How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 3)
Discussion
PurpleMoonlight said:
alfie2244 said:
No but I think they should only be allowed to whinge once about the result if they don't vote....after that they should be ridiculed.
The wonders of free speech don't you know.PurpleMoonlight said:
alfie2244 said:
No but I think they should only be allowed to whinge once about the result if they don't vote....after that they should be ridiculed.
The wonders of free speech don't you know.Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
turbobloke said:
Don't forget the wonders of EU seditious libel.
Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
How does this fit in with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights ?Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
alfie2244 said:
turbobloke said:
Don't forget the wonders of EU seditious libel.
Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
How does this fit in with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights ?Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
IANAL
<"The limitations on freedom of expression in a democratic society, as stated by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, to which the Court of Justice directly refers, are to be restrictively interpreted," the Court said in striking down appeals by Connolly.>
turbobloke said:
The ruling stated that the Commission could restrict dissent in order to punish individuals who “damaged the institution's image and reputation”.
IANAL
<"The limitations on freedom of expression in a democratic society, as stated by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, to which the Court of Justice directly refers, are to be restrictively interpreted," the Court said in striking down appeals by Connolly.>
So I assume the EU courts override the UN?IANAL
<"The limitations on freedom of expression in a democratic society, as stated by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, to which the Court of Justice directly refers, are to be restrictively interpreted," the Court said in striking down appeals by Connolly.>
"Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. "
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Transl...
Tuna said:
Mrr T said:
I suspect you have no idea.
The fact is the loss of passport will see a lot of job move from the UK and London’s importance as a centre of FS diminished. This will have a serious effect on UK tax revenues.
I'm trying to understand the situation - just as you're trying to understand parts of the negotiation that are outside your area of expertise.The fact is the loss of passport will see a lot of job move from the UK and London’s importance as a centre of FS diminished. This will have a serious effect on UK tax revenues.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-exclusive-banks-de...
article said:
Industry executives say as much as 70 percent of sovereign debt in Europe is arranged by London-based firms, either acting as market makers in government bond auctions or selling debt directly to investors through "syndicated" deals.
Several billion euros of European government bonds are sold every week to primary dealers through auctions, which they then sell on. In addition, Thomson Reuters data shows 148 billion euros of bonds were sold via syndication last year.
https://www.ft.com/content/18dcf566-5025-11e7-bfb8-997009366969Several billion euros of European government bonds are sold every week to primary dealers through auctions, which they then sell on. In addition, Thomson Reuters data shows 148 billion euros of bonds were sold via syndication last year.
article said:
It is a critical part of London’s financial services sector and the volume of business can exceed a notional $900bn a day. It centres on the processing of euro-denominated derivatives contracts by clearing houses such as the London Stock Exchange’s LCH.
Insulting someone and then attempting to pass opinion off as 'fact' could be regarded as a pretty weak way to make an argument. How did your previous predictions of changes in the London financial market pan out?Your opinion seems to be that loss of passporting is of little concern to the EU - so they would happily remove that right and in the process damage London. My position is that yes, removing passporting could have a big impact, but it doesn't look so likely in the face of the scale of business that the EU relies on. Of course some commentators are going to be calling for passporting to be removed - let's face it, Paris and Amsterdam have failed to grab business from London any other way. For those who want to see business move, having legislation force the issue might seem very attractive, even if it were to do immense damage to both sides in the process.
Edited by Tuna on Friday 27th April 11:24
Issuance – Is the initial sale of the bonds. Most government debt is issued in the counties own market in local currency and is settled in the local CSD. A small amount of debt is insured outside and will usually be domiciled in the US, the US is different because of the size of the market, or internationally via with the ICSD’s. Issuance process does vary across the EU but all require the buyers to be locally constituted because they will settle via the local CSD. A UK based bank will access the issuance, if they wish, via their local entity. Often the long term owners of the debt will be able to bid directly but some will be brought by dealers who will then sell on to investors.
Trading – Investors expect to be able to buy and sell the debt instantly and at small spreads. This execution service is provided by banks. Most EU debt is traded domestically by the local bank. The exception is the bunds which is traded mainly in the UK with settlement in Euroclear SA. Trading is closely linked to issuance.
