• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

35 Excellent
  1. Our new position in the EU

    But the reasons for leaving were so disparate and the type of future envisaged so different (from Minford style free market to Marxist controlled economy hard left) that in many ways the status quo was the compromise - I see no more clarity and coming together of the differing interest groups now than the day before the referendum - just mounting costs and disappointment. It is literally like throwing good money after bad, carrying on building an edifice after it has been shown the final product has no use or purpose just because you have started it
  2. Our new position in the EU

    My son was 18 end of Jan - he was spitting feathers over the vote as were all his mates. A mock referendum held in the 6th form of his school was 80%+ remain
  3. Our new position in the EU

    Yes in my part of the south I live within yards of Redwood territory and my constituency switched from C to L at the post referendum election. The canvassers from the Tories going door to door where quite happy to resignedly admit that a vast number of people were telling them they would "never vote Blue again" over the referendum 58% & 55% remain votes in the 2 local areas. Redwood is almost universally despised by the younger local voters - I can see his vote plummeting at the next election although Wokingham is about as Blue as you can get so if he loses his seat it would only be part of a total rout of the tories - I think most would just not vote rather than switch allegiance
  4. Our new position in the EU

    It won't be "cancelled" it could however be put to a ratification vote given new information or you can also get into the whole argument as to "what do you actually mean by leave"
  5. Our new position in the EU

    I see it a bit differently Prior to the GFA we had Republican terrorists, Loyalist Terrorists, Uk Govt, Eire Govt and a bunch of "civilians" caught in the middle of the other 4. 40 years of hard line dogma had got us nowhere - some people took the brave decision to sit down around a table and thrash out a compromise, nobody got all they wanted but a deal was signed that allowed all to go back to their supporters and claim things were moving forward. Since then we have had far less violence, much more investment into NI and from what i understand a degree of return to the normality of civilised society. Brexit risks this BECAUSE it means some of those face saving clauses agreed inthe GFA which allowed all to claim victory may be set aside. In another 10 years it would probably not matter as more of the old hardliners would have passed away but currently there are still too many who will see "their small victory" being eroded. This is on both sides as I think SF & DUP (and their respective terrorist affiliates) will both be left looking weaker to their supporters - a wounded animal fights hardest So it is not "pandering to terrorists" it is standing by hard negotiated and legally binding agreements we made in good faith which is the issue Also can we really afford the kind of military presence we used to have in ni, Both in manpower and £ terms
  6. Our new position in the EU

    I may be slightly wrong on this but i believe that the Le Torquet (sp?) agreement which has our officers in France and theirs in the UK ends in a few years (and maybe earlier). If the effective border moves to our own side of the channel (rather than in france) and then we dont strictly enforce it then surely all of the asylum seekers/economic migrants need only get to this side of the channel and they have "succeeded" - once they make a claim we can not deport them anywhere with a full assessment and on our current track record most will disappear into the black economy. If that happens I think a lot of Leave voters who were scared by Farage;s queue of turks poster and liked the promise if controlling immigration are going to be less than impressed. We will be keeping out economically active Europeans but letting in more non Europeans (on current visa figures) and also Economic Migrants/illegals/asylum seekers. The ,100k per annum promised is never going to be approached (other than by not counting all the ones coming through an open border). Basically if we have no border controls the ONLY effective control will be ID cards for all which need to be shown to get a job, house, medical care etc etc (we may call that ID card a passport - it is about having to present it regularly rather than the name of it)
  7. Our new position in the EU

    Shell is HQ'ed in Holland with a primary listing on the UK stock exchange - which is what i would expect Unilever will do. From Wiki "In November 2004, following a period of turmoil caused by the revelation that Shell had been overstating its oil reserves, it was announced that the Shell Group would move to a single capital structure, creating a new parent company to be named Royal Dutch Shell plc, with its primary listing on the London Stock Exchange, a secondary listing on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange, its headquarters and tax residency in The Hague, Netherlands and its registered office in London. The unification was completed on 20 July 2005 and the original owners delisted their companies from the respective exchanges. On 20 July 2005, the Shell Transport & Trading Company plc was delisted from the LSE,[30]where as, Royal Dutch Petroleum Company from NYSE on 18 November 2005"
  8. Our new position in the EU

    Just as aside - when Grayling says "We will manage trade electronically. Trucks will move through the border without stopping. We will manage them electronically. In the way it happens between Canada and the US. He has obviously no idea of how the US/Canada border works - here is the OFFICIAL guide for crossing from Michigan to Ontario in a truck - you will notice the fast track procedure is known as "line release" with marked lanes, the easiest being when origin & destination are both the US and the truck has just used Canada as a short cut - even for this it gives the notice "Send paperwork to your customs broker at least two hours before you arrive at customs. This may expedite the process up to 30 minutes." that hardly sounds like a frictionless zero time crossing does it. Page 17 & 18 are the best to get an idea of the procedure - and remember US & Canada have a full free trade agreement
  9. Our new position in the EU

