Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Thracian]

On 2017-5-28 at 15:40, davieG said:

I can't imagine the Tories letting money grabbing opportunities for their business friends go even if it costs taxpayers money

Can't imagine why anyone would take the pressures of employing people, and the headaches of running a business, without making money. 

Profit might be a dirty word in some people's eyes but it's strange how people will change their  minds when they get the chance.   

[Thracian]

5 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

The world's second largest trader in currencies now prefers Labour in a hung parliament:

 

 

May needs to shelter the economy from the Brexit's effect on the financial sector - accounting for about 20% of our economy, about £71bn to the Exchequer.

• Goldman Sach's has said Brexit 'will stall' the City of London https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-latest-news-goldman-sachs-cut-london-stall-leaving-eu-lloyd-blankfein-a7718876.html
• Banks braced for ‘hundreds of millions’ in Brexit costs https://www.ft.com/content/bfb842f2-36fb-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e where the costs 'will get passed on to the client base' according to Goldman Sachs.
• JP Morgan has already started moving its office to Dublin https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/15/jp-morgan-landmark-office-dublin-brexit. Investec are looking to do the same http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/05/18/investec-eyes-dublin-brexit-banking-subsidiary/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw. Deutsche Bank has warned outside the Single Market they'll have to move around 4,000 staff to deal with EU finance https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-26/deutsche-bank-s-matherat-says-4-000-u-k-jobs-at-risk-in-brexit UBS warned of this much earlier. And about a quarter of firms are already thinking of relocating:
• And multi-million euro denominations gig in London is looking to move to an EU country now. http://uk.businessinsider.com/london-losing-euro-clearing-brexit-2017-5?r=US&IR=T

May seems not to care about the UK as a global financial centre - something Thatcher created as a source of funds after fighting the miners and manufacturing base.

 

But if she doesn't care about it, she certainly needs an alternative source of funds. She has currently no plans whatsoever. And all our fancy new trading deals have come to nothing, apart from the US, China and Austrialia saying they find the Single Market more important now. It makes me doubt her economic competence.

 

She has a way around this: leave the EU but remain in the Single Market. But she has consistently chose to abandon this approach for vague fantasy.

Mrs May worries me. Pretends to be tough but is starting to seem like a political Twiggy. Even talks about terrorists in terms of "this has got to stop"  but with no answers or actions I've ever heard or seen the result of. 

[Foxxed]

4 hours ago, Thracian said:

Mrs May worries me. Pretends to be tough but is starting to seem like a political Twiggy. Even talks about terrorists in terms of "this has got to stop"  but with no answers or actions I've ever heard or seen the result of. 

I'd prefer a minority Tory/Lab government that has to do deals with the opposition.

 

It may make for sensible policy.

[Buce]

 

Farmers increasingly gloomy over Brexit:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/05/farmers-feeling-increasingly-gloomy-about-future-ahead-of-brexit-says-nfu

 

Despite overwhelmingly being in support of leaving the EU at the Brexit referendum, farmers are increasingly gloomy now that they are staring down the reality of what leaving will entail.

In two years, confidence levels on the outlook for the next three years, as measured by the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), have plummeted to just above zero from a high of 19 points on the positive side, in the wake of the general election being called and Brexit being set.

The NFU takes regular soundings of its members and measures their confidence on a scale of 0-100 positive and 0-100 negative points, with zero representing a neutral outlook.

 

Data on farmers’ investment intentions adds to the gloom. One in five farmers said they were reducing their investment, while only half that number were planning to increase their investments in the next year, as a result of the EU referendum.

“Farmer confidence is absolutely critical to the future of a profitable and productive food and farming sector,” said Meurig Raymond, president of the NFU, warning it was a red flag to the incoming government. “In such a period of uncertainty politically, we need politicians to fully understand the impact this lack of clarity is having economically.”

