Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 2,900
I'm sorry Neil but you're just plain wrong about borders. What you describe is the EEC before completion of the Single Market. In that scenario there would still be border controls in both directions; Common Transit would alleviate the fiscal ones but it would take at least mutual recognition of non-fiscal standards to approach 'frictionless'.
(Not my real name.)
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Guest 1881- Registered: 16 Oct 2016
- Posts: 1,071
What's wrong with equality Gilead, where an equal amount of men have to give up work to perform their duty to their parents?
Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean that politics won't take an interest in you. PERICLES.
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,482
Dear Bishop, get with the programme, you'll be telling me that the nuclear family, with parents of different genders staying together to bring up their children, often specialising so one earns whilst the other concentrates on child care, whilst having an obligation to also care for their parents if necessary, is best for society next!
'If no one went no faster than what I do there'd be a sight less trouble in this world'
Neil Moors- Registered: 3 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,225
Always happy to be corrected by you, Button, and there is something mildly reassuring that it isn't as easy as I had suggested (as surely it would have been suggested already!).
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 2,900
Fear not NM, I'm sure CH (the councillor not the confederation) is working with his officers as we speak. So that just leaves the other 24 non-fiscal agencies on our side of the channel to deal with (particularly BEIS).
(Not my real name.)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Could be a bit of scare mongering here as I remember Mr Barnier saying that a few things had been agreed, one of them being keeping us in the European arrest warrant scheme although I don't know if there will be joint investigations if and when we leave.
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/dover/news/no-deal-brexit-poses-security-risks-187578/ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
#2325 You can go to Hargreaves Lansdown if you're rolling in it and are prepared to pay through the nose for financial advice you could receive more cheaply and effectively elsewhere. Like Brexit - beware the gullible.
Brian Dixon likes this
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
yeah 17.2 million people where/ still are gullible.
Weird Granny Slater- Location: Dover
- Registered: 7 Jun 2017
- Posts: 2,844
I thought the advice to the 'in the know' rich was to buy gold but to make sure to stash it where the banks won't think of looking for it?
'Pass the cow dung, my dropsy's killing me' - Heraclitus
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
under the bed next to the granny pot.
Guest 1881- Registered: 16 Oct 2016
- Posts: 1,071
Weird Granny Slater wrote:I thought the advice to the 'in the know' rich was to buy gold but to make sure to stash it where the banks won't think of looking for it?
In the Bank of England?!
Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean that politics won't take an interest in you. PERICLES.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Not all doom and gloom, a big fall in house prices would benefit a lot more people than it would hurt.
https://metro.co.uk/2018/08/03/banks-preparing-house-prices-fall-third-brexit-7792888/howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Sir Vince makes a valid point about legislation being pushed through quickly but it isn't that simple in my view as the previous protaganists have to regroup and campaign from scratch, time must be given for both sides to put their case to the media and literature delivered to every dwelling in the country.
To add to that nobody has the faintest idea of what the final deal is and unlikely that we will know in time for the campaign to start.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/final-say-vince-cable-brexit-referendum-eu-uk-leave-no-deal-vote-a8486091.htmlhoward mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
From the independent.
A survey of 1,481 people by BMG claims every group under the age of 55 also wants the chance to decide the terms of Britain’s exit from the bloc – something the prime minister has categorically ruled out. Overall, when asked about the possibility of a referendum should a Brexit deal be reached between Britain and the EU, 48 per cent said they would support a public vote while 24 per cent would be opposed and 11 per cent said they did not know.
The survey suggested that just one in seven voters (14 per cent) would back the prime minister’s Chequers plan for Britain’s withdrawal from the EU if given the chance at a referendum, while 27 per cent said they believed the UK should leave with no deal and 43 per cent would back remaining inside the bloc. It also found that if Ms May fails to secure a deal that her ministers can agree to later this year, nearly half (49 per cent) of respondents believed she should be replaced as prime minister.
A majority – 52 per cent – said that if this scenario played out then a general election should be held with the Conservatives’ new leader. Just under a third (28 per cent) said she should be replaced without a vote while 20 per cent said they did not know.
But respondents were divided on whether the 2016 referendum result gave the prime minister a mandate to leave the EU without a deal, with 34 per cent believing it did and 36 per cent suggesting it did not.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
so a undesided vote then. to many if's and buts for my liking.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Courtesy of the Times.
Theresa May’s plan for a bespoke customs deal with the European Union is based on flawed analysis described by trade experts last night as “fanciful”.Scrutiny of the proposal on behalf of The Times cast doubt over the central pledge that the vast majority of businesses would pay the right or no tariff at the border. Business experts also questioned another key part of the plan: that businesses would be able reliably to track goods to their final destination. This issue is critical to the EU, which fears the scheme could become a backdoor smuggling route into the continent.
Alan Winters, professor of economics and director of the UK Trade Policy Observatory at Sussex University, who examined the government’s assumptions, said: “The whole thing when you analyse it is pretty fanciful.”If the proposal, unveiled at Chequers last month, collapses it would increase the chance that Mrs May would have to choose between remaining inside a customs union that would limit free-trade deals or pulling out altogether. The prime minister was forced into drawing up her new plan — which includes the so-called facilitated customs arrangement (FCA) — after her proposal for a customs partnership with the EU was vetoed by Brexiteer ministers and Brussels.
Downing Street claimed that the Chequers proposal fixed flaws in the original idea, which was criticised for being costly for business to implement and undermining the rationale for free-trade deals. However, problems with the new plan uncovered by The Times include:
• The central claim that about 96 per cent of products would be able to pay the correct tariff “up front” was calculated as a proportion of the UK’s total goods trade rather than imports only. When exports are stripped out, the percentage of goods requiring additional checks and monitoring would be about four times the estimate.
• The analysis assumes that importers would be able to prove the final destination of every “finished” product arriving in the UK. Business leaders said this was fantasy and that the majority of companies would find it impossible to track the destination of goods coming into the country from outside the EU.The experts said the government’s assumptions appear to have been exaggerated and they cast serious doubt over whether they could work in practice, even if the deal were to be agreed with the EU. Professor Winters said: “It is weird that they are using the whole of trade for the basis of their calculation when it is clear that it is only imports that will be affected and it has nothing at all to do with exports. “The idea that you would know where all finished goods being imported were headed also doesn’t make sense. This is clearly reasonable for some goods like meat that are heavily regulated, but we cannot see it applying automatically to all goods.”
Anna Jerzewska, an expert in trade agreements who has advised large companies such as GSK, said the government’s assumptions appeared to have been “exaggerated at best”. “I don’t know any business that is routinely able to determine where all the goods they import end up and in which market. You simply don’t have that visibility,” she said. For example at present the EU imposes tariff levels of between 10 and 13 per cent on imported clothing and footwear. If the UK signed a free-trade agreement that reduced those tariffs for the UK market an importer could declare that the product was destined for the UK then export it on to the EU. Under the FCA there would be no further customs checks between Britain and Europe.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Tory HQ are asking local associations to buy these leaflets and distribute but activists are angry, not just at the content, but that it is in Lib Dem yellow.