The Positive Brexit Thread

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

@Barbe bleu, noting your disinterest in the distinction between a right and a privilege on the other thread, I thought I'd answer here to keep it tidy.

The protection of rights and the idea of citizenship are massively important topics at the moment, especially where the ability of law  to protect them is concerned. Fortunes are being spent on challenging whether Shamima Begum, one woman who betrayed her country by going to Syria to support a terrorist organisation, was lawfully stripped of her British citizenship. This is not even in international courts; our own courts have considered the question extremely carefully, making sure there has been no misinterpretation of the law in ensuring it's lawful.

There's no question that the ECJ had a question to answer about whether it was fitting for a good 60,000,000 or so people to be automatically stripped of what the EU calls 'a true citizenship' with associated rights; that's why there was a court case in the ECJ on that very question. It answered that question by asserting it was no business of the EU to protect individual rights associated with EU citizenship for EU citizens, dismissing all of the reasonable points about why our EU citizenship should be considered independently of the UK's decision to leave the EU and endorsing stripping everybody, whether they'd wished to remain EU citizens or not, of their EU citizenship.

It's not like the EU is reluctant to assert its interests regarding Britain where it interests it. It was quick to threaten closing the border on the island of ireland to further its interests in a dispute over vaccines, just as it has been strongly insistent on asserting the right of the ECJ to have primacy on trade matters in Northern Ireland. The simple fact is that the EU walked away from protecting our rights as EU citizens because it didn't consider it in its interest to do so. It dismissed it by choosing to assert that the absence of any words saying EU citizenship could be held without being a citizen of an EU member state meant that we couldn't continue to be EU citizens.  they've cheapened all their big words about 'rights' and 'true EU citizenship' and cheapened the concepts of rights and citizenship in the process.

48% of those who voted in the EU referendum wanted to stay in the EU, but they were stripped of their 'true citizenship' of the EU en masse along with those who did, amounting to a form of collective punishment. The ECJ was asked to clarifyand the ECJ said yes it was. I don't see any justice in that if we're to go by the EU's words about the rights of EU citizens.

I wouldn't characterise myself as 'angry' about any of this. I'm old and cynical enough to accept realpolitik for what it is. But it irritates me how the EU is characterised as so noble and worthy when it showed itself to be anything but on the question of our so-called citizens rights.

 

Noble and worthy do not sound appropriate words for politics. Its dirty, devious, ego ridden and the most outdated way of running the world. Yes we all have our views and disagreements but there would be no need for politics if those we choose to run things for us, had any version of decency running through their veins.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,595]

4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Noble and worthy do not sound appropriate words for politics. Its dirty, devious, ego ridden and the most outdated way of running the world. Yes we all have our views and disagreements but there would be no need for politics if those we choose to run things for us, had any version of decency running through their veins.

Absolutely. This was a legal question though that was blatantly perverted by political considerations.

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

Another Brexit bonus.......................for France.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-20/banks-choosing-paris-over-london-help-boost-france-s-exports?leadSource=uverify wall

Banks Choosing Paris Over London Post Brexit Boost France’s Exports

• French financial services surplus swells as banks choose Paris
• Bank of France chief says trend is still accelerating

[littleyellowbirdie 2,595]

5 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Another Brexit bonus.......................for France.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-20/banks-choosing-paris-over-london-help-boost-france-s-exports?leadSource=uverify wall

Banks Choosing Paris Over London Post Brexit Boost France’s Exports

• French financial services surplus swells as banks choose Paris
• Bank of France chief says trend is still accelerating

Bit of a win win on that score seeing as the financial services industry has  grown in the UK post-Brexit.

[ricardo 7,401]

33 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Bit of a win win on that score seeing as the financial services industry has  grown in the UK post-Brexit.

Yes, French financial services surplus increased to 10.4 billion but here's  a bit of perspective. Premier League v Conference North.

https://www.theaccountant-online.com/news/uk-confirmed-as