Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
IIRC when Davis said "row of the summer" he was specifically referring to the suggested €100bn divorce fee, which we must accept, according to the EU, before they will even consider Free Trade Agreements.
If the EU really does demand this kind of cash, with no intention of compromising, then Davis will be proven right. It will be a huge row - and the talks will collapse
My memory could be faulty, but I swear I saw a clip of Davis referring specifically to the money.
Either way, this is boring processology. The money is not. That really will be the row of the summer. If the EU insists on anything like €100bn, it will be Crash Brexit.
The price of a crash Brexit to the UK economy will be far, far higher than £100 billion.
Project fear is sooooo 2016.
Just admit - you have zero faith in the Uk economy to prosper outside the benign guidance of Brussels.
Which given the facts of the economy of the Eurozone is an amazing place to find one's rationale.
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
I would have done. It would have been utterly destructive and self-harming. I am delighted he has caved so quickly.
Yup. Whatever the UK does or doesn't do criticism or ridicule will be the order of the day.
It's not the UK that merits ridicule and criticism, it is this totally inept Tory government. The two should not be confused. The UK actually deserves a whole lot better. For some reason best known to himself, but probably not unconnected to perceived electoral advantage, Davis promised the row of the summer over sequencing last month. He conceded the EU timetable on Day One of the talks. That makes him look ridiculous. But it is good news for the UK.
If you put aside your partisan bluster for a second, you might notice this is all carefully chronographed. We say their timetable, they say "sufficient progress".
Both sides have moved on this. And the deal will only be signed and sealed, as one, at the end.
I really wouldn't get too excited about the noise and posturing.
Looks like we are going to get a running commentary after all. Complete with the full range of well worn, boring, hackneyed, cliched phrases!
Perhaps Barnier uses a form of English that can only be understood properly by Remainers, where progress means the same thing as agreement. The version I read said; "The European Council can then decide on whether we can show sufficient progress, or not. And if we can move to scoping the future relationship on trade and other matters.", which is not the same thing as agreeing on - say - the Brexit bill before discussing trade.
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
I would have done. It would have been utterly destructive and self-harming. I am delighted he has caved so quickly.
Yup. Whatever the UK does or doesn't do criticism or ridicule will be the order of the day.
It's not the UK that merits ridicule and criticism, it is this totally inept Tory government. The two should not be confused. The UK actually deserves a whole lot better. For some reason best known to himself, but probably not unconnected to perceived electoral advantage, Davis promised the row of the summer over sequencing last month. He conceded the EU timetable on Day One of the talks. That makes him look ridiculous. But it is good news for the UK.
If you put aside your partisan bluster for a second, you might notice this is all carefully chronographed. We say their timetable, they say "sufficient progress".
Both sides have moved on this. And the deal will only be signed and sealed, as one, at the end.
I really wouldn't get too excited about the noise and posturing.
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
IIRC when Davis said "row of the summer" he was specifically referring to the suggested €100bn divorce fee, which we must accept, according to the EU, before they will even consider Free Trade Agreements.
If the EU really does demand this kind of cash, with no intention of compromising, then Davis will be proven right. It will be a huge row - and the talks will collapse
The FT had a great breakdown of the €100bn gross bill at the weekend.
It broke down roughly like this:
€15bn contingent liabilities, i.e. the amount that might theoretically become payable if all the loans the EU advanced during UK membership went sour, and there was zero recovery. (Worth remembering that the UK is not party to the Greek loans, and the largest portion of this is currently Ireland.)
€40bn for payments due in 2019 and 2020 after we leave but in the budget cycle that we approved. (I.e., we signed off on the plans to have certain spending in 2019 and 2020, and just because we've left doesn't get us off the hook for having agreed it.)
€20bn for our share of the EU's €150bn unfunded pension liabilties.
€25bn for commitments post 2020 that we have - allegedly - signed off on.
These are *gross* numbers, and ignore any share of assets (which is generally estimated to be circa €20bn).
Of these, the contingent liabilities are easily dealt with, especially as the loans to Ireland make up the largest share. (And given Irish government debt-to-GDP has come down from 145% to 90% in the last five years, I think we can reasonably assume we'll get this back.) Alternatively, you can look at the CDS rates and net it off (Ireland 5 year CDS are about 20bps, so the net value of insuring against the entire contingent liability is 1% of headline.) The easiest way to proceed would be for us to say we'd honour our share of any losses that happen in the current programme, 90% or so of which expires by 2021.