    For inbound lorries checks are at calais for outbound they are at Dover we each have officials in each others ports to facilitate that (hence the tv shows with uk immigration staff at calais checking trucks for illegals) Currently the Dover checks take about 2 or 3 minutes per lorry as there isn't really anything to check - the further from the current free trade/single market/customs union position we move the more things need checking before the lorry is allowed to board the ferry/pass through customs and the longer the time taken the longer the queues will be. estimate is an extra 2 mins per truck will triple the queue length No point trying to say the french should do that checking as their counter would be "fine we will stop checking outbound trucks as well" that would allow all those jungle inhabitants free rein to get on the boats and once here you know how hard it would be to send them back (they would claim asylum the second they passed into English waters let alone landed and there would be nothing we could do as that is international not eu law)
  10. Our new position in the EU

    I do remember various senior governmental people saying the Kraft takeover was a business matter not a governmental issue and EU competition rules would prevent then making any intervention. I know there were 2 HQ's just like Royal Dutch Shell used to have a joint HQ's - what I am talking about is the reasoning behind their decision being to do with takeover protection But i do agree the GKN/Melrose takeover will be a big test because as you sayt is tied up in national security etc and with BAe / Airbus openly stating that a Melrose takeover will be the end of new orders it will give us a big pointer to wards how interventionist or wildwest free market the government are looking to go. Melrose are a pure and simple asset stripping organisation - buy it cheap flog the separate bits for more than you paid for it, rinse and repeat. To lose the BAe wings work would seriously affect the uk aerospace industry
  11. Our new position in the EU

    I believe there is a Brexit connection but in a more nuanced way - several years ago when Cadbury was being taken over we were all being told EU rules stopped the govt interfering. If Unilever is making it's HQ dutch rather then UK for the reason there are better legal protections against hostile takeovers it rather proves the point that an awful lot of what we kept getting told was "EU restrictions" was actually the policy of our govt of the time and nothing at all to do with the EU. Yet blaming the EU for interfering was one of the cornerstones of the Vote leave campaign
  12. Our new position in the EU

    I have friend following the developments on settlement status with great personal interest Born in Rhodesia but with no way of proving it (they didnt do birth certificates out in the backwoods) moved to NZ when young, grew up there and then joined British Army where he served for many years in REME (i met him when based near me in uk) he then found he had no automatic right to settle in the UK as he could not prove he was born in Rhodesia (he was offered a Botswanan nationality for some reason). Met his wife whilst based on the Rhine and they have a son. They all moved to the uk when his son was young and then after years fighting the Army medical corps assessments of his knees he was finally given a medical discharge (caused probably by the huge dose of meds they got given for desert storm followed by a forced route march the next day). He is employed but unless they add his medical discharge pension to his low salary there is no way he meets the criteria and I am not sure he will even with that His ONLY right to be in the county is as the spouse of an EU national and his 16 yo son is also officially a German citizen having been born in a civilian hospital in Germany despite living here since the age of about 2. Having been part of the Eu for so many years and having had FOM for so many years I have no doubt there are an awful lot of cases like his
  13. Our new position in the EU

    I would be more worried about the report form the Institute of Fiscal Studies - considering they are usually lambasted for being a right wing think tank who favour the rich at the expense of the poor working man their analysis makes dismal reading A couple of highlights "Annual tax rises of £40bn will be needed if the government wants to keep spending constant and balance its books by 2025" & "If high-paid jobs - and EU citizens, who are well represented among high earners in the UK - relocate elsewhere, the consequences for the Exchequer will be severe,"
  14. Our new position in the EU

    I do agree with the concept but find "potentially aggressive tax planning schemes with a cross-border element" to be so subjective a measure it will be hard to enforce - they need to actually quantify it by saying something like "any scheme which has the potential likelihood to save more than 25% of an individual or corporate entities tax liability through it's use and that also contains a cross-border element" That leaves far less wiggle room
  15. Our new position in the EU

    to be fair £31b is greater than £27bn so it will cost them more - it is just at there are nearly 10x as many of them it will hurt then less per capita What a pity that £27bn PER ANNUM is just over 3x our NET EU contribution PER ANNUM or to put it another way we will be paying £18bn per annum in extra red tape to escape the red tape and that is about £1150 for each of the 70m people in the UK or just over £3k PER YEAR for every member of the working population