politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Symbols for our time
Comments
-
The 40bn was GBP - equivalent to about Eur 47bnFrancisUrquhart said:
The Telegraph understands that the final figure, which is deliberately being left open to interpretation, will be between €45bn and €55bn.calum said:
So lets call it 50bn...so even higher than the 40bn quoted last week.0 -
Thanks Nick and it would be nice if we could try to make it to the new yearNickPalmer said:
Excellent news - and yes, take it easy. We will all try to be nice for 4 weeks before our evil natures resurfaceBig_G_NorthWales said:
Yes thank you but need to be kind to myself for a few weeksMorris_Dancer said:Welcome back, Mr. NorthWales. Glad it went well.
0 -
Ooooh you're pushing itBig_G_NorthWales said:
Thanks Nick and it would be nice if we could try to make it to the new yearNickPalmer said:
Excellent news - and yes, take it easy. We will all try to be nice for 4 weeks before our evil natures resurfaceBig_G_NorthWales said:
Yes thank you but need to be kind to myself for a few weeksMorris_Dancer said:Welcome back, Mr. NorthWales. Glad it went well.
0 -
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42152146
Very unfortunate. The Pope could not refer to the Rohingyas by name.0 -
Do not believe it - they have huge problems including China courting the eastern block states with huge investmentssurbiton said:
The EU side did not seem to be too worried!Big_G_NorthWales said:
We should all be relieved as a no deal is a non starter for both sidesSouthamObserver said:
Actually, this is very good news. The sane wing of the Cabinet may have won out after months of haggling with the loons. Now that we have conceded on the money it may mean we will concede on other stuff, too. That means a final trade deal becomes a lot more likely. And that is a whole lot better than a No Deal.Big_G_NorthWales said:0 -
The bill being sorted is bad news for the ultras on both sides, and good news for anyone sane0
-
So it seems the A50 divorce bill will come in at £40-50 billion so about what we pay on Defence or Debt Interest this year. It's a significant sum of money set against the £802 billion public spend and the £744 billion receipts for this year even though said payment will certainly spread over a number of years.
How will this go politically ? Will the bellicose rantings of the more extreme pro-LEAVE campaigners reach a new crescendo - there will be calls to pay nothing and crash out without a deal from some I would guess.
Will others see this as "a price worth paying" for an FTA with the EU ? I suspect that will be the majority view from within the Conservative Party and the May Government. It may prove harder, I would argue, to label Corbyn's Labour party as extravagant when the "bill" for leaving becomes generally known and yes there's an irony here but politics doesn't always do irony or does it very well.
It will be seen as £40 or £50 billion "given away" to the EU and there may be some backlash. We'll see.
0 -
ProbablyNickPalmer said:
Ooooh you're pushing itBig_G_NorthWales said:
Thanks Nick and it would be nice if we could try to make it to the new yearNickPalmer said:
Excellent news - and yes, take it easy. We will all try to be nice for 4 weeks before our evil natures resurfaceBig_G_NorthWales said:
Yes thank you but need to be kind to myself for a few weeksMorris_Dancer said:Welcome back, Mr. NorthWales. Glad it went well.
0 -
+1Pulpstar said:The bill being sorted is bad news for the ultras on both sides, and good news for anyone sane
0 -
This is excellent news. It will be harder to halt progress on Ireland alone once the 27 start thinking about all the wonderful things they can spend our money on.
Rejoice!0 -
Agreed they are the three that I remember the most.stodge said:Evening all
Symbolic moments - for me, no.1 will always be Neil Armstrong and the Moon landing in 1969 with no.2 the Fall of the Berlin Wall twenty years later and no.3 the second plane hitting the WTC in NYC on 11/9/01.
All three changed the world fundamentally.0 -
+1RoyalBlue said:This is excellent news. It will be harder to halt progress on Ireland alone once the 27 start thinking about all the wonderful things they can spend our money on.
