Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result

[tarnished]

Could well be!

[Tycho]

p1stonhead said:

tarnished said:

p1stonhead said:

tarnished said:

Jockman said:

Germany has confirmed today - no prelim talks.

The button has to be pressed before negotiations.

Good. Now we just need someone to press it.

But no one will because politicians are selfish and it would be suicide.

It might be, if badly handled.

Not pressing it would be suicidal for the whole party.

I think this whole thing looks like suicide for all of the parties

You say that like it's a bad thing....

[The Beaver King]

p1stonhead said:

tarnished said:

Jockman said:

Germany has confirmed today - no prelim talks.

The button has to be pressed before negotiations.

Good. Now we just need someone to press it.

But no one will because politicians are selfish and it would be suicide.

I wonder if the Conservatives are desperately looking for someone to Martyr themselves?

CMD has played a very clever game against Boris; in losing he has ensured he has salted the earth on the way out. Boris will never take the job, as he has long term aspirations. So who do you offer up? Somebody who may never have stood a chance at making PM, but will be grateful to have the top job, even if just for a while? Somebody disconnected from the campaign, who can project an aura of 'doing the dirty work for the good of the people'?

The EU knows the UK is divided over this and by forcing Article 50 to be submitted sooner rather than later, they are still calling the UK's bluff. If we bottle it now, we really are fked. The EU will have us over a barrel and we will lose any previous power we had.

It's too late to back out now.

[Mrr T]

loafer123 said:

Mrr T said:

I suggest your knowledge of financial services regulations is out of date. You cannot register a company and with a couple of employees its become a regulated entity. Regulators require most sales staff, all key individuals, from senior management to risk and compliance to be based in the country of the regulated entity. Regulator do not like the idea of finding a regulated entity is in breach of regulations and the managers are outside its jursdiction.

My guess is 400/500k jobs moving. Which in my view is a lot.

Given there are only 400k people working in the City of London, I think you are an idiot.

You did read I said financial services and not the City of London. There are about 2m people in the UK who work in financial services.

My estimate is about 25% of the job will be lost if we lose financial services passporting.

Which suggests I may not be an idiot but you do seem to have some of the attributes.

[GipsyHillClimber]

Jimbeaux said:

Don't panic! The economic dip is normal. The investors went with the polls and loaded cash into what would have been the proper places, now they are trying to snatch it back. This is expected and will get better!

London did not become a world center of banking because of the E.U. it did so because of lighter regulation and well-managed U.K. institutions.

It may have done so because of lighter regulation but that is definitely not the case now for UK's financial services. If you think our regulation doesn't go above and beyond that of EU directives then you're mistaken. UK regulation is now seen as "gold plating" and when we leave we'll still need to comply with the EU regulation for any cross border activity anyway. I'm also positive the FCA will also make it a requirement to comply with MiFID ii in the UK markets also.

So yeah, lighter regulation...... don't think so

[romeogolf]

don4l said:

p1stonhead said:

Except most of his items mentioned are EU rules and regulations and not European ones - Free Movement, Cooperation on services, Being able to live anywhere (and vice versa) etc.

All he wants removed are EU directives and rules, of which there are many very beneficial ones;

Equal opportunities
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid...

Working time
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid...

Use of personal data
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid...

Consumer rights
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid...

Do any of these things exist in the USA, Canada, Australia or Japan?

Pretending that we could not have these laws without the EU is just plain silly.

The argument that we could have the laws without the EU, while valid on the surface, misses the point of the complaint. Without the EU, would we have developed these laws? Would it have taken longer? Going forward, will we be left behind while Europe moves on with further consumer and worker protection? That would be my concern.

[Jimbeaux]

The Beaver King said:

p1stonhead said:

tarnished said:

Jockman said:

Germany has confirmed today - no prelim talks.

The button has to be pressed before negotiations.

Good. Now we just need someone to press it.

But no one will because politicians are selfish and it would be suicide.

I wonder if the Conservatives are desperately looking for someone to Martyr themselves?

CMD has played a very clever game against Boris; in losing he has ensured he has salted the earth on the way out. Boris will never take the job, as he has long term aspirations. So who do you offer up? Somebody who may never have stood a chance at making PM, but will be grateful to have the top job, even if just for a while? Somebody disconnected from the campaign, who can project an aura of 'doing the dirty work for the good of the people'?

The EU knows the UK is divided over this and by forcing Article 50 to be submitted sooner rather than later, they are still calling the UK's bluff. If we bottle it now, we really are fked. The EU will have us over a barrel and we will lose any previous power we had.

