Brexit delayed

[Stom]

They’ve been struggling, in various guises, for years. Unfortunately, Brexit is just a convenient excuse for a number of failing and struggling companies at the moment, and, in this case, is one of a number of factors, as set out in the body of the article once you get past the headline.
Ironically, the EU Commision setout the plan for continued flights on Friday.

Yeah, any airline that goes under now will blame brexit when it's their mismanagement that caused it.

[Digby]

They’ve been struggling, in various guises, for years. Unfortunately, Brexit is just a convenient excuse for a number of failing and struggling companies at the moment, and, in this case, is one of a number of factors, as set out in the body of the article once you get past the headline.
Ironically, the EU Commision setout the plan for continued flights on Friday.

Yeah, any airline that goes under now will blame brexit when it's their mismanagement that caused it.

It's not wholly an unfair part of their struggles. We have sort of similar problems in a different field, and trying to secure long term plans/deals in or involving Europe is bloody problematic when you don't know what the situation specifically will be

Brexit is more than a convenient excuse

[Digby]

There was a chap on the radio earlier who manufactures high end beds (mattresses) and an important part of his supply chain is horse hair coming out of South America, but he's got issues with brexit as the hair is shipped to Switzerland and then treated and made into ropes before coming by road to his workshop

It nicely illustrates just how global and connected supply chains are, and in his instance he's spent a fortune stockpiling materials so he knows his workers will be able to carry on production should transport become a problem. And that latter nicely illustrates what will emerge as still further drop in production rates with a focus on stockpiling and associated costs therein rather than investment and employment, as that plays out across the economy it'll represent huge losses and huge lost opportunities

The leave lunatics deserve hell for saying we had this idea without any idea how to actually do it and now it's for society to fix, as I don't believe in a literal hell I'll have to settle for a metaphorical one. And if I do encounter one of the bastards on fire I'll not be wasting any piss looking to help them out

[Sandydragon]

There was a chap on the radio earlier who manufactures high end beds (mattresses) and an important part of his supply chain is horse hair coming out of South America, but he's got issues with brexit as the hair is shipped to Switzerland and then treated and made into ropes before coming by road to his workshop

It nicely illustrates just how global and connected supply chains are, and in his instance he's spent a fortune stockpiling materials so he knows his workers will be able to carry on production should transport become a problem. And that latter nicely illustrates what will emerge as still further drop in production rates with a focus on stockpiling and associated costs therein rather than investment and employment, as that plays out across the economy it'll represent huge losses and huge lost opportunities

The leave lunatics deserve hell for saying we had this idea without any idea how to actually do it and now it's for society to fix, as I don't believe in a literal hell I'll have to settle for a metaphorical one. And if I do encounter one of the bastards on fire I'll not be wasting any piss looking to help them out

No they simply don’t get it. What’s really sad is that those poor mugs who got conned into voting for this daft venture will be the ones who get burnt the most.

Their argument will be that someone in Britain can do what the Swiss company currently does, but this takes time.

[Sandydragon]

They’ve been struggling, in various guises, for years. Unfortunately, Brexit is just a convenient excuse for a number of failing and struggling companies at the moment, and, in this case, is one of a number of factors, as set out in the body of the article once you get past the headline.
Ironically, the EU Commision setout the plan for continued flights on Friday.

Yeah, any airline that goes under now will blame brexit when it's their mismanagement that caused it.

It could well be the final straw for a lot of companies, although some will use it as the primary excuse.

[Mellsblue]

They’ve been struggling, in various guises, for years. Unfortunately, Brexit is just a convenient excuse for a number of failing and struggling companies at the moment, and, in this case, is one of a number of factors, as set out in the body of the article once you get past the headline.
Ironically, the EU Commision setout the plan for continued flights on Friday.

Yeah, any airline that goes under now will blame brexit when it's their mismanagement that caused it.

It could well be the final straw for a lot of companies, although some will use it as the primary excuse.

It of course doesn’t help, but the headline blames Brexit and it’s been used for all sorts things. John Lewis tried to blame Brexit despite consumer spending holding up. Everyone tried to blame Brexit for Nissan not opening their new production plant when it was just that the market for diesels has contracted.
It is being used as a convenient excuse for troubles elsewhere.

[Banquo]

Can anyone explain why the withdrawal agreement is so universally despised? I get that confirmed remainers don't want to hear anything that isn't a second referendum/revoke A50; I think leaving the EU is looney tunes, but can't see any way of avoiding it now, and I don't want no deal, obviously. However, only about 10% of the population have any truck with the WA, which is frankly pretty anodyne- it preserves much of what people like at the moment, and gives at least until Dec 2020 to stop a drive over a cliff. The backstop, which is essentially Labours policy, is clearly temporary for the EU, as its a marginally better deal for us.