Rejoice!0 -
0
-
It's the best news for a long time. It seems that there are enough sane members of the Cabinet to win through and the mad ones don't feel strong enough to push their luck.Pulpstar said:The bill being sorted is bad news for the ultras on both sides, and good news for anyone sane
It appears that no deal is now recognised as worse than a bad deal, which is correct on this occasion, even if it's impolitic to admit it.0 -
Surely no one will complain about 50 billion euros ? Just shows you that there is cash when required .Big_G_NorthWales said:
I agree with that - just hope the opposition doesn't play stupid on itSouthamObserver said:
Not really - if we are paying £50 billion and on top of that face years of sclerotic growth and falling living standards, followed by a Canada-style deal, the joys of leaving may begin to seem slightly less compelling for at least some.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems it is irrelevant - if agreement has happened the narrative turns away from the remainers in a big waynot_on_fire said:
Ignore the facts cos you don’t like the sourceBig_G_NorthWales said:
Arch remaining paper - again remainers fighting their lost campaignScott_P said:
However, that is by the by, the good news is that the government has seen sense and will have to face down its right flank. Having made the decision to do that, it does open up the possibility of other concessions and the opportunity to get a better Brexit than the worse case scenario. Everyone should welcome that.0 -
Britain pays £50 billion not to pay £10bn /annum.surbiton said:
No.4 - Britain pays £50 billion not to let foreigners in.stodge said:Evening all
Symbolic moments - for me, no.1 will always be Neil Armstrong and the Moon landing in 1969 with no.2 the Fall of the Berlin Wall twenty years later and no.3 the second plane hitting the WTC in NYC on 11/9/01.
All three changed the world fundamentally.0 -
-
Don't be so sure about it ? Doesn't Norway and Switzerland pay ?RobD said:
Britain pays £50 billion not to pay £10bn /annum.surbiton said:
No.4 - Britain pays £50 billion not to let foreigners in.stodge said:Evening all
Symbolic moments - for me, no.1 will always be Neil Armstrong and the Moon landing in 1969 with no.2 the Fall of the Berlin Wall twenty years later and no.3 the second plane hitting the WTC in NYC on 11/9/01.
All three changed the world fundamentally.0 -
Good news then , you must be happy.CarlottaVance said:0 -
-
No doubt Faisal Islam will soon be tweeting that this apparent deal is just disastrous for the UK.0
-
Looks as if they are redundant if the Telegraph story is trueScott_P said:0 -
Art of negotiation - compromiseYorkcity said:
Surely no one will complain about 50 billion euros ? Just shows you that there is cash when required .Big_G_NorthWales said:
I agree with that - just hope the opposition doesn't play stupid on itSouthamObserver said:
Not really - if we are paying £50 billion and on top of that face years of sclerotic growth and falling living standards, followed by a Canada-style deal, the joys of leaving may begin to seem slightly less compelling for at least some.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems it is irrelevant - if agreement has happened the narrative turns away from the remainers in a big waynot_on_fire said:
Ignore the facts cos you don’t like the sourceBig_G_NorthWales said:
Arch remaining paper - again remainers fighting their lost campaignScott_P said:
However, that is by the by, the good news is that the government has seen sense and will have to face down its right flank. Having made the decision to do that, it does open up the possibility of other concessions and the opportunity to get a better Brexit than the worse case scenario. Everyone should welcome that.0 -
The magic money tree apparently has extended its roots into Brexit soil.Yorkcity said:
Surely no one will complain about 50 billion euros ? Just shows you that there is cash when required .Big_G_NorthWales said:
I agree with that - just hope the opposition doesn't play stupid on itSouthamObserver said:
Not really - if we are paying £50 billion and on top of that face years of sclerotic growth and falling living standards, followed by a Canada-style deal, the joys of leaving may begin to seem slightly less compelling for at least some.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems it is irrelevant - if agreement has happened the narrative turns away from the remainers in a big waynot_on_fire said:
Ignore the facts cos you don’t like the sourceBig_G_NorthWales said:
Arch remaining paper - again remainers fighting their lost campaignScott_P said:
However, that is by the by, the good news is that the government has seen sense and will have to face down its right flank. Having made the decision to do that, it does open up the possibility of other concessions and the opportunity to get a better Brexit than the worse case scenario. Everyone should welcome that.0 -
They have to say that - it cannot be announced formally until the EU Council meeting next monthScott_P said:0 -
If there is a deal at the end then people will see it in the round.stodge said:So it seems the A50 divorce bill will come in at £40-50 billion so about what we pay on Defence or Debt Interest this year. It's a significant sum of money set against the £802 billion public spend and the £744 billion receipts for this year even though said payment will certainly spread over a number of years.
