about a Leave result, rather they must be convinced it will be a catastrophe of epic proportions.

Given these two facts, it's an argument over nothing that neither side can win.

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I hate West Ham

Blame Southam - he called it for leicester down the thread.

Dirty underhand Spurs fan trick.

Don't worry, I've played my own dirty trick, I picked Lloris as my goalie in this week's fantasy football.

to think my title hopes rest on Stoke !

Actually I want Spurs to win the title.

Spurs were humiliated by Dortmund, then we beat Dortmund.

That makes us better than The English Champions.

MikeK said:

Scott_P said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Bizarre. The Leavers are advocating 'Leave but not quite yet'. They need to get a grip here. This referendum isn't a game. If we vote Leave we're out and all the consequences that entails will ensue. I get the impression the Leavers think this is merely some sort of thought experiment.

It's IndyRef Deja Vu all over again...

If we vote Yes Leave, everything we ever wanted will magically be true, and there will no nasty reality to intrude.

All of those people we despise will bend to our will, International Law will not apply to us, and there will be much rejoicing.

What is depressing is those folk who knew the separatist myth was a basket case last time, but seem seduced by the same fantasies wearing a different rosette

All I know is that if the UK remains in the EU, say goodby to Britain as a nation state. It may not happen for a few years, but happen it will. The only thing that will save us, is if the whole EU implodes from it's internal contradictions; and perhaps it will, ah la, the USSR.

TBH, although we’re a large(ish, anyway) economy, the world’s firms are getting bigger. And unlike the days when the East India Company and the like were based in London, the biggest aren’t here any more. And we, the people, need a Government that can deal with with global supercorps.