So, assuming we have to leave, what is it that so offends people about the WA (and I don't mean the ERG and DUP loonies). I must be missing summat.

[Stom]

Can anyone explain why the withdrawal agreement is so universally despised? I get that confirmed remainers don't want to hear anything that isn't a second referendum/revoke A50; I think leaving the EU is looney tunes, but can't see any way of avoiding it now, and I don't want no deal, obviously. However, only about 10% of the population have any truck with the WA, which is frankly pretty anodyne- it preserves much of what people like at the moment, and gives at least until Dec 2020 to stop a drive over a cliff. The backstop, which is essentially Labours policy, is clearly temporary for the EU, as its a marginally better deal for us.

So, assuming we have to leave, what is it that so offends people about the WA (and I don't mean the ERG and DUP loonies). I must be missing summat.

Because the loons want a clean break, the sensible brexiteers want common access, and the WA does neither.

It's avoiding the big red lines of everyone. It's a terrible idea built upon the idea of May trying to accommodate 2 completely opposing views that are not compatible.

[Banquo]

Can anyone explain why the withdrawal agreement is so universally despised? I get that confirmed remainers don't want to hear anything that isn't a second referendum/revoke A50; I think leaving the EU is looney tunes, but can't see any way of avoiding it now, and I don't want no deal, obviously. However, only about 10% of the population have any truck with the WA, which is frankly pretty anodyne- it preserves much of what people like at the moment, and gives at least until Dec 2020 to stop a drive over a cliff. The backstop, which is essentially Labours policy, is clearly temporary for the EU, as its a marginally better deal for us.

So, assuming we have to leave, what is it that so offends people about the WA (and I don't mean the ERG and DUP loonies). I must be missing summat.

Because the loons want a clean break, the sensible brexiteers want common access, and the WA does neither.

It's avoiding the big red lines of everyone. It's a terrible idea built upon the idea of May trying to accommodate 2 completely opposing views that are not compatible.

So what do you think a withdrawal agreement could contain- I'm intrigued, because arch remainer Ken Clarke said it was as good an agreement as you could get in the circumstances; my understanding is that nothing around trade deals is set in stone in the agreement, all it does is transcribe various technical bits and pieces into UK law, carry on as we are more or less until the big issues are sorted through the transition period. What have you read that contradict that?
Fact is, you can't leave the EU and expect to have the same customs or access arrangements, as they carry the same conditions of contribution, free movement, obedience to EU regulations, and only EU trade deals.

The whole thing is pointless though! Frankly, as you kind of point out, the negotiation was always paradoxical- Schrodingers Brexit made me laugh

[Stom]

Can anyone explain why the withdrawal agreement is so universally despised? I get that confirmed remainers don't want to hear anything that isn't a second referendum/revoke A50; I think leaving the EU is looney tunes, but can't see any way of avoiding it now, and I don't want no deal, obviously. However, only about 10% of the population have any truck with the WA, which is frankly pretty anodyne- it preserves much of what people like at the moment, and gives at least until Dec 2020 to stop a drive over a cliff. The backstop, which is essentially Labours policy, is clearly temporary for the EU, as its a marginally better deal for us.

So, assuming we have to leave, what is it that so offends people about the WA (and I don't mean the ERG and DUP loonies). I must be missing summat.

Because the loons want a clean break, the sensible brexiteers want common access, and the WA does neither.

It's avoiding the big red lines of everyone. It's a terrible idea built upon the idea of May trying to accommodate 2 completely opposing views that are not compatible.

So what do you think a withdrawal agreement could contain- I'm intrigued, because arch remainer Ken Clarke said it was as good an agreement as you could get in the circumstances; my understanding is that nothing around trade deals is set in stone in the agreement, all it does is transcribe various technical bits and pieces into UK law, carry on as we are more or less until the big issues are sorted through the transition period. What have you read that contradict that?
Fact is, you can't leave the EU and expect to have the same customs or access arrangements, as they carry the same conditions of contribution, free movement, obedience to EU regulations, and only EU trade deals.

The whole thing is pointless though!

Free movement! About 30% want 0 movement and 60% want 100% movement. May's deal does neither. The only sensible solution is to say we fucked up, there's no brexit.

[Banquo]

Because the loons want a clean break, the sensible brexiteers want common access, and the WA does neither.

It's avoiding the big red lines of everyone. It's a terrible idea built upon the idea of May trying to accommodate 2 completely opposing views that are not compatible.