How will this go politically ? Will the bellicose rantings of the more extreme pro-LEAVE campaigners reach a new crescendo - there will be calls to pay nothing and crash out without a deal from some I would guess.
Will others see this as "a price worth paying" for an FTA with the EU ? I suspect that will be the majority view from within the Conservative Party and the May Government. It may prove harder, I would argue, to label Corbyn's Labour party as extravagant when the "bill" for leaving becomes generally known and yes there's an irony here but politics doesn't always do irony or does it very well.
It will be seen as £40 or £50 billion "given away" to the EU and there may be some backlash. We'll see.
If the deal is minimal or non-existent there will be huge resistance to paying anything regardless of the consequences0 -
Long day, catching up. Awesome thread Ms Cyclefree, as usual.0
-
The point is that the £45bn is a lump sum - albeit that it'll be paid over a few years.stodge said:So it seems the A50 divorce bill will come in at £40-50 billion so about what we pay on Defence or Debt Interest this year. It's a significant sum of money set against the £802 billion public spend and the £744 billion receipts for this year even though said payment will certainly spread over a number of years.
How will this go politically ? Will the bellicose rantings of the more extreme pro-LEAVE campaigners reach a new crescendo - there will be calls to pay nothing and crash out without a deal from some I would guess.
Will others see this as "a price worth paying" for an FTA with the EU ? I suspect that will be the majority view from within the Conservative Party and the May Government. It may prove harder, I would argue, to label Corbyn's Labour party as extravagant when the "bill" for leaving becomes generally known and yes there's an irony here but politics doesn't always do irony or does it very well.
It will be seen as £40 or £50 billion "given away" to the EU and there may be some backlash. We'll see.
If you were buying an annuity, £45bn would get you about £2bn per year.
If we are currently paying the EU about £10bn per year (net) then we're reducing our bill by about 80%.0 -
Of course, we don't actually know for sure that the Telegraph report is accurate. Even if it is, it cannot formally be the case that agreement has been reached on the bill, but it might be the case that the EU negotiating team have agreed to recommend that we can now go on to their next stage.
More importantly, how the figure is made up is crucial. Does it, for example, include any payment during the transitional two-year period? If so, it's not too bad - just a couple of extra years' payment. If it doesn't (which is more likely I think) it's rather a lot of dosh for nothing much in return. And what guarantees/hints/nods have the EU given us regarding the trade side?
Also, is there any provision for reducing it if we buy in to specific EU programmes? It probably is the case that it can't actually be finalised a single figure now, or perhaps ever.0 -
The FT is reporting this a bit differently:Richard_Nabavi said:Of course, we don't actually know for sure that the Telegraph report is accurate. Even if it is, it cannot formally be the case that agreement has been reached on the bill, but it might be the case that the EU negotiating team have agreed to recommend that we can now go on to their next stage.
More importantly, how the figure is made up is crucial. Does it, for example, include any payment during the transitional two-year period? If so, it's not too bad - just a couple of extra years' payment. Also, is there any provision for reducing it if we buy in to specific EU programmes? It probably is the case that it can't actually be finalised a single figure now, or perhaps ever.
https://www.ft.com/content/cabf22e2-d462-11e7-8c9a-d9c0a5c8d5c90 -
That looks very plausible as a description of the horse-trading and the positioning so that each side can present it domestically.AlastairMeeks said:The FT is reporting this a bit differently:
https://www.ft.com/content/cabf22e2-d462-11e7-8c9a-d9c0a5c8d5c90 -
North Korea may've launched another ballistic missile:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42160227
And on that cheery note, I must be off.0 -
The important question of the day: would £40bn buy you a war on the Korean peninsula?Morris_Dancer said:North Korea may've launched another ballistic missile:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-42160227
And on that cheery note, I must be off.0 -
Don't be silly. Cats are French.OldKingCole said:rottenborough said:
So cats are the Libertarians of politics? Do what they like, rules don't apply, kill wildlife...foxinsoxuk said:
Definitely vote dog not cat.rottenborough said:
This party is so wrong. If only they had been the 'Larry the Downing Street Cat for PM' then it would romp home.foxinsoxuk said:
They are barking up the wrong tree if they think they will ever get anywhere under FPTP. They will be hounded from office if they ever try.Scott_P said:
They could be in coalition with Brian Cox's Rational Quanta Party.
Politicians need to be loyal, obedient and able to bite intruders, not just make themselves comfortable and kill wildlife. Dogs are servants, cats are masters.
We established this some time ago. Cats are Tories.
Supremely elegant, utterly indifferent if not actually contemptuous of you, lazy, sleep in the afternoon, fond of food, can be charming when they want something from you and sexually promiscuous.
French. Not Tories.0 -
In fairness you’d want to know how the hell it got here.anothernick said:
I was a at pre Brexit seminar for business last week and the audience was given some statistics.FF43 said:
Whatever else, Brexit will lead to an explosion of red tape.Scott_P said:@cpmcgonagle: UK - “We must leave the EU due to stifling Brussels red tape that we are powerless to resist!”
Also UK - “Why can’t Ireland just ignore the rules and leave their borders open?”
Each truck that passes through Dover from another EU country takes on average two minutes to clear customs.
If the average clearance time were to double to four minutes there would be 17-mile queues on either side of the channel.
The average clearance time for a truck from a non-EU country is 45 minutes.0 -
No doubt what the UK is hoping to achieve by placing this story in the Telegraph.RoyalBlue said:This is excellent news. It will be harder to halt progress on Ireland alone once the 27 start thinking about all the wonderful things they can spend our money on.
Rejoice!0 -
Self-interest strikes again:
YouGov: Should there be a Bank Holiday for Royal Wedding?
Under 50s: Yes
Over 65s: No (massively)
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK?original_referer=http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/03/04/the-latest-batch-of-ashcroft-marginals-polling-finds/&tw_i=573192912663650304&tw_p=tweetembed
0 -
I don't think it is entirely accurate but definitely leaked. In fact, the figure could be on the higher end.Richard_Nabavi said:Of course, we don't actually know for sure that the Telegraph report is accurate. Even if it is, it cannot formally be the case that agreement has been reached on the bill, but it might be the case that the EU negotiating team have agreed to recommend that we can now go on to their next stage.
More importantly, how the figure is made up is crucial. Does it, for example, include any payment during the transitional two-year period? If so, it's not too bad - just a couple of extra years' payment. If it doesn't (which is more likely I think) it's rather a lot of dosh for nothing much in return. And what guarantees/hints/nods have the EU given us regarding the trade side?
Also, is there any provision for reducing it if we buy in to specific EU programmes? It probably is the case that it can't actually be finalised a single figure now, or perhaps ever.
Let's face it, if this figure was put out a month back, all hell would have broken loose particularly here in PB Brexitland. But since the £40bn leak from last week, the Brexiters are welcoming this "settlement".
I believe this is only the second stage of the leak. These payments are only the ticket to the dance.
There will have to be annual payments to access the Single market. That still leaves the financial "passport".0 -
... and the FT? or was that the Germans...?williamglenn said:
No doubt what the UK is hoping to achieve by placing this story in the Telegraph.RoyalBlue said:This is excellent news. It will be harder to halt progress on Ireland alone once the 27 start thinking about all the wonderful things they can spend our money on.