The €40bn for payments due in 2019/2020 is the hardest one. The EU's own negotiation document says that if we are paying for programmes post exit, we should have access to the benefits. My guess is that this number will be shaved somewhat, and will be offset against our payments during any transition period. (€10bn a year for four years pretty much solves it.)
Pensions: we'll pay British citizens pensions, they'll pay theirs. The numbers are all misleadingly grossed up anyway.
Commitments post 2020 are where I think the EU are on very shaky ground. I think the UK will really hang tough on this one, and I think there is very little legal recourse for the EU. (Unlike with pensions where I think we'd get completely stuffed in the UK courts or in international arbitration.)
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
IIRC when Davis said "row of the summer" he was specifically referring to the suggested €100bn divorce fee, which we must accept, according to the EU, before they will even consider Free Trade Agreements.
If the EU really does demand this kind of cash, with no intention of compromising, then Davis will be proven right. It will be a huge row - and the talks will collapse
My memory could be faulty, but I swear I saw a clip of Davis referring specifically to the money.
Either way, this is boring processology. The money is not. That really will be the row of the summer. If the EU insists on anything like €100bn, it will be Crash Brexit.
The price of a crash Brexit to the UK economy will be far, far higher than £100 billion.
I tend to agree. But I don't think a weakened TMay could get a €100bn bill through the Commons.
The UK will agree a bill "subject to a satisfactory agreement on future UK/EU relations". It will be a provisional agreement we can walk away from.
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
I would have done. It would have been utterly destructive and self-harming. I am delighted he has caved so quickly.
Yup. Whatever the UK does or doesn't do criticism or ridicule will be the order of the day.
t
If you put aside your partisan bluster for a second, you might notice this is all carefully chronographed. We say their timetable, they say "sufficient progress".
Both sides have moved on this. And the deal will only be signed and sealed, as one, at the end.
I really wouldn't get too excited about the noise and posturing.
Looks like we are going to get a running commentary after all. Complete with the full range of well worn, boring, hackneyed, cliched phrases.
That might be the best result of all. Brexit turns into the most monumental bureucratic bore, with endless guff about widget tariffs, and when we all switch off and look elsewhere, the dweebs can sort out a reasonable compromise.
It's uncanny how the people who thought it shouldn't happen, predicted it wouldn't happen, said it was only advisory, supported both the dark skinned and light skinned Gina Miller, and want a second referendum also find fault with every negotiating tactic our side use. Is it still called doubling down by then?
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
IIRC when Davis said "row of the summer" he was specifically referring to the suggested €100bn divorce fee, which we must accept, according to the EU, before they will even consider Free Trade Agreements.
If the EU really does demand this kind of cash, with no intention of compromising, then Davis will be proven right. It will be a huge row - and the talks will collapse
My memory could be faulty, but I swear I saw a clip of Davis referring specifically to the money.
Either way, this is boring processology. The money is not. That really will be the row of the summer. If the EU insists on anything like €100bn, it will be Crash Brexit.
The price of a crash Brexit to the UK economy will be far, far higher than £100 billion.
I tend to agree. But I don't think a weakened TMay could get a €100bn bill through the Commons.
The UK will agree a bill "subject to a satisfactory agreement on future UK/EU relations". It will be a provisional agreement we can walk away from.
You'll get nowhere on here with such sanity.
I pretty much think the Uk will sign off anything transitory as long as it's not on average more expensive than our annual bill.
Means of course we'll have to wait for our £350m more for the NHS - thanks to our friends in the EU.
And it came to pass, in the land of Britain, that the High Priestess went unto the people and said, Behold, I bring ye tidings of great joy. For on the eighth day of the sixth month there shall be a general election.
And the people said, Not another one.
And they waxed wrath against the High Priestess and said, Didst thou not swear, even unto seven times, that thou wouldst not call a snap election?
And the High Priestess said, I know, I know. But Brexit is come upon us, and I must go into battle against the tribes of France, Germany, and sundry other holiday destinations. And I must put on the armour of a strong majority in the people’s house. Therefore go ye out and vote.
And there came from the temple pollsters, who said, Surely this woman will flourish. For her enemy is as grass; she cutteth him down. He is as straw in the wind, and he will blow away. And the trumpet of her triumph shall sound in all the land.
And the High Priestess said, Piece of cake.