So what do you think a withdrawal agreement could contain- I'm intrigued, because arch remainer Ken Clarke said it was as good an agreement as you could get in the circumstances; my understanding is that nothing around trade deals is set in stone in the agreement, all it does is transcribe various technical bits and pieces into UK law, carry on as we are more or less until the big issues are sorted through the transition period. What have you read that contradict that?
Fact is, you can't leave the EU and expect to have the same customs or access arrangements, as they carry the same conditions of contribution, free movement, obedience to EU regulations, and only EU trade deals.

The whole thing is pointless though!

Free movement! About 30% want 0 movement and 60% want 100% movement. May's deal does neither. The only sensible solution is to say we fucked up, there's no brexit.

Not sure, unfortunately it was free movement that triggered the big turnout. I agree with the latter, but can't see it being stopped- ironically, the best bet for stopping it is the ERG/DUP continuing to vote down the WA....I don't think parliament will allow a no deal.

[Stom]

So what do you think a withdrawal agreement could contain- I'm intrigued, because arch remainer Ken Clarke said it was as good an agreement as you could get in the circumstances; my understanding is that nothing around trade deals is set in stone in the agreement, all it does is transcribe various technical bits and pieces into UK law, carry on as we are more or less until the big issues are sorted through the transition period. What have you read that contradict that?
Fact is, you can't leave the EU and expect to have the same customs or access arrangements, as they carry the same conditions of contribution, free movement, obedience to EU regulations, and only EU trade deals.

The whole thing is pointless though!

Free movement! About 30% want 0 movement and 60% want 100% movement. May's deal does neither. The only sensible solution is to say we fucked up, there's no brexit.

Not sure, unfortunately it was free movement that triggered the big turnout. I agree with the latter, but can't see it being stopped- ironically, the best bet for stopping it is the ERG/DUP continuing to vote down the WA....I don't think parliament will allow a no deal.

Sorry, I meant MPs.

But even the population. The problem is a very small amount of people want a half in half out solution. The vast, vast majority want either fully out or free movement/fully in.

So Any WA was going to be hard to pass. There's just no support for any kind of deal. They want in or out, not anything in the middle.

[Banquo]

Free movement! About 30% want 0 movement and 60% want 100% movement. May's deal does neither. The only sensible solution is to say we fucked up, there's no brexit.

Not sure, unfortunately it was free movement that triggered the big turnout. I agree with the latter, but can't see it being stopped- ironically, the best bet for stopping it is the ERG/DUP continuing to vote down the WA....I don't think parliament will allow a no deal.

Sorry, I meant MPs.

But even the population. The problem is a very small amount of people want a half in half out solution. The vast, vast majority want either fully out or free movement/fully in.

So Any WA was going to be hard to pass. There's just no support for any kind of deal. They want in or out, not anything in the middle.

well if you have to choose between no freedom of movement or no deal (which has no freedom of movement), what do you do? The WA does give you fully out, eventually .

[Stom]

Not sure, unfortunately it was free movement that triggered the big turnout. I agree with the latter, but can't see it being stopped- ironically, the best bet for stopping it is the ERG/DUP continuing to vote down the WA....I don't think parliament will allow a no deal.

Sorry, I meant MPs.

But even the population. The problem is a very small amount of people want a half in half out solution. The vast, vast majority want either fully out or free movement/fully in.

So Any WA was going to be hard to pass. There's just no support for any kind of deal. They want in or out, not anything in the middle.

well if you have to choose between no freedom of movement or no deal (which has no freedom of movement), what do you do? The WA does give you fully out, eventually .

Well, that's why May's done what she's done... But it doesn't stop the fact it's something literally no-one wants...

[Banquo]

Sorry, I meant MPs.

But even the population. The problem is a very small amount of people want a half in half out solution. The vast, vast majority want either fully out or free movement/fully in.

So Any WA was going to be hard to pass. There's just no support for any kind of deal. They want in or out, not anything in the middle.

well if you have to choose between no freedom of movement or no deal (which has no freedom of movement), what do you do? The WA does give you fully out, eventually .

Well, that's why May's done what she's done... But it doesn't stop the fact it's something literally no-one wants...

I don’t think that’s true; I think literally a handful understand what the WA is; as literally no one who wants no deal (wto will be fine wtaf !!!) can understand what that means. What we have here is no one listening to any other point of view and thus not understanding.