Rejoice!0 -
Plus to end free movement, a great day for Theresa May if true that the bill has been agreed and FTA talks about to beginRobD said:
Britain pays £50 billion not to pay £10bn /annum.surbiton said:
No.4 - Britain pays £50 billion not to let foreigners in.stodge said:Evening all
Symbolic moments - for me, no.1 will always be Neil Armstrong and the Moon landing in 1969 with no.2 the Fall of the Berlin Wall twenty years later and no.3 the second plane hitting the WTC in NYC on 11/9/01.
All three changed the world fundamentally.0 -
YouGov Wales:
Labour: 47% (-3)
Conservatives: 31% (-1)
Plaid Cymru: 11% (+3)
Liberal Democrats: 5% (+1)
UKIP: 3% (no change)
Others: 3% (+1)
On UNS, no seats change hands from GE.
http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/2017/11/27/the-november-welsh-political-barometer-poll/
0 -
I see the Remainers flipped their line of attack on this thread even more quickly.Richard_Nabavi said:Just about now, someone in Labour HQ is emailing Labour MPs:
Please note our Agreed Position on the Brexit bill has just changed. The previous position of "This Conservative government is risking Britain's economy by refusing to agree the exit bill with the EU, acting as always for the few, not the many." should no longer be used. The new position is "This Conservative government is shamelessly wasting taxpayers' money on the EU exit bill, acting as always for big business, not ordinary people."0 -
Good news on the agreed bill. Should give the government and May a bit of a boost. If she now delivers a good free trade agreement some will be wondering how they ever doubted her. Looks very likely to me given how much free trade has worked to the EU’s advantage.
Looks like the Irish are being ignored too. Hopefully we will now work together to come up with practical solutions rather than domestic political points.0 -
3rd September video - getting a bit desperate nowsurbiton said:0 -
Not really. What was "nonsense" on 3rd September is the first down payment 2 months later.Big_G_NorthWales said:
3rd September video - getting a bit desperate nowsurbiton said:0 -
Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/9355814646867435530 -
-
3 months to Council meeting and down payment is the divorce bill to achieve a trade dealsurbiton said:
Not really. What was "nonsense" on 3rd September is the first down payment 2 months later.Big_G_NorthWales said:
3rd September video - getting a bit desperate nowsurbiton said:0 -
Hands up those PB Brexiters who just a few months back were saying we should not be paying anything.
Anyone honest enough to admit that ?0 -
If they had presented £100m, £200m, £300m, £400m, I suspect they'd have got the same percentages.AlastairMeeks said:0 -
Off topic, good news for any male PBers who have been foolish enough to marry someone three decades younger than themselves:
"Viagra can be sold over the counter"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-42155489
0 -
£50bn was simply off the scale!AlastairMeeks said:0 -
As a matter of interest did the question ask to achieve a trade deal and meet our legal obligationsAlastairMeeks said:0 -
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.0 -
Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately0
-
Farage can Foxtrot Oscar back to the States and his his new, rather unpleasant, friends.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/9355814646867435530 -
We are basically paying up to the nd of the budget round in 2021.
Small price to end these payments for the next 100 years and beyond.
om
Irish will be dropped by the EU now they have their wonga.0 -
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".0 -
AgreedDavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.0 -
As a matter of interest why have they collapsedRochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
0 -
+1OldKingCole said:
Farage can Foxtrot Oscar back to the States and his his new, rather unpleasant, friends.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/9355814646867435530 -
No we just stop buying their stuff. By the time this is over driving a German car may be, well, brave. If they want to squeeze the pips they can but we will not forget.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".0 -
People have stopped smoking.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest why have they collapsedRochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
0 -
Ah, the Austin Allegro gambit.DavidL said:
No we just stop buying their stuff. By the time this is over driving a German car may be, well, brave. If they want to squeeze the pips they can but we will not forget.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".
If you don't mind, I'll carry on buying goods on quality and value for money rather than enabling some mad Brexit autarkic vision.0 -
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
Not good but it’s been coming for a while. Given the market concentration we are willing to tolerate in the supermarket business it’s not obvious what wholesalers are for.RochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
0 -
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
I did 14 years agoTGOHF said:
People have stopped smoking.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest why have they collapsedRochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
0 -
Buy a Jag or a Chelsea tractor Alastair. You can afford it.AlastairMeeks said:
Ah, the Austin Allegro gambit.DavidL said:
No we just stop buying their stuff. By the time this is over driving a German car may be, well, brave. If they want to squeeze the pips they can but we will not forget.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".
If you don't mind, I'll carry on buying goods on quality and value for money rather than enabling some mad Brexit autarkic vision.0 -
Why did Davis say paying them for access was a possibility, then?DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
So, to summarise, we should have done this a while ago. Agreed.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
0 -
P&H have gone bust? Bloody hell, bad news for a lot of small grocers, as well as obviously their own staff.RochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
0 -
Why on earth should I engage in economic warfare? For those obsessed by manufacturing, British manufacturers simply need to make better stuff.DavidL said:
Buy a Jag or a Chelsea tractor Alastair. You can afford it.AlastairMeeks said:
Ah, the Austin Allegro gambit.DavidL said:
No we just stop buying their stuff. By the time this is over driving a German car may be, well, brave. If they want to squeeze the pips they can but we will not forget.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".
If you don't mind, I'll carry on buying goods on quality and value for money rather than enabling some mad Brexit autarkic vision.0 -
I think he is talking about something else. If we want to remain a part of the European patent Court or EU research projects or an associate member of any other EU institution then it is reasonable we pay a subscription.Danny565 said:
Why did Davis say paying them for access was a possibility, then?DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access
0 -
Depends what we’re importing and what the balance would be without an ongoing arrangement. If we need their stuff more than they need ours, we’ll have to concede again.DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access
Given how much the City’s tax contribution is worth we’ll need to keep as much of it as possible, for example. That means a deal on passporting rights.
0 -
Maybe because our trade deficit is impoverishing our children. Frankly a bit selfish to ignore that.AlastairMeeks said:
Why on earth should I engage in economic warfare? For those obsessed by manufacturing, British manufacturers simply need to make better stuff.DavidL said:
Buy a Jag or a Chelsea tractor Alastair. You can afford it.AlastairMeeks said:
Ah, the Austin Allegro gambit.DavidL said:
No we just stop buying their stuff. By the time this is over driving a German car may be, well, brave. If they want to squeeze the pips they can but we will not forget.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".
If you don't mind, I'll carry on buying goods on quality and value for money rather than enabling some mad Brexit autarkic vision.0 -
Yes it’s taken longer than it should but May has faced down the nutters. Maybe it was unrealistic to expect her to do it before now.SouthamObserver said:
So, to summarise, we should have done this a while ago. Agreed.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.0 -
No they have not , anyways I thought one of the main reasons was Tesco has bought bookers and the Co -op Nisa., so less business for the them as a wholesaler.TGOHF said:
People have stopped smoking.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest why have they collapsedRochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
0 -
Quite. For a trade deal on goods they should be paying us on the current numbers. We need to push to include services in the trade deal, maybe even work to complete the single market in services that we can then subscribe to.DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
Yes, I know, but the government has repeatedly said that, although we won't be members of the Single Market, they still want privileged tariff-free "access" to the Single Market. That's likely to require annual payments, like Davis himself conceded a year ago.TGOHF said:
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
Eh? Davis was responding to a question which specifically asked whether he would “consider making any contribution in any shape or form for access to the single market"DavidL said:
I think he is talking about something else. If we want to remain a part of the European patent Court or EU research projects or an associate member of any other EU institution then it is reasonable we pay a subscription.Danny565 said:
Why did Davis say paying them for access was a possibility, then?DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
Buying crap won't make anyone's life better.DavidL said:
Maybe because our trade deficit is impoverishing our children. Frankly a bit selfish to ignore that.AlastairMeeks said:
Why on earth should I engage in economic warfare? For those obsessed by manufacturing, British manufacturers simply need to make better stuff.DavidL said:
Buy a Jag or a Chelsea tractor Alastair. You can afford it.AlastairMeeks said:
Ah, the Austin Allegro gambit.DavidL said:
No we just stop buying their stuff. By the time this is over driving a German car may be, well, brave. If they want to squeeze the pips they can but we will not forget.AlastairMeeks said:
I'm sure it could be achieved pdq by placing a total ban on importing and exporting to the EU.DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.HYUFD said:Farage not happy unsurprisingly but bar a few diehard Brexiteers most will be pleased with what May has achieved
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/935581464686743553
Next priority is to get our trade deficit with the EU down from £60 bn a year to zero pdq. If we achieve that this will be cheap as chips.
I'm less sure that would be good for the British economy or make a hypothetical £50 billion payment "cheap as chips".
If you don't mind, I'll carry on buying goods on quality and value for money rather than enabling some mad Brexit autarkic vision.0 -
The problem is it’s £6 billion among 27 and £5 billion for us alone. On a country by country basis we need them more than they need us. That’s why we’re conceding on this payment, after all.Sandpit said:
Quite. For a trade deal on goods they should be paying us on the current numbers. We need to push to include services in the trade deal, maybe even work to complete the single market in services that we can then subscribe to.DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access
0 -
How much is Canada paying for their access to the single EU market?Danny565 said:
Yes, I know, but the government has repeatedly said that, although we won't be members of the Single Market, they still want privileged tariff-free "access" to the Single Market. That's likely to require annual payments, like Davis himself conceded a year ago.TGOHF said:
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
A lot of us realised this before the vote and suggested that we pay into the EEA/ Norway funds scheme for the regeneration of Eastern Europe. This would relieve the EU of a burden in regeneration funds, but would give the UK much more control over how the money was spent.Danny565 said:
Yes, I know, but the government has repeatedly said that, although we won't be members of the Single Market, they still want privileged tariff-free "access" to the Single Market. That's likely to require annual payments, like Davis himself conceded a year ago.TGOHF said:
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
Canada was never in the Single Market and is not home to countless companies and institutions - employing huge numbers of people and generating billions in tax revenues - whose commercial success is predicated on that membership.Sandpit said:
How much is Canada paying for their access to the single EU market?Danny565 said:
Yes, I know, but the government has repeatedly said that, although we won't be members of the Single Market, they still want privileged tariff-free "access" to the Single Market. That's likely to require annual payments, like Davis himself conceded a year ago.TGOHF said:
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access
0 -
Ouch, very uncomfortable interview with Tulip Siddiq on C4 news.
Never let it be said that Labour always gets an easy ride.0 -
I think there is a misunderstanding of what the City does. Most of what is contained in Passporting is retail business, not the wholesale money market. I'm no expert on this, but this is interesting on the subject.SouthamObserver said:
Depends what we’re importing and what the balance would be without an ongoing arrangement. If we need their stuff more than they need ours, we’ll have to concede again.DavidL said:
Why would we want to pay them for access to a market that sells us £6bn a week and only buys £5bn of our stuff? We want to avoid a cliff edge but these terms of trade are unaffordable.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access
Given how much the City’s tax contribution is worth we’ll need to keep as much of it as possible, for example. That means a deal on passporting rights.
https://semperfidem2004.wordpress.com/2016/08/16/brexits-non-impact-on-the-city-of-london-follow-the-money/0 -
They were bailed out by Imperial tobacco and JTI last year as the fag boys needed their wagons to keep delivering cancer sticks. Needed more £, non coming from cancer sticks so we're looking to a deal with the Carlyle Group to keep them going.Sandpit said:
P&H have gone bust? Bloody hell, bad news for a lot of small grocers, as well as obviously their own staff.RochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
Those talks reported to have collapsed at 13:30. Industry reacts, news at 14:00 that they're at risk of Administration by Christmas, by 14:30 I'm in meetings looking at how we protect ourselves, at 16:30 I hear they're in administration. That fast - they simply ran out of cash.