And there came from the same country a prophet, whose name was Jeremy. His beard was as the pelt of beasts, and his raiments were not of the finest. And he cried aloud in the wilderness and said, Behold, I bring you hope.
And suddenly there was with him a host of young people. And he said unto them, Ye shall study and grow wise in all things, and I shall not ask ye for gold. And the sick shall be made well, and they also will heal freely. And he promised unto them all manner of goodly things.
And the young people said unto him, How shall these things be rendered, seeing that thou hast no money in thy purse?
And he spake unto them in a voice of sounding brass and said, Soak the rich. And again, Pull down the mighty from their seats.
IIRC when Davis said "row of the summer" he was specifically referring to the suggested €100bn divorce fee, which we must accept, according to the EU, before they will even consider Free Trade Agreements.
If the EU really does demand this kind of cash, with no intention of compromising, then Davis will be proven right. It will be a huge row - and the talks will collapse
The FT had a great breakdown of the €100bn gross bill at the weekend.
Did they break out the estimates for moving EU agencies from the UK - which they say we should bear the entire cost of?
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
Not my fault that Davis either lied or had no idea what he was talking about:
Set your clocks by this:
Throughout the negations the EU side will spin, leak and brief on how awful the Uk is at the process - this will be hyped in the media and elsewhere by sympathetic "useful idiots" - - just in case anyone else gets the idea that leaving might be a good thing.
Of course they will.
And through this process, the UK government will spin that it is perfectly happy to walk away without a deal, that the rest of world is lining up to sign FTAs with the UK, and that €100bn is completely unacceptable.
Both sides will use public forums to try and further their aims.
Which is exactly as they should both do. We must act in our best interest, and they must act in theirs. And that means there will be a monumental amount of bullshit leaking.
Predictably some getting confused about Brexit talks already. The Faisal Islams of this world.
Will the U.K. pay its legal financial obligations upon leaving the EU? Yes, of course. Will that be anywhere near what the EU wants the UK to pay? Well, we'll see.
But they are two distinct parts - one relates to law, the other to a classic negotiation.
The UK should be willing to talk about both if the EU wants to. But the UK has no reason to agree even £1 of the latter unless it is getting something on transitional arrangements and/ or FTA in return.
Unless I've missed something today the UK has not departed from its position that the financial settlement should depend on firstly legal obligations and secondly the future relationship that the UK and EU will have. I say this having just read the EU's statement.
€40bn for payments due in 2019 and 2020 after we leave but in the budget cycle that we approved. (I.e., we signed off on the plans to have certain spending in 2019 and 2020, and just because we've left doesn't get us off the hook for having agreed it.)
So that's €40bn for the twenty months after April 2019 when we leave - which works out at £35 billion for 20 months or £1.75 billion a month which they claim we should be paying. Rather more than the £350 million a week number that the Remoaners were complaining about.
The United Kingdom has decided to leave the European Union, it is not the other way around. The United Kingdom is going to leave the European Union, single market and the customs union, not the other way around.
Predictably some getting confused about Brexit talks already. The Faisal Islams of this world.
Will the U.K. pay its legal financial obligations upon leaving the EU? Yes, of course. Will that be anywhere near what the EU wants the UK to pay? Well, we'll see.
But they are two distinct parts - one relates to law, the other to a classic negotiation.
The UK should be willing to talk about both if the EU wants to. But the UK has no reason to agree even £1 of the latter unless it is getting something on transitional arrangements and/ or FTA in return.
Unless I've missed something today the UK has not departed from its position that the financial settlement should depend on firstly legal obligations and secondly the future relationship that the UK and EU will have. I say this having just read the EU's statement.
Realistically, we are likely to get stuffed on pension liabilities whatever happens. Just as companies that demerge cannot walk away from their obligations regarding pensions, nor can nations. We'd fall foul of UK domestic legislation, especially when UK civil servants ended up in Brussels on secondment, and almost certainly lose in international arbitration. (In a worst case scenario, failure to honour our share of pension obligations could lead to a technical default.)
Equally though, payments during the transition period would be offset against a bill. If we pay (say) €10bn a year for four years post 2019 as part of a transitional agreement while we work out final status, that would reduce the sum owed dramatically. Add in a swap of responsibilities for pensions, include a guarantee for contingent liabilities that will never be called, and include the UK's share of assets, then you have no money transferring on day one. And the UK has "paid" €80bn.