[Digby]

The WA is an organised version of kicking the can down the road whilst the EU and other nations work out a way of giving us worse deals than we currently have

Any number of firms in finance could really use knowing where we stand, ideally as close to where we stand today, the equivalency analysis isn't due for many, many months and I assume will be delayed, we don't know if in future if we'll have non regressive or dynamic alignment, we do know even where we get an equivalence based market access the EU can withdraw it with notice of all of one month (30 days)

And the WA is almost certain to run until 2022, and no doubt can in practice be extended further, and it's not uncertainty from now until then we've already had years of uncertainty

So yes May's deal is better than no deal, vastly so, but it's still a steaming pile of shit. I'd probably find more sense in clicking on one of the porn links now littering the site

[Banquo]

So yes May's deal is better than no deal, vastly so,

which was mostly my point. Your main objection seems to be the time it will take to get any certainty, and you are working on the assumption that we will be out-negotiated by the EU. Which is fair.

Anything that anyone comes up with will look like a pile of crap compared to what we have, daft innit.

Your second paragraph makes no sense to me, but I'm sure that was intentional.

[Digby]

So yes May's deal is better than no deal, vastly so,

which was mostly my point. Your main objection seems to be the time it will take to get any certainty, and you are working on the assumption that we will be out-negotiated by the EU. Which is fair.

Anything that anyone comes up with will look like a pile of crap compared to what we have, daft innit.

Your second paragraph makes no sense to me, but I'm sure that was intentional.

I thought it was clear, but my English teacher at school thought I was polite but an idiot who shouldn't be trusted to write a birthday card.

[Stones of granite]

They’ve been struggling, in various guises, for years. Unfortunately, Brexit is just a convenient excuse for a number of failing and struggling companies at the moment, and, in this case, is one of a number of factors, as set out in the body of the article once you get past the headline.
Ironically, the EU Commision setout the plan for continued flights on Friday.

Yeah, any airline that goes under now will blame brexit when it's their mismanagement that caused it.

To be honest, Brexit and its consequences is the most credible from the litany of excuses that the BMIRegional management have given. For example, aviation fuel is at its lowest price since November 2017.

[Sandydragon]

And so seven Labour MPs set off into the political centre ground/wilderness (depending on your perspective) protesting at anti Semitism and Brexit policy in Labour.

The key question will be how many others might follow?

[Zhivago]

And so seven Labour MPs set off into the political centre ground/wilderness (depending on your perspective) protesting at anti Semitism and Brexit policy in Labour.

The key question will be how many others might follow?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -join-new/
"It came as Anna Soubry sparked speculation she is preparing to jump ship after removing a Conservative party slogan from her social media profile."

[Sandydragon]

And so seven Labour MPs set off into the political centre ground/wilderness (depending on your perspective) protesting at anti Semitism and Brexit policy in Labour.

The key question will be how many others might follow?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -join-new/
"It came as Anna Soubry sparked speculation she is preparing to jump ship after removing a Conservative party slogan from her social media profile."

There might be a couple. Interesting times.

What baffles me is the lack of profile the Lib Dema currently have. They should be in a position to clean up the centre ground, but they aren’t seen as an alternative.

[Stom]

Chukka wants a run at PM.

Doesn't quite understand that he's a snake and will be stamped on as soon as anyone gets a chance...

It's honestly a good thing. Get all the Conservatives out of both parties into a new right of centre party that fits the requirements. Let the Tories be their right wing selves, let Labour be their left wing selves.

It's just a crying shame there's no-one really credible within either party to stand up and be counted AND who represents and stands for the core values their party also represents/should represent.

[Puja]

The whole idea of a new third political party in the UK is utterly pointless until we sort out our antiquated electoral system that forces a two party contest. You cannot have genuine multi-party competition for government while FPtP exists.

It's a point McDonnell appears to have missed in his instant claim that Ummuna et al should call instant by-elections. At least the Secret Seven can be vaguely relied upon as an anti-Tory, anti-austerity voting bloc, whereas a by-election would likely see some of the seats lost to the Conservatives if the left vote split evenly.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

The whole idea of a new third political party in the UK is utterly pointless until we sort out our antiquated electoral system that forces a two party contest. You cannot have genuine multi-party competition for government while FPtP exists.

It's a point McDonnell appears to have missed in his instant claim that Ummuna et al should call instant by-elections. At least the Secret Seven can be vaguely relied upon as an anti-Tory, anti-austerity voting bloc, whereas a by-election would likely see some of the seats lost to the Conservatives if the left vote split evenly.

Puja

If it’s just 7 MPs then it will make little difference. If a larger number move across then it could become very interesting. Their immediate disadvantage is that they don’t have the party machinery to support them, but they could split votes.