I've been told some other stuff this evening but that's not for a public forum... :shock:0 -
Zero, I think. But that's not relevant here, because May herself said in the Florence speech that she wanted a higher level of access to the Single Market than Canada has:Sandpit said:
How much is Canada paying for their access to the single EU market?Danny565 said:
Yes, I know, but the government has repeatedly said that, although we won't be members of the Single Market, they still want privileged tariff-free "access" to the Single Market. That's likely to require annual payments, like Davis himself conceded a year ago.TGOHF said:
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access
Unfortunately, this is what May said Britain wanted. A “stark and unimaginative choice” between two options was not “best for either the UK or the EU”, she said. A Norway-style deal would represent “a loss of democratic control”, while a Canada-style deal would be “a restriction on our market access”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/22/theresa-mays-florence-speech-key-points
0 -
Paying for certain associate memberships of EU bodies after we leave the EU I can understand, but we shouldn’t be paying anything on an ongoing basis purely for access to their market. They benefit from it more than we do. The trade imbalance is something that needs to move in our favour, paying for something that tilts it away from us is nonsensical.SouthamObserver said:
Canada was never in the Single Market and is not home to countless companies and institutions - employing huge numbers of people and generating billions in tax revenues - whose commercial success is predicated on that membership.Sandpit said:
How much is Canada paying for their access to the single EU market?Danny565 said:
Yes, I know, but the government has repeatedly said that, although we won't be members of the Single Market, they still want privileged tariff-free "access" to the Single Market. That's likely to require annual payments, like Davis himself conceded a year ago.TGOHF said:
We are leaving the single market.Danny565 said:
Are we going to be stopping paying £10bn a year (or something similar) ad infintem? This lump sum is likely going to be on top of ongoing payments for high access to the Single Market, isn't it? Davis himself said this was a distinct possibility:DavidL said:
Yep. This almost certainly includes the money we were always going to pay over the next 18 months as well. Is it more than I would want us to pay in an ideal world? Yes. Is it worth it to stop paying £10bn a year ad infinitem? Hell yes.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-secretary-suggests-uk-would-consider-paying-for-single-market-access0 -
Tulip Siddiq watchers should check out C4 News +1. Devastating. She really shouldn't survive this story.0
-
The crack about the pregnant C4 producer was...not good.ThomasNashe said:Tulip Siddiq watchers should check out C4 News +1. Devastating. She really shouldn't survive this story.
0 -
Indeed. Also the pretence of outrage at the interviewer (which of course he wasn't) supposedly suggesting she was Bangledeshi rather than British will fool no-one.Theuniondivvie said:
The crack about the pregnant C4 producer was...not good.ThomasNashe said:Tulip Siddiq watchers should check out C4 News +1. Devastating. She really shouldn't survive this story.
0 -
She's on the "good" side, she'll survive. Just like Seumas.ThomasNashe said:Tulip Siddiq watchers should check out C4 News +1. Devastating. She really shouldn't survive this story.
0 -
Wow, that was very quick, as you say it sounds like the money ran out and the banks pulled the plug.RochdalePioneers said:
They were bailed out by Imperial tobacco and JTI last year as the fag boys needed their wagons to keep delivering cancer sticks. Needed more £, non coming from cancer sticks so we're looking to a deal with the Carlyle Group to keep them going.Sandpit said:
P&H have gone bust? Bloody hell, bad news for a lot of small grocers, as well as obviously their own staff.RochdalePioneers said:Brutal day. I've spent the afternoon dealing with what started as a tip off to review our credit limit for Palmer and Harvey and ended with their catastrophic collapse into liquidation and 2,500 people made redundant immediately
Those talks reported to have collapsed at 13:30. Industry reacts, news at 14:00 that they're at risk of Administration by Christmas, by 14:30 I'm in meetings looking at how we protect ourselves, at 16:30 I hear they're in administration. That fast - they simply ran out of cash.
I've been told some other stuff this evening but that's not for a public forum... :shock:
I’m thinking there must be a lot of small businesses utterly dependent on P&H for their supply chain, lots of independent and small chain grocers are going to be heading to the cash and carry in vans tomorrow.0 -
What happened?ThomasNashe said:Tulip Siddiq watchers should check out C4 News +1. Devastating. She really shouldn't survive this story.
0