Execution Services – Now the above services are provided mainly by the banks but banks hold only small amounts of government debt. The owners are described below. The link between, issuance, trading and the end investor is what I refer to as execution services. These are sales people who deal with end owners (normally the Fund managers operating on behalf of the owners) to convince them to use your bank to buy and sell the debt.
Holders of Government – The largest holders of government debt are local pensions and insurance companies. Some will be held by investment vehicles such as UCITS so that investors (including other funds) can invest in what is deemed the safest form of investments. The amount of government debt held by banks is as small as possible and is used for liquidity purposes, and to access CBM.
Fund Managers – Fund management is deciding what assets the owners should hold. Some owners do this in house others may use external managers.
In terms of UK based banks and rEU government debt outside of the bund the involvement in issuance and trading is limited. The UK banks are heavily involved in the bund market. The UK also has some significant fund managers.
Those involved in issuance and trading decisions (normally the same people) will not have much contact with owners or fund managers. So will not be effected by any loss of passporting. However, those who sell the execution services will be. When we lose passporting a person in the UK will not be able to sell execution services to any owner or fund manager in the rEU. They will have to move to be regulated in the rEU.
The big one for UK jobs is will rEU regulators allow UK based fund managers to manage rEU regulated investments. I have seen conflicting opinions. The last I saw was that regulators where expecting fund management for rEU regulated funds investing mainly in rEU assets (bond and equity) to be based in the rEU.
The fact is if the UK losses passporting it will have minimal impact on rEU government debt issuance.
turbobloke said:
Don't forget the wonders of EU seditious libel.
Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
Except if you look at the details the truth is rather different. If you disagree with your employer then you are perfectly entitled to resign and publish your views. They may or may not then pursue you for libel. Missing out the resigning bit changes the rules a bit. Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
He was not a whistle blower reporting wrong doing he just disagreed with policy. He then pursued an unwinnable case through the courts.
He is still working, writing articles, appearing on TV and his book are on Amazon.
Edited by Mrr T on Friday 27th April 13:59
Mrr T said:
Except if you look at the details the truth is rather different. If you disagree with your employer then you are perfectly entitled to resign and publish your views. They may or may not then pursue you for liable. Missing out the resigning bit changes the rules a bit.
He was not a whistle blower reporting wrong doing he just disagreed with policy. He then pursued an unwinnable case through the courts.
He is still working, writing articles, appearing on TV and his book are on Amazon.
IANAL but does "Libel" have to be untrue to be pursued / prosecuted for it?He was not a whistle blower reporting wrong doing he just disagreed with policy. He then pursued an unwinnable case through the courts.
He is still working, writing articles, appearing on TV and his book are on Amazon.
Mrr T said:
turbobloke said:
Don't forget the wonders of EU seditious libel.
Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
Except if you look at the details the truth is rather different. If you disagree with your employer then you are perfectly entitled to resign and publish your views. They may or may not then pursue you for liable. Missing out the resigning bit changes the rules a bit. Free speech in the EU even when truthful can cost more than six quid.
European Court of Justice changed the political climate profoundly this week by ruling that the European Union can suppress criticism to protect its reputation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325841...
http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-002-it-is-now-aga...
Connolly wrote material that was held to damage the reputation of the EU and within seditious libel the matter is made worse if the accusations are true because the damage to reputation is worse. Connolly was told to pay the European Commission's legal costs, not £6.
He was not a whistle blower reporting wrong doing he just disagreed with policy. He then pursued an unwinnable case through the courts.
He is still working, writing articles, appearing on TV and his book are on Amazon.
The point about libel is that truth is an absolute defence.
With EU seditious libel the matter is made worse (for the dedendant) if the material is true as then the damage to the EU's reputation can be greater.
You're not comparing like with like but I can understand your desperation with something as damning as this.
alfie2244 said:
Mrr T said:
Except if you look at the details the truth is rather different. If you disagree with your employer then you are perfectly entitled to resign and publish your views. They may or may not then pursue you for liable. Missing out the resigning bit changes the rules a bit.