Farmers were among the staunchest supporters of leaving the EU, despite their dependence on subsidies of up to €3bn (£2.5bn) they receive each year. Rural voters opted in large numbers to leave the EU in most of the country, excluding Scotland, Northern Ireland and parts of Wales.

Before the referendum, many farmers told the Guardian they preferred to be outside the EU despite the lack of certainty on future subsidies, because they disliked EU regulations or were confident the UK could compete independently with other countries.

However, since the referendum farmers have also raised concerns that the end of free movement and the single market could be severe blows to business. Tens of thousands of migrant workers, mostly from former Eastern Europe, are required seasonally for harvesting, and the majority of the UK’s food and farming export trade is with the EU. The loss of the former will raise costs and if farmers are penalised by EU trade tariffs, their exports are likely to suffer markedly.

Puzzlingly, the gloom among farmers post-referendum contrasts sharply with a positive outlook for the short term. When farmers were asked about their confidence levels in the outlook for the next year, the results were markedly different. From confidence levels deep in negative territory – at 18 points below zero, the worst levels in more than seven years – in April 2016, before the referendum, their short-term outlook bounced back this spring to +17, its highest point in four years.

 

Farmers’ confidence varies widely from season to season, based not just on the prevailing political outlook but heavily dependent on weather conditions, demand in the market, harvests overseas and price levels for key produce. The weak pound, EU subsidies for the next two years and access to EU markets could boost confidence.

But Raymond warned that these were short-term factors. “We all know farming businesses are long-term, and cannot rely on currency fluctuations,” he said.

Farmers’ reluctance to put money into future investment, in new machinery, stock or materials, was also of particular concern, he said. “Investment in farming is integral to our ability to produce food efficiently and sustainably, ensuring food security and farming’s huge contribution to the health and wealth of the nation. With just 10% willing to increase investment in their business, it does not paint a pretty picture for the progressive industry that we are striving to be,” he said.

 

The government has reassured farmers that the current subsidy regime will continue until 2020 at least, but the prospects for taxpayer payments to farmers beyond that are uncertain.

Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Green party are adamant that any future support for farmers must depend on them taking action to preserve and protect the environment, including through high animal welfare standards, providing habitats for wildlife, managing hedgerows, waterways and other features of the landscape, and altering farming methods to protect against flooding. A study published last week found that intensive agriculture was the prime cause of damage to the UK’s floodplains, with dire consequences for urban areas downstream.

Raymond said the next government would play a key role in deciding the fate of farmers in the wake of Brexit. “We need a competent and reliable workforce, a fit-for-purpose domestic agricultural policy, and the right trade deals. To address this debilitating uncertainty [politicians] needs to give the industry as many assurances as possible.”

[Foxxed]

There's more on the farmers being ****ed in the Yorkshire post.

 

Quote

With early Brexit talks between Prime Minister Theresa May and leaders of the European Union showing signs that the negotiations ahead will be far from straightforward, not least regarding future trade, peers said a transitional trade deal between Britain and the EU bloc is vital to avoiding a “cliff edge” for farmers.

 

They predict that life outside the EU “will not be easy” for British farmers who rely on European support payments that are worth more than £1bn a year in total, saying the agricultural industry has an “enormous” challenge ahead. Both the challenges and opportunities posed by the divorce from the EU are detailed in a report about the implications of Brexit on agriculture, published today by the House of Lords EU energy and environment sub-committee.

Read more at: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/business/farming-policy-on-cliff-edge-without-eu-deal-1-8523697

£1 billion pounds a year for the farmers then - unless there's going to be job losses.

 

Since the farming community is normally heavily Conservative it's no surprise she's said nothing about this during the election.

[SMX11]

Pretty sure all special interest groups will moan like hell if you try and take away subsidies, but New Zealand's experience tells me that the large majority will be fine assuming they are meeting the needs of consumers. It is up to the farmers to adjust what they do to be globally competitive and they will succeed. 

[Foxxed]

14 hours ago, SMX11 said:

Pretty sure all special interest groups will moan like hell if you try and take away subsidies, but New Zealand's experience tells me that the large majority will be fine assuming they are meeting the needs of consumers. It is up to the farmers to adjust what they do to be globally competitive and they will succeed. 

Farming isn't globally competitive though.

 

They are undercut by third world producers.

 

The reason the CAP existed is because the EU decided it didn't want to be dependent on non European countries for food.

 

Take away the subsidies and it becomes cheaper to import - and that means job losses.

[Foxxed]

The FT has something on the 759 treaties we need to renegotiate in two years just to stand still economically.

 

All in a time when China, the US and Australia have said we're less appealing now we're no longer in the Single Market.

 

Quote

In the early 1970s the Queen’s Messengers delivered a historic parcel from London to Brussels, stuffed with enough documents to fill a tea-chest.

 

Since the 15th century these diplomatic couriers have carried the affairs of state. This time the delivery included scores of treaties, all bearing Royal Arms, which stretched back decades and traced the UK’s commercial arteries around the world. The arrangements were largely to be subsumed by the European Community when Britain joined its trade bloc; this was, in paper form, part of a handover of power.

 

Forty-six years on, when Britain leaves the EU in 2019, the UK stands to lose far more than it brought over to Brussels that day. The treaty chest has swollen into a small archive of EU agreements, running to hundreds of thousands of pages and spanning 168 non-EU countries. Within them are covered almost every external function of a modern economy, from flying planes to America and trading sows with Iceland to fishing in far-flung seas.

 

On Brexit day, that will all fall away. By law Britain will overnight be excluded from those EU arrangements with “third countries”, entering the equivalent of a legal void in key parts of its external commercial relations. Some British officials are even peering into the pre-1973 chest again to see whether some seemingly obsolete treaties might gain a new lease of life from a disorderly Brexit. “It is dusty in there,” jokes one Whitehall official.

 

It poses a formidable and little-understood challenge for Britain’s prime minister after the June 8 election. While Brexit is often cast as an affair between Brussels and London, in practice Britain’s exit will open more than 750 separate time-pressured mini-negotiations worldwide, according to Financial Times research. And there are no obvious shortcuts: even a basic transition after 2019 requires not just EU-UK approval, but the deal-by-deal authorisation of every third country involved.

 

“The nearest precedent you can think of is a cessation of a country — you are almost starting from scratch,” says Andrew Hood, a former UK government lawyer now at Dechert. “It will be a very difficult, iterative process.”

 

Britain finds itself at the diplomatic starting line, with the status quo upended and all sides reassessing their interests.

 

To Brexiters this is a liberation that allows Britain to negotiate better, more ambitious deals with trading partners, shorn of the encumbrance of Brussels dogma and politics. At worst, they say, existing arrangements would be continued through drafting tweaks replacing “EU” with “UK”; at best they would be improved. Boris Johnson, foreign secretary, said nations were “already queueing up” to do deals.

 

Even if it were this simple, critics still fear it will open a bureaucratic vortex, sapping energy and resources. Each agreement must be reviewed, the country approached, the decision makers found, meetings arranged, trips made, negotiations started and completed — all against a ticking clock and the backdrop of Brexit, with the legal and practical constraints that brings. Most inconvenient of all, many countries want to know the outcome of EU-UK talks before making their own commitments.

 

“We are talking about an enormous number of complex acts that we rely on today,” says Lord Hannay, Britain’s former EU ambassador. “The challenge of replacing them falls in the same category as Alice in Wonderland running furiously to stand in the same spot.”

https://www.ft.com/content/f1435a8e-372b-11e7-bce4-9023f8c0fd2e

 

I can't see us doing all this in time. It'd be a treaty every two days, starting from last March. It seems they'll be considerable economic pain in the five to ten years while we renegotiate.

 

And in an economic slowdown, now outside the world's largest trading block, will we be more attractive? Early evidence from Trump, China and Austrian companies says no.

 

Again, a soft Brexit, Norway's model, could avoid this. But May doesn't want to be "half in, half out".

[SMX11]

30 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

Farming isn't globally competitive though.

 

They are undercut by third world producers.

 

The reason the CAP existed is because the EU decided it didn't want to be dependent on non European countries for food.

 

Take away the subsidies and it becomes cheaper to import - and that means job losses.

3rd world producers don't have our yields or productivity and most produce different crops. Why should consumers be penalised to buy the food they want?

 

Some jobs will be lost I am not denying that but it will in things like sugar beet farmers where the CAP and tarrifs has encouraged them produce a crop which makes no economic sense without 'protection'.

[Foxxed]

18 minutes ago, SMX11 said:

3rd world producers don't have our yields or productivity and most produce different crops. Why should consumers be penalised to buy the food they want?

It's far more expensive, and not worthwhile to produce these goods, without EU subsidies.

 

We either need to stop farming as we are - meaning job losses - or give the farmers about a billion a year.

 

Here's another article from the FT talking about the 55% of farmers incomes that come from the EU - I would be surprised if farmers can remain as productive without 55% of their income.

 

Quote

Britain’s decision to leave the EU poses challenges for many sectors of the economy. Few are likely to feel the heat in the next few years quite as much as the country’s farmers.

 

For decades, the British farming community has been the recipient of generous subsidies under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. Last year CAP payments to the UK totalled about £3bn, making up 55 per cent of farmers’ incomes. Once the UK leaves the bloc, these payments will come to an end, potentially endangering businesses across the country.

 

Theresa May’s new government is aware of the challenge this poses. Earlier this month, Philip Hammond, the chancellor, announced that the Treasury would replace any shortfall in EU funding to farmers that might arise between now and the end of the decade as Britain redefines its relationship with the EU.

However, Mr Hammond is providing no more than a short term stopgap. Farmers remain highly uncertain about their prospects after 2020 and Mrs May and her ministers need to address how British farming support can be reconfigured in a post-CAP age.

 

Some free market thinkers believe Britain’s departure from the CAP is a golden opportunity to scale back — and even end — agricultural subsidies altogether. They believe the CAP has been hugely distortive because farmers are granted funds according to how much they produce. British farming businesses have therefore been unwilling to innovate, leaving agricultural productivity in the UK lagging well behind that of the US, for example.

 

Proponents of deep cuts in subsidy also believe they are a sine qua non if Britain is to forge new trade deals with non-EU states. The EU is so heavily committed to agricultural protectionism — imposing tariff barriers on outsiders while subsidising its own farmers — that its ability to sign trade agreements with developing nations has long been restricted. If the UK adopts a different approach, opening up its markets to food exports from, say, Commonwealth nations, it could gain significant new access for UK companies looking to sell services.

 

Politicians should tread carefully, however. It is in Britain’s interest to maintain a strong farming industry at home and no government should take risks on food security. Farming is an uncertain profession and one that is increasingly exposed to the challenges posed by climate change. That is why most developed countries, whether inside the EU or not, maintain public funding for farming communities.

 

The right course for Britain is to replace the CAP with a smarter and more innovative system of public support. Instead of subsiding food production, the UK should look to adopt a system of highly specific direct transfers. Future UK governments should, for example, put far more emphasis on paying farmers to tackle specific environmental problems; or to boost training and skills in the workplace; or to invest in research and development projects that boost productivity.

 

British agriculture is at the start of a tough new era. The country’s farmers have long thrived on the free movement of cheap European labour, direct access to continental consumers and generous subsidies from Brussels. Britain’s decision to leave the EU — one that was ironically backed by many voters in rural communities — is now set to put that business model in jeopardy. The end of the CAP regime in Britain will be no bad thing. But ministers must ensure that British farming communities receive the support they need in order to survive in the brave new world after Brexit. https://www.ft.com/content/df151906-6616-11e6-a08a-c7ac04ef00aa

Fullfact has an article on how farmers in the UK receive more from subsidies than actual farming too. https://fullfact.org/economy/farming-subsidies-uk/

 

The idea British farming can remain globally competitive without 55% of its income seems to fly in the face of evidence. Evidence the houses of Parliament agrees on as with the originally posted article.

[Innovindil]

Rent prices have fallen for the first time since 2009. House prices have fallen for 3 months in a row. 

 

Might actually see affordable housing in my lifetime. 

[Foxxed]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

Rent prices have fallen for the first time since 2009. House prices have fallen for 3 months in a row. 

 

Might actually see affordable housing in my lifetime. 

 

Since wages and spending has decreased rents would have to go down too, although just by a fiver according to countrywide.

 

I thought this would affect mortgages too, but apparently not: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/personal-banking/mortgages/your-mortgage-is-going-to-cost-more-very-soon---here-is-why/ Since it's more expensive for the government to borrow money apparently although I fail to see the link.

 

Which kind of ****s me personally.

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, Foxxed said:

 

Since wages and spending has decreased rents would have to go down too, although just by a fiver according to countrywide.

 

I thought this would affect mortgages too, but apparently not: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/personal-banking/mortgages/your-mortgage-is-going-to-cost-more-very-soon---here-is-why/ Since it's more expensive for the government to borrow money apparently although I fail to see the link.

 

Which kind of ****s me personally.

Seems odd considering the rates from all the large banks just went down. 

[leicsmac]

https://www.ft.com/content/cfbea554-4904-11e7-a3f4-c742b9791d43

 

How tremendous.

[The Doctor]

12 hours ago, SMX11 said:

3rd world producers don't have our yields or productivity and most produce different crops. Why should consumers be penalised to buy the food they want?

 

Some jobs will be lost I am not denying that but it will in things like sugar beet farmers where the CAP and tarrifs has encouraged them produce a crop which makes no economic sense without 'protection'.

It's not about penalising people for buying the food they want, it's about sustainable sourcing and not having all our eggs in a basket we have no control over.

[Webbo]

8 hours ago, The Doctor said:

It's not about penalising people for buying the food they want, it's about sustainable sourcing and not having all our eggs in a basket we have no control over.

If every third world food producing country refused to sell us food ,we could still buy from the EU if we wanted to.

[The Doctor]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

If every third world food producing country refused to sell us food ,we could still buy from the EU if we wanted to.

Yeah, that's sort of the point of the CAP, as I said...

 

8 hours ago, The Doctor said:

It's not about penalising people for buying the food they want, it's about sustainable sourcing and not having all our eggs in a basket we have no control over.

 

[Webbo]

12 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Yeah, that's sort of the point of the CAP, as I said...

 

 

Europe sells food to countries outside the EU.

[The Doctor]

4 hours ago, Webbo said:

Europe sells food to countries outside the EU.

Your point being?

[Webbo]

Just now, The Doctor said:

Your point being?

Well, if I've understood your point correctly. Not being in the CAP will mean we won't have a sustainable food source. 

[Foxxed]

22 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Seems odd considering the rates from all the large banks just went down. 

House prices have just increased as well, as of yesterday. I really have no idea how the housing market or mortgage market works.

[Foxxed]

So the score after 15 minutes of the first half of Brexit

• Prices and inflation are up
• Wages are down
• Spending is on the decrease
• Growth is slowing
• We have 759 treaties to renegotiate in under two years
• China, Australia and the US have publicly said they find trade deals with Single Market as more important than with us
• Investment capital for the tech sector is down
• Our financial technology, Fintech, firms are relocating to the Single Market
• The farming sector is going off a cliff edge according to a parliament committee
• The chemical industry is set to suffer from tariffs since the products at part-produced in and outside the UK
• Factories like ministry of cake that depend on cheap EU Labour have said they'll suffer
• The retail sector, such as wetherspoons, said they'll suffer without eu immigration
• 50% of EU companies are looking to move away from UK suppliers in their supply chain
• A weaker pound means it's more expensive for our government to borrow
• A weaker pound means our imports, including food etc, are import expensive
• Our manufacturing output as fallen https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-manufacturing-09-per-cent-january-a7622121.html
• Banks such as JP Morgan, UBS are relocating to Dublin along with others
• Goldmansachs has said Brexit will stall the City of London sector, responsible for 71 billion of our tax revenue.
• The multi million pound euro denominations gig in the financial sector is set to leave
• Germany has said we're no longer a reliable partner, France has said it's now their job to make Brexit benefit the union before Britain.
• Border problems in Northern Ireland
• Border problems in Gibraltar
• The leading Brexiteer is under investigation by the FBI
• Hate crime as recorded by the home office increased after Brexit and did not go down to previous levels
• University funding down as no longer getting EU grants
• Large numbers of EU nurses are leaving a NHS already suffering

On the other hand

• Self-determination?
• Employment hasn't deceased, although a shortage in Labour has started
• House prices were falling (but just increased this month but that could be a blip)
• Rent is down by a fiver nationally
• Farage is very happy

Most of the negative points can be stopped by remaining a member of the Single Market while leaving the EU. But Brexit means Brexit.

[Guest]

On 2017-6-5 at 20:38, Foxxed said:

There's more on the farmers being ****ed in the Yorkshire post.

 

£1 billion pounds a year for the farmers then - unless there's going to be job losses.

 

Since the farming community is normally heavily Conservative it's no surprise she's said nothing about this during the election.

Farming community in general backed brexit. I've got no sympathy whatsoever. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Foxxed said:

So the score after 15 minutes of the first half of Brexit

• Prices and inflation are up
• Wages are down
• Spending is on the decrease
• Growth is slowing
• We have 759 treaties to renegotiate in under two years
• China, Australia and the US have publicly said they find trade deals with Single Market as more important than with us
• Investment capital for the tech sector is down
• Our financial technology, Fintech, firms are relocating to the Single Market
• The farming sector is going off a cliff edge according to a parliament committee
• The chemical industry is set to suffer from tariffs since the products at part-produced in and outside the UK
• Factories like ministry of cake that depend on cheap EU Labour have said they'll suffer
• The retail sector, such as wetherspoons, said they'll suffer without eu immigration
• 50% of EU companies are looking to move away from UK suppliers in their supply chain
• A weaker pound means it's more expensive for our government to borrow
• A weaker pound means our imports, including food etc, are import expensive
• Our manufacturing output as fallen https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-manufacturing-09-per-cent-january-a7622121.html
• Banks such as JP Morgan, UBS are relocating to Dublin along with others
• Goldmansachs has said Brexit will stall the City of London sector, responsible for 71 billion of our tax revenue.
• The multi million pound euro denominations gig in the financial sector is set to leave
• Germany has said we're no longer a reliable partner, France has said it's now their job to make Brexit benefit the union before Britain.
• Border problems in Northern Ireland
• Border problems in Gibraltar
• The leading Brexiteer is under investigation by the FBI
• Hate crime as recorded by the home office increased after Brexit and did not go down to previous levels
• University funding down as no longer getting EU grants
• Large numbers of EU nurses are leaving a NHS already suffering

On the other hand

• Self-determination?
• Employment hasn't deceased, although a shortage in Labour has started
• House prices were falling (but just increased this month but that could be a blip)
• Rent is down by a fiver nationally
• Farage is very happy

Most of the negative points can be stopped by remaining a member of the Single Market while leaving the EU. But Brexit means Brexit.

Yet the ever more ridiculous mrs may keeps telling the right wing of her party that no deal is better than a bad deal. 

[The Doctor]

5 hours ago, Webbo said:

Well, if I've understood your point correctly. Not being in the CAP will mean we won't have a sustainable food source. 

Not even close to my point. I wasn't even talking about brexits affect on us - I was talking about the point of the CAP.