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
total guff
most UK car exports dont go to Europe
Thats not the point, BMW/merc were often quoted as the reason we would get a good deal, i was suggesting that although they might see their sales drop in the uk most people who want one will but one even if it costs more. The uk is a mojor supplier of parts to european car manufacturers who can be engineered out of the supply chain if we go to WTO rules. Nothing to do with where we sell our cars just that it was a big part of the leaves campaign that was going to ensure we got a good deal
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
Not my fault that Davis either lied or had no idea what he was talking about:
Set your clocks by this:
Throughout the negations the EU side will spin, leak and brief on how awful the Uk is at the process - this will be hyped in the media and elsewhere by sympathetic "useful idiots" - - just in case anyone else gets the idea that leaving might be a good thing.
Of course they will.
And through this process, the UK government will spin that it is perfectly happy to walk away without a deal, that the rest of world is lining up to sign FTAs with the UK, and that €100bn is completely unacceptable.
Both sides will use public forums to try and further their aims.
Which is exactly as they should both do. We must act in our best interest, and they must act in theirs. And that means there will be a monumental amount of bullshit leaking.
€40bn for payments due in 2019 and 2020 after we leave but in the budget cycle that we approved. (I.e., we signed off on the plans to have certain spending in 2019 and 2020, and just because we've left doesn't get us off the hook for having agreed it.)
So that's €40bn for the twenty months after April 2019 when we leave - which works out at £35 billion for 20 months or £1.75 billion a month which they claim we should be paying. Rather more than the £350 million a week number that the Remoaners were complaining about.
So given this arithmetic - if we had stayed then what would our annual payments be to the EU in say 2020 or 2021 ?
As I pointed out when they were published, the EU guidelines acknowledge that the UK was right in saying that the future trade deal and the exit deal have to be negotiated together:
While an agreement on a future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom as such can only be finalised and concluded once the United Kingdom has become a third country, Article 50 TEU requires to take account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union in the arrangements for withdrawal. To this end, an overall understanding on the framework for the future relationship should be identified during a second phase of the negotiations under Article 50 TEU. We stand ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions to this end in the context of negotiations under Article 50 TEU, as soon as the European Council decides that sufficient progress has been made in the first phase towards reaching a satisfactory agreement on the arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.
This is very different from what they were originally saying, which did not accept that Article 50 required agreement on the on-going relationship before agreeing the 'exit deal'. They have backed down, with a face-saving formula which allows them to claim they haven't. Basically Michel Barnier seems to be doing a good job steering them towards a more realistic stance.
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
total guff
most UK car exports dont go to Europe
Thats not the point, BMW/merc were often quoted as the reason we would get a good deal, i was suggesting that although they might see their sales drop in the uk most people who want one will but one even if it costs more. The uk is a mojor supplier of parts to european car manufacturers who can be engineered out of the supply chain if we go to WTO rules. Nothing to do with where we sell our cars just that it was a big part of the leaves campaign that was going to ensure we got a good deal
So you don't think BMW or Mercedes buyers would consider a Jaguar or an Aston Martin ?
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
total guff
most UK car exports dont go to Europe
Thats not the point, BMW/merc were often quoted as the reason we would get a good deal, i was suggesting that although they might see their sales drop in the uk most people who want one will but one even if it costs more. The uk is a mojor supplier of parts to european car manufacturers who can be engineered out of the supply chain if we go to WTO rules. Nothing to do with where we sell our cars just that it was a big part of the leaves campaign that was going to ensure we got a good deal
again total guff
the UK is a net importer of automotive components
when in the EU we cleverly agreed that we should close down our factories and import because it suited the tax dodging multinats
Realistically, we are likely to get stuffed on pension liabilities whatever happens. Just as companies that demerge cannot walk away from their obligations regarding pensions, nor can nations. We'd fall foul of UK domestic legislation, especially when UK civil servants ended up in Brussels on secondment, and almost certainly lose in international arbitration. (In a worst case scenario, failure to honour our share of pension obligations could lead to a technical default.)
I don't think that is necessarily true. The EU itself claims to be a legal entity in its own right, not just a collection of countries. If you resign from a golf club, you don't remain liable for any pension fund set up for the manager.
At the very least, it's arguable that we would owe nothing.
Predictably some getting confused about Brexit talks already. The Faisal Islams of this world.
Failal Islam is a news-reader.
His mistake (or rather the mistake of those around him) is to believe that he's capable of doing more than reading a script that's put in front of him.
Genuinely shocked that the UK has agreed to follow the EU's Brexit talks timetable. Didn't see that one coming.
It turns out that all the pre-election tough guy talk was designed solely to pull the wool over voters' eyes. It's actually good news, because it may indicate that the government never believed some of the other nonsense it's been coming out with.
I know - we are awful at everything and the Eurocrats are marvellous, enlightened and so clever. I'm surprised we could tie our own shoelaces before we joined the common market.
If he had caused 'the row of the summer' you'd have been one of the first to criticise him for being dangerously belligerent and obstructive.
IIRC when Davis said "row of the summer" he was specifically referring to the suggested €100bn divorce fee, which we must accept, according to the EU, before they will even consider Free Trade Agreements.
If the EU really does demand this kind of cash, with no intention of compromising, then Davis will be proven right. It will be a huge row - and the talks will collapse
My memory could be faulty, but I swear I saw a clip of Davis referring specifically to the money.
Either way, this is boring processology. The money is not. That really will be the row of the summer. If the EU insists on anything like €100bn, it will be Crash Brexit.
The price of a crash Brexit to the UK economy will be far, far higher than £100 billion.
I tend to agree. But I don't think a weakened TMay could get a €100bn bill through the Commons.
Thosethat want Bmw's and mercs etc will still buy them even if they cost 15% more so they dont need to worry, those in the supply chain in the UK .........
total guff
most UK car exports dont go to Europe
Thats not the point, BMW/merc were often quoted as the reason we would get a good deal, i was suggesting that although they might see their sales drop in the uk most people who want one will but one even if it costs more. The uk is a mojor supplier of parts to european car manufacturers who can be engineered out of the supply chain if we go to WTO rules. Nothing to do with where we sell our cars just that it was a big part of the leaves campaign that was going to ensure we got a good deal
So you don't think BMW or Mercedes buyers would consider a Jaguar or an Aston Martin ?
Oddly enough no, the bottom of the jag range is only what was a scorpio but not sure where porche manufacture . I must admit i dont shop in that market so really dont need to worry
It's bumped and battered, the image transfer is low resolution, dust has settled on it before the enamel has dried baking in imperfections. Doesn't seem it could stand up to much of anything. I was fooled by the marketing images.
This couldn't be a more perfect metaphor if I made it myself.
So we have Theresa May who sounds like a Thatcher android, Phillip Hammond who makes John Major sound interesting, David Davis, an aging right winger, Boris Johnson, a posturing buffoon, and in the wings, Jeremy Corbyn, a near septuanarian Casto-ite in a Lenin cap. God help us all.
But we tried young, fresh faced, go getters and look where that got us. Why can't we go back to boring politics where you have grey efficient people who don't want to be in the limelight all the time, or prance about on the world's stage.
Because the media want to see pictures of people not shaking hands with Donald Trump, etc., etc.,. We truly get the politicians we deserve.
I still believe Theresa May is the best person for the job, at this particular time. I believe her experience coming from councillor, through the Tory ranks and six years in the Home Office is invaluable.
Just because she won't emote in front of the cameras, is to her credit. If the witch-hunt against her continues, then I believe it will work in her favour. There are some fundamentally decent people in this country and they won't like the media's treatment of her.
At the moment she is being blamed for everything. How can this be reasonable ? It is like blaming President Bush for the Louisiana Hurricane or the Queen for Princess Diana's choice of chauffeur. There is something quite revolting about second and third rate journalists jumping on to bandwagons. Crick is not alone although he is undoubtably the worst.
It looks to me as if Theresa will survive this artificial storm of faux outrage and when people look back in ten years time they might well think she was actually pretty good at the PM lark.
And it came to pass, in the land of Britain, that the High Priestess went unto the people and said, Behold, I bring ye tidings of great joy. For on the eighth day of the sixth month there shall be a general election.
And the people said, Not another one.
And they waxed wrath against the High Priestess and said, Didst thou not swear, even unto seven times, that thou wouldst not call a snap election?
And the High Priestess said, I know, I know. But Brexit is come upon us, and I must go into battle against the tribes of France, Germany, and sundry other holiday destinations. And I must put on the armour of a strong majority in the people’s house. Therefore go ye out and vote.
And there came from the temple pollsters, who said, Surely this woman will flourish. For her enemy is as grass; she cutteth him down. He is as straw in the wind, and he will blow away. And the trumpet of her triumph shall sound in all the land.
And the High Priestess said, Piece of cake.
And there came from the same country a prophet, whose name was Jeremy. His beard was as the pelt of beasts, and his raiments were not of the finest. And he cried aloud in the wilderness and said, Behold, I bring you hope.
And suddenly there was with him a host of young people. And he said unto them, Ye shall study and grow wise in all things, and I shall not ask ye for gold. And the sick shall be made well, and they also will heal freely. And he promised unto them all manner of goodly things.
And the young people said unto him, How shall these things be rendered, seeing that thou hast no money in thy purse?
And he spake unto them in a voice of sounding brass and said, Soak the rich. And again, Pull down the mighty from their seats.
At the moment she is being blamed for everything. How can this be reasonable ? It is like blaming President Bush for the Louisiana Hurricane or the Queen for Princess Diana's choice of chauffeur. There is something quite revolting about second and third rate journalists jumping on to bandwagons. Crick is not alone although he is undoubtably the worst.
It looks to me as if Theresa will survive this artificial storm of faux outrage and when people look back in ten years time they might well think she was actually pretty good at the PM lark.
The "artificial outrage" is so full of "faux outrage" that even the Prime Minister said the response had been inadequate which is code for so piss poor you couldn't make it up.
Theresa May is Prime Minister not fifth choice goal scorer for the Maidenhead Senior Ladies Netball Team who's slightly off her game.
Comments
That's great news for anyone with half a brain or half a business in this country.
Just admit - you have zero faith in the Uk economy to prosper outside the benign guidance of Brussels.
Which given the facts of the economy of the Eurozone is an amazing place to find one's rationale.
And a commons vote will be the deal or WTO.
Something for the Europhiles to ponder.
It's a theory I suppose.
most UK car exports dont go to Europe
It broke down roughly like this:
€15bn contingent liabilities, i.e. the amount that might theoretically become payable if all the loans the EU advanced during UK membership went sour, and there was zero recovery. (Worth remembering that the UK is not party to the Greek loans, and the largest portion of this is currently Ireland.)
€40bn for payments due in 2019 and 2020 after we leave but in the budget cycle that we approved. (I.e., we signed off on the plans to have certain spending in 2019 and 2020, and just because we've left doesn't get us off the hook for having agreed it.)
€20bn for our share of the EU's €150bn unfunded pension liabilties.
€25bn for commitments post 2020 that we have - allegedly - signed off on.
These are *gross* numbers, and ignore any share of assets (which is generally estimated to be circa €20bn).
Of these, the contingent liabilities are easily dealt with, especially as the loans to Ireland make up the largest share. (And given Irish government debt-to-GDP has come down from 145% to 90% in the last five years, I think we can reasonably assume we'll get this back.) Alternatively, you can look at the CDS rates and net it off (Ireland 5 year CDS are about 20bps, so the net value of insuring against the entire contingent liability is 1% of headline.) The easiest way to proceed would be for us to say we'd honour our share of any losses that happen in the current programme, 90% or so of which expires by 2021.
The €40bn for payments due in 2019/2020 is the hardest one. The EU's own negotiation document says that if we are paying for programmes post exit, we should have access to the benefits. My guess is that this number will be shaved somewhat, and will be offset against our payments during any transition period. (€10bn a year for four years pretty much solves it.)
Pensions: we'll pay British citizens pensions, they'll pay theirs. The numbers are all misleadingly grossed up anyway.
Commitments post 2020 are where I think the EU are on very shaky ground. I think the UK will really hang tough on this one, and I think there is very little legal recourse for the EU. (Unlike with pensions where I think we'd get completely stuffed in the UK courts or in international arbitration.)
Another little bit of my childhood died today.
RIP Brian Cant and thanks for all the memories from my earliest years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-hQ6-biWoo
you're in Hell, the ultimate fate of all Osbornites
I pretty much think the Uk will sign off anything transitory as long as it's not on average more expensive than our annual bill.
Means of course we'll have to wait for our £350m more for the NHS - thanks to our friends in the EU.
And it came to pass, in the land of Britain, that the High Priestess went unto the people and said, Behold, I bring ye tidings of great joy. For on the eighth day of the sixth month there shall be a general election.
And the people said, Not another one.
And they waxed wrath against the High Priestess and said, Didst thou not swear, even unto seven times, that thou wouldst not call a snap election?