He was not a whistle blower reporting wrong doing he just disagreed with policy. He then pursued an unwinnable case through the courts.
He is still working, writing articles, appearing on TV and his book are on Amazon.
IANAL but does "Libel" have to be untrue to be pursued / prosecuted for it?He was not a whistle blower reporting wrong doing he just disagreed with policy. He then pursued an unwinnable case through the courts.
He is still working, writing articles, appearing on TV and his book are on Amazon.
Mistake spotted already and corrected. Libel is civil so it would be for damages. Since the views where opinion I think they would have no case. The issue was he decided to publish before he resigned. What would team leave say if a senior civil servant published a book called “brexit the stupid idea”.
Mrr T said:
What would team leave say if a senior civil servant published a book called “brexit the stupid idea”.
I dunno what team leave would say but I would say:Under Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold or change opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. "
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Transl...
Not sure whether the difference is clear to all, no names no pack drill...
UK Libel - truth is an absolute defence
EU Seditious Libel - truth is not a defence and can make the situation worse for a defendant
This is a good thing to have hanging around? No, it's not. We'll be well out of it eventually.
UK Libel - truth is an absolute defence
EU Seditious Libel - truth is not a defence and can make the situation worse for a defendant
This is a good thing to have hanging around? No, it's not. We'll be well out of it eventually.
SpeckledJim said:
Is this actually an actual thing. Actually!?
Remarkable if so.
As mentioned previously IANAL.Remarkable if so.
It's an actual thing and seditious libel was once used by the British Crown to silence political opponents in the 17th / 18th centuries. Juries were permitted only to decide the factual issue of whether or not the defendant had communicated in public.
Then judges decided the legal issue of whether the communication constituted seditious libel. Truth = no defence.
Fortunately we don't have it any more but the EU has revived it.
alfie2244 said:
Mrr T said:
What would team leave say if a senior civil servant published a book called “brexit the stupid idea”.
I dunno what team leave would say but I would say:Under Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold or change opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. "
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Transl...
http://www.civilservant.org.uk/the_westminster_mod...
Also the decision of the ECJ is here and is worth reading:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?docid=102...
Connolly had a job in the EU close to the topic he wrote about. I can't see how it could be classified as a work of fiction. He's been around and about since the court case and was the subject of an article in the FT in 2015. Link below.
As it's the FT, a summary for those with no access would be to note that few economists have been vindicated by events in the Greek chapter of the euro crisis. The one who has earned the most honour is Bernard Connolly, Manchester born and Oxford educated, who 20 years ago published a book 'The Rotten Heart of Europe'
https://www.ft.com/content/c5da21d8-26ee-11e5-bd83...
As it's the FT, a summary for those with no access would be to note that few economists have been vindicated by events in the Greek chapter of the euro crisis. The one who has earned the most honour is Bernard Connolly, Manchester born and Oxford educated, who 20 years ago published a book 'The Rotten Heart of Europe'
https://www.ft.com/content/c5da21d8-26ee-11e5-bd83...
Mrr T said:
alfie2244 said:
Mrr T said:
What would team leave say if a senior civil servant published a book called “brexit the stupid idea”.
I dunno what team leave would say but I would say:Under Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold or change opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. "
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Transl...
http://www.civilservant.org.uk/the_westminster_mod...
Also the decision of the ECJ is here and is worth reading:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?docid=102...
"Government in the United Kingdom (the UK) is built on the assumption of Parliamentary Sovereignty; all key decisions are made by Parliamentarians and there is no higher authority ." - This was, for me at least, a major factor in wanting out of this EU political project that has the intention of abolishing nation states leading eventually to a USEU.
Mrr T said:
You will find this interesting:
http://www.civilservant.org.uk/the_westminster_mod...
Also the decision of the ECJ is here and is worth reading:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?docid=102...
Ihad a quick scan read of the judgement............IMO he was an employee not a public servant so as such his rights to freedom of expression override those stated in Articles 11 and 12 of the Staff Regulations.http://www.civilservant.org.uk/the_westminster_mod...
Also the decision of the ECJ is here and is worth reading:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?docid=102...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff