The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

	Quote:	John William
	Apparently Corbyn's a fan of I'm a Celebrity . . . Get Me Out of Here !

Sounds about right for a man of his intellectual fortitude.

The cost of Brexit has been massive so far- and the economic forecast have not happened yet as the economy has been artificially pumped with emergency funds.

This guy is one of the very few talking sense at the moment, well worth listening to:

https://youtu.be/Ajk6jHdmPnw

	Quote:	Jim2007
	Yes that would definitely do wonders for your reputation! And you’d be in exactly the same situation as with the proposed deal - accepting all EU regulations etc with no say and no ability to do trade deals. The EU would simply assign the negotiating task to some minor official how would just keep telling you the deal that is on the table is it. Needless to say two more years of BS, with the prospect of more would not inspire business and inward investment much either. And yes the EU is moving forward, you’re just not at the table anymore. The new budget as been set out, rebates have been eliminated, the trade deal wth Japan sorted out, initial reform of the Euro agreed and so on.

Haha, you can barely disguise your contempt for the UK. Well sorry to disappoint you pal, if the Art 50 were to be revoked and Brexit cancelled then it'd mean the UK retaining all the rights of membership that it had before. And Ireland wouldn't even get a referendum on the matter

	Quote:
	The cost of Brexit has been massive so far- and the economic forecast have not happened yet as the economy has been artificially pumped with emergency funds. This guy is one of the very few talking sense at the moment, well worth listening to: https://youtu.be/Ajk6jHdmPnw

Where did they find this guy? "Economy artificially pumped with emergency funds"

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Where did they find this guy? "Economy artificially pumped with emergency funds"

You mean apart from the :

- Interest rate cut
- £60 bn additional money supply, extending QE to £435bn
- £100 bn additional bank funding
- £10 bn corporate bond purchases?

	Quote:
	You mean apart from the : - Interest rate cut - £60 bn additional money supply, extending QE to £435bn - £100 bn additional bank funding - £10 bn corporate bond purchases?

Interest rates are currently higher than before the referendum, and you've just made up the rest.

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Interest rates are currently higher than before the referendum, and you've just made up the rest.

Indeed 50% higher than before the referendum, business must have taken off after the vote.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Interest rates are currently higher than before the referendum, and you've just made up the rest.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...interest-rates
Just google it, it's in all the papers. Just quoted the Graun as it isn't behind a paywall.

Oh and as you appear to have a short memory here's the base rate history. The 2018 increase is basically down to inflation fears.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/boea.../Bank-Rate.asp

[fatmanfilms]

	Quote:
	https://www.theguardian.com/business...interest-rates Just google it, it's in all the papers. Just quoted the Graun as it isn't behind a paywall. Oh and as you appear to have a short memory here's the base rate history. The 2018 increase is basically down to inflation fears. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/boea.../Bank-Rate.asp

The interest rate cut was an unnecessary knee jerk reaction, the rate has tripled since.

Inflation is roughly 3%, so interest rates should be 4% plus if inflation was in any way feared.

	Quote:
	https://www.theguardian.com/business...interest-rates Just google it, it's in all the papers. Just quoted the Graun as it isn't behind a paywall.

You do realise that none of that actually happened don't you? These were measures that were promised in the event of financial instability. As it was, there was little capital flight and banks continued to lend as before so significant action wasn't required.

	Quote:	Loz1983
	You do realise that none of that actually happened don't you? These were measures that were promised in the event of financial instability. As it was, there was little capital flight and banks continued to lend as before so significant action wasn't required.

Well according to this from the ONS the full £435bn of QE did happen.

	Quote:
	Since then, two more rounds of QE were announced, bringing the total amount of gilts purchased to £435 billion

£435m being the amount I referred to before.

According to this, by end 2016 £5 bn of the bond purchases had already happened (plan was over 18 months) as had £21 bn of the bank funding.

Agreed not to the full extent announced but still at least 85 billion.

[amogles]

	Quote:	MusicChick
	And Jackson is alive.

He must be pretty old by now.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:	amogles
	He must be pretty old by now.

Actually he got re-incarnated not that long ago.

	Quote:	Urs Max
	Actually he got re-incarnated not that long ago.

	Quote:	amogles
	He must be pretty old by now.

Right you two, enough of this Pollocks. Back onto topic please.

[3Wishes]

Poking my head in again after reading an article on BBC. This bit caught my eye:

"...Whereas Article 50 allowed the UK to pull out of the EU, there is no provision for the UK to pull out of the withdrawal agreement..."

This is puzzling for me. I thought now that they'd reached a withdrawal agreement, said agreement had to be approved by parliament and that's why they are debating this week. If it's not approved then what? Try again? Too bad and you're leaving whether an agreement is reached and approved by parliament or not?

[marton]

	Quote:
	Well no- not helped by the Attorney General being in contempt of the House today, refusing to release the legal advice re the deal, very bombastically- saying on the one hand 'nothing to see here' and on the other 'far too serious and sensitive to be shared- and would seriously damage our country'... 'As flagged by Labour spokespeople during television interviews yesterday and today, a letter has gone to Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow, asking him to begin contempt of Parliament proceedings against the government. The call has been signed by six opposition parties – including the DUP, the government’s former ‘confidence and supply’ support. Theresa May has withheld the government’s full legal advice on her Brexit deal from MPs, even though she failed to contest a Commons decision to order its release, with not one Tory MP voting against it. Contempt of Parliament is a serious offence that can result in custodial sentences for non-MPs – and the expulsion of members of Parliament, vacating their seat and causing by-elections. For a government to face such a charge for ignoring the will of Parliament is unprecedented. According to the BBC’s Iain Watson, John Bercow intends to decide the issue very rapidly and possibly even this evening.' so we have little choice but to take information from where it comes from, and Peston seems quite informed, somehow. But, yes again, we have to take every bit of info at the moment with a large dose of salt, whether from the AG- Mrs May, Rees-Mogg, Andrew Marr, or Peston, etc, or anyone else for that matter

Did anyone read the whole of the Attorney General legal advice who could maybe explain why May was against releasing this?

	Quote:	marton
	Did anyone read the whole of the Attorney General legal advice who could maybe explain why May was against releasing this?

Probably, mainly this bit (from the article linked by 3Wishes):

	Quote:	BBC article
	But (Mrs May) came under fire at Prime Minister's Questions from the SNP's Westminster leader Ian Blackford. "The legal advice is clear," he said. "It states: despite statements in the protocol it is not permanent, in international law the protocol would endure indefinitely. Since the prime minister returned from Brussels with her deal, the prime minister has been misleading the House inadvertently or otherwise. "Is it time that the prime minister took responsibility for concealing the facts on her Brexit deal from members in this House and the public?"

[marton]

	Quote:
	Probably, mainly this bit (from the article linked by 3Wishes):

Thanks but it just seems a bit trivial when the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox, had argued that the public interest did not permit the publication of the advice. I had expected something a bit more.....

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	Haha, you can barely disguise your contempt for the UK. Well sorry to disappoint you pal, if the Art 50 were to be revoked and Brexit cancelled then it'd mean the UK retaining all the rights of membership that it had before. And Ireland wouldn't even get a referendum on the matter

The original post was a proposal to cancel A50 and the give notice again to reset it... do try and keep up.

[Urs Max]

	Quote:	3Wishes
	Poking my head in again after reading an article on BBC. This bit caught my eye: "...Whereas Article 50 allowed the UK to pull out of the EU, there is no provision for the UK to pull out of the withdrawal agreement..." This is puzzling for me. I thought now that they'd reached a withdrawal agreement, said agreement had to be approved by parliament and that's why they are debating this week. If it's not approved then what? Try again? Too bad and you're leaving whether an agreement is reached and approved by parliament or not?

I would think whether parliament rejects the agreement or the government amounts to essentially the same. so isnt't that the no-deal scenario? (unless the 2yr get extended, which seems extremely unlikely)


ETA:
Unrelated to the above but can't have three sequential posts: Here's the legal advice given to cabinet by the AG.