And the High Priestess said, I know, I know. But Brexit is come upon us, and I must go into battle against the tribes of France, Germany, and sundry other holiday destinations. And I must put on the armour of a strong majority in the people’s house. Therefore go ye out and vote.
And there came from the temple pollsters, who said, Surely this woman will flourish. For her enemy is as grass; she cutteth him down. He is as straw in the wind, and he will blow away. And the trumpet of her triumph shall sound in all the land.
And the High Priestess said, Piece of cake.
And there came from the same country a prophet, whose name was Jeremy. His beard was as the pelt of beasts, and his raiments were not of the finest. And he cried aloud in the wilderness and said, Behold, I bring you hope.
And suddenly there was with him a host of young people. And he said unto them, Ye shall study and grow wise in all things, and I shall not ask ye for gold. And the sick shall be made well, and they also will heal freely. And he promised unto them all manner of goodly things.
And the young people said unto him, How shall these things be rendered, seeing that thou hast no money in thy purse?
And he spake unto them in a voice of sounding brass and said, Soak the rich. And again, Pull down the mighty from their seats.
And the young people went absolutely nuts.
Strawberries and cream, mango juice, and an excess of pretty ladies of serving me.
And through this process, the UK government will spin that it is perfectly happy to walk away without a deal, that the rest of world is lining up to sign FTAs with the UK, and that €100bn is completely unacceptable.
Both sides will use public forums to try and further their aims.
Which is exactly as they should both do. We must act in our best interest, and they must act in theirs. And that means there will be a monumental amount of bullshit leaking.
Will the U.K. pay its legal financial obligations upon leaving the EU? Yes, of course. Will that be anywhere near what the EU wants the UK to pay? Well, we'll see.
But they are two distinct parts - one relates to law, the other to a classic negotiation.
The UK should be willing to talk about both if the EU wants to. But the UK has no reason to agree even £1 of the latter unless it is getting something on transitional arrangements and/ or FTA in return.
Unless I've missed something today the UK has not departed from its position that the financial settlement should depend on firstly legal obligations and secondly the future relationship that the UK and EU will have. I say this having just read the EU's statement.
The United Kingdom has decided to leave the European Union, it is not the other way around. The United Kingdom is going to leave the European Union, single market and the customs union, not the other way around.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/jun/19/boris-johnson-and-gove-both-back-may-as-tory-leadership-speculation-continues-politics-live
anyway I have a massive sodding aircon in my office
Equally though, payments during the transition period would be offset against a bill. If we pay (say) €10bn a year for four years post 2019 as part of a transitional agreement while we work out final status, that would reduce the sum owed dramatically. Add in a swap of responsibilities for pensions, include a guarantee for contingent liabilities that will never be called, and include the UK's share of assets, then you have no money transferring on day one. And the UK has "paid" €80bn.
Nearly £20Bn per year ?
Eyewatering.
While an agreement on a future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom as such can only be finalised and concluded once the United Kingdom has become a third country, Article 50 TEU requires to take account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union in the arrangements for withdrawal. To this end, an overall understanding on the framework for the future relationship should be identified during a second phase of the negotiations under Article 50 TEU. We stand ready to engage in preliminary and preparatory discussions to this end in the context of negotiations under Article 50 TEU, as soon as the European Council decides that sufficient progress has been made in the first phase towards reaching a satisfactory agreement on the arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.
This is very different from what they were originally saying, which did not accept that Article 50 required agreement on the on-going relationship before agreeing the 'exit deal'. They have backed down, with a face-saving formula which allows them to claim they haven't. Basically Michel Barnier seems to be doing a good job steering them towards a more realistic stance.
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/29-euco-brexit-guidelines/
You're damned fortunate I don't seize your undeserved middle class bourgeois aircon!
NEW THREAD
the UK is a net importer of automotive components
when in the EU we cleverly agreed that we should close down our factories and import because it suited the tax dodging multinats
https://twitter.com/i_dont_know_her/status/876483993109180417
At the very least, it's arguable that we would owe nothing.
It's tuppence ha'penny anyway.
His mistake (or rather the mistake of those around him) is to believe that he's capable of doing more than reading a script that's put in front of him.
It looks to me as if Theresa will survive this artificial storm of faux outrage and when people look back in ten years time they might well think she was actually pretty good at the PM lark.
Theresa May is Prime Minister not fifth choice goal scorer for the Maidenhead Senior Ladies Netball Team who's slightly off her game.