It's too late to back out now.

This 100% ^^^ If you run back now, begging forgiveness, you will be Oliver asking for more soup.

[Timmy40]

Mrr T said:

loafer123 said:

Mrr T said:

I suggest your knowledge of financial services regulations is out of date. You cannot register a company and with a couple of employees its become a regulated entity. Regulators require most sales staff, all key individuals, from senior management to risk and compliance to be based in the country of the regulated entity. Regulator do not like the idea of finding a regulated entity is in breach of regulations and the managers are outside its jursdiction.

My guess is 400/500k jobs moving. Which in my view is a lot.

Given there are only 400k people working in the City of London, I think you are an idiot.

You did read I said financial services and not the City of London. There are about 2m people in the UK who work in financial services.

My estimate is about 25% of the job will be lost if we lose financial services passporting.

Which suggests I may not be an idiot but you do seem to have some of the attributes.

The banking jobs affected by passporting are almost entirely those related to trading and treasury operations in the City of London and Canary Wharf. Which either you know pefectly well are are pretending not to, or you don't realise....in which case you don't know what you're talking about.

[Jimbeaux]

Timmy40 said:

Mrr T said:

loafer123 said:

Mrr T said:

I suggest your knowledge of financial services regulations is out of date. You cannot register a company and with a couple of employees its become a regulated entity. Regulators require most sales staff, all key individuals, from senior management to risk and compliance to be based in the country of the regulated entity. Regulator do not like the idea of finding a regulated entity is in breach of regulations and the managers are outside its jursdiction.

My guess is 400/500k jobs moving. Which in my view is a lot.

Given there are only 400k people working in the City of London, I think you are an idiot.

You did read I said financial services and not the City of London. There are about 2m people in the UK who work in financial services.

My estimate is about 25% of the job will be lost if we lose financial services passporting.

Which suggests I may not be an idiot but you do seem to have some of the attributes.

The banking jobs affected by passporting are almost entirely those related to trading and treasury operations in the City of London and Canary Wharf. Which either you know pefectly well are are pretending not to, or you don't realise....in which case you don't know what you're talking about.

I have met Brits that are unaware that the "City of London" does not mean all of London but only a "precinct". I stand by to be corrected if wrong.

[Mrr T]

Timmy40 said:

Mrr T said:

loafer123 said:

Mrr T said:

I suggest your knowledge of financial services regulations is out of date. You cannot register a company and with a couple of employees its become a regulated entity. Regulators require most sales staff, all key individuals, from senior management to risk and compliance to be based in the country of the regulated entity. Regulator do not like the idea of finding a regulated entity is in breach of regulations and the managers are outside its jursdiction.

My guess is 400/500k jobs moving. Which in my view is a lot.

Given there are only 400k people working in the City of London, I think you are an idiot.

You did read I said financial services and not the City of London. There are about 2m people in the UK who work in financial services.

My estimate is about 25% of the job will be lost if we lose financial services passporting.

Which suggests I may not be an idiot but you do seem to have some of the attributes.

The banking jobs affected by passporting are almost entirely those related to trading and treasury operations in the City of London and Canary Wharf. Which either you know pefectly well are are pretending not to, or you don't realise....in which case you don't know what you're talking about.

I suspect the difference between you and I is I know what I am talking about and you do not.

Firstly, passporting does not just cover bank trading activities, it covers lots of other bank services, cash transaction services, custody, depository services, new issuance, corporate advisory, etc, etc. Further financial services does not just cover banking it includes, fund management, insurance, rating agencies, many different type of vendors, from central counterparties, to price providers.

If you do not know what some of the above services are please ask.

[anonymous-user]

The Beaver King said:

p1stonhead said:

tarnished said:

Jockman said:

Germany has confirmed today - no prelim talks.

The button has to be pressed before negotiations.

Good. Now we just need someone to press it.

But no one will because politicians are selfish and it would be suicide.

I wonder if the Conservatives are desperately looking for someone to Martyr themselves?

CMD has played a very clever game against Boris; in losing he has ensured he has salted the earth on the way out. Boris will never take the job, as he has long term aspirations. So who do you offer up? Somebody who may never have stood a chance at making PM, but will be grateful to have the top job, even if just for a while? Somebody disconnected from the campaign, who can project an aura of 'doing the dirty work for the good of the people'?

The EU knows the UK is divided over this and by forcing Article 50 to be submitted sooner rather than later, they are still calling the UK's bluff. If we bottle it now, we really are fked. The EU will have us over a barrel and we will lose any previous power we had.

It's too late to back out now.

Nothing to back out of. Referendum scraped through, largely based upon self confessed lies which a few million idiots believed. Just tear it up & carry on as before. Except commit more to the EU next time .

[lostkiwi]

Just a thought...

As Article 50 requires an act of parliament there could be an easy way out of this for the government.
If it voted on as a free vote it is quite possible for the act to be rejected by parliament. As this would be a cross party vote no single party could be held accountable. This is especially true if the vast majority vote against the Act.
Ergo all parties are equally tarred but as we have an effectively two party state what will the electorate do about it?

They could vote in Labour next time (as the Conservatives will bear most of the brunt of any backlash)
They could vote in UKIP (and I can't help wondering of this is Farage's long game - he's an idiot but clearly not stupid).

If Article 50 is rejected by parliament the economy will recover relatively quickly and with little damage done either to our economy nor to our relationships with the EU (who will have had a wakeup call as the threat of article 50 has not entirely gone away as it could be resubmitted at a later date there still being a mandate from the people to leave).

The alternative is to carry on and push the button now (when the economy is in a pretty poor state with a negative balance of payments). At present we have no clear idea how to manage Brexit, no prior plans in place and will be in a poor bargaining position with the EU for trading rights. At best we could end up with a Norway deal which doesn't address any of the concerns of Brexit whilst at the same time reducing any influence we have. At worst if no agreement is found the EU cast us adrift and we trade under WTO rules which would likely be disastrous for the economy as the markets would be likely to react extremely badly to this scenario severely limiting the ability of the UK to repay current debts (expect to see the AA- credit rating we currently have drop even further) and limiting foreign investment.

Once the economy is better prepared for a Brexit Article 50 could then be invoked and a more orderly exit arranged.

[paul789]

lostkiwi said:

Just a thought...

As Article 50 requires an act of parliament there could be an easy way out of this for the government.
If it voted on as a free vote it is quite possible for the act to be rejected by parliament. As this would be a cross party vote no single party could be held accountable. This is especially true if the vast majority vote against the Act.
Ergo all parties are equally tarred but as we have an effectively two party state what will the electorate do about it?

They could vote in Labour next time (as the Conservatives will bear most of the brunt of any backlash)
They could vote in UKIP (and I can't help wondering of this is Farage's long game - he's an idiot but clearly not stupid).

If Article 50 is rejected by parliament the economy will recover relatively quickly and with little damage done either to our economy nor to our relationships with the EU (who will have had a wakeup call as the threat of article 50 has not entirely gone away as it could be resubmitted at a later date there still being a mandate from the people to leave).

The alternative is to carry on and push the button now (when the economy is in a pretty poor state with a negative balance of payments). At present we have no clear idea how to manage Brexit, no prior plans in place and will be in a poor bargaining position with the EU for trading rights. At best we could end up with a Norway deal which doesn't address any of the concerns of Brexit whilst at the same time reducing any influence we have. At worst if no agreement is found the EU cast us adrift and we trade under WTO rules which would likely be disastrous for the economy as the markets would be likely to react extremely badly to this scenario severely limiting the ability of the UK to repay current debts (expect to see the AA- credit rating we currently have drop even further) and limiting foreign investment.

Once the economy is better prepared for a Brexit Article 50 could then be invoked and a more orderly exit arranged.

I don't disagree with any of the above, but what an absolute shambles the whole thing is! A distinctly British ball-drop.

[Fastdruid]

I think in all honesty there would be rioting on the streets. It would be akin to the poll tax riots only potentially worse.

[m3jappa]

I agree with pretty much everything in that post, it will IMO be something very very close to that will happen (except there will never ever be another referendum).

[dandarez]

lostkiwi said:

Just a thought...

As Article 50 requires an act of parliament there could be an easy way out of this for the government.
If it voted on as a free vote it is quite possible for the act to be rejected by parliament. As this would be a cross party vote no single party could be held accountable. This is especially true if the vast majority vote against the Act.
Ergo all parties are equally tarred but as we have an effectively two party state what will the electorate do about it?

They could vote in Labour next time (as the Conservatives will bear most of the brunt of any backlash)
They could vote in UKIP (and I can't help wondering of this is Farage's long game - he's an idiot but clearly not stupid).

If Article 50 is rejected by parliament the economy will recover relatively quickly and with little damage done either to our economy nor to our relationships with the EU (who will have had a wakeup call as the threat of article 50 has not entirely gone away as it could be resubmitted at a later date there still being a mandate from the people to leave).

The alternative is to carry on and push the button now (when the economy is in a pretty poor state with a negative balance of payments). At present we have no clear idea how to manage Brexit, no prior plans in place and will be in a poor bargaining position with the EU for trading rights. At best we could end up with a Norway deal which doesn't address any of the concerns of Brexit whilst at the same time reducing any influence we have. At worst if no agreement is found the EU cast us adrift and we trade under WTO rules which would likely be disastrous for the economy as the markets would be likely to react extremely badly to this scenario severely limiting the ability of the UK to repay current debts (expect to see the AA- credit rating we currently have drop even further) and limiting foreign investment.

Once the economy is better prepared for a Brexit Article 50 could then be invoked and a more orderly exit arranged.

Hogwash.
Won't happen.

Re the bold:
Don't look in the mirror, just pick up a copy of the OED.

Idiot:
/ a stupid person

[kurt535]

Fastdruid said:

I think in all honesty there would be rioting on the streets. It would be akin to the poll tax riots only potentially worse.

brexit v remain: the riot rematch....wonder who would win!

[Don]

kurt535 said:

Fastdruid said:

I think in all honesty there would be rioting on the streets. It would be akin to the poll tax riots only potentially worse.

brexit v remain: the riot rematch....wonder who would win!

If our elected MPs decide not to implement the result of the referendum I am genuinely afraid that there will be blood.

[Mark Benson]

paul789 said:

lostkiwi said:

Just a thought...

As Article 50 requires an act of parliament there could be an easy way out of this for the government.
If it voted on as a free vote it is quite possible for the act to be rejected by parliament. As this would be a cross party vote no single party could be held accountable. This is especially true if the vast majority vote against the Act.
Ergo all parties are equally tarred but as we have an effectively two party state what will the electorate do about it?

They could vote in Labour next time (as the Conservatives will bear most of the brunt of any backlash)
They could vote in UKIP (and I can't help wondering of this is Farage's long game - he's an idiot but clearly not stupid).

If Article 50 is rejected by parliament the economy will recover relatively quickly and with little damage done either to our economy nor to our relationships with the EU (who will have had a wakeup call as the threat of article 50 has not entirely gone away as it could be resubmitted at a later date there still being a mandate from the people to leave).

The alternative is to carry on and push the button now (when the economy is in a pretty poor state with a negative balance of payments). At present we have no clear idea how to manage Brexit, no prior plans in place and will be in a poor bargaining position with the EU for trading rights. At best we could end up with a Norway deal which doesn't address any of the concerns of Brexit whilst at the same time reducing any influence we have. At worst if no agreement is found the EU cast us adrift and we trade under WTO rules which would likely be disastrous for the economy as the markets would be likely to react extremely badly to this scenario severely limiting the ability of the UK to repay current debts (expect to see the AA- credit rating we currently have drop even further) and limiting foreign investment.

Once the economy is better prepared for a Brexit Article 50 could then be invoked and a more orderly exit arranged.

I don't disagree with any of the above, but what an absolute shambles the whole thing is! A distinctly British ball-drop.

It either appears that the Govt. didn't plan for this eventuality as they were so stupidly confident of winning the referendum or they're lying about being ready and are spinning out the FUD and looking for a way out of actually implementing what was voted for; leaving the EU.

So they're either stupid and arrogant or duplicitous and arrogant.

Either way it's a sorry state for the country to be in.

[Terminator X]

Mrr T said:

loafer123 said:

Mrr T said:

I suggest your knowledge of financial services regulations is out of date. You cannot register a company and with a couple of employees its become a regulated entity. Regulators require most sales staff, all key individuals, from senior management to risk and compliance to be based in the country of the regulated entity. Regulator do not like the idea of finding a regulated entity is in breach of regulations and the managers are outside its jursdiction.

My guess is 400/500k jobs moving. Which in my view is a lot.

Given there are only 400k people working in the City of London, I think you are an idiot.

You did read I said financial services and not the City of London. There are about 2m people in the UK who work in financial services.

My estimate is about 25% of the job will be lost if we lose financial services passporting.

Which suggests I may not be an idiot but you do seem to have some of the attributes.

Where did this "estimate" come from or are you just pulling %ages out of your arse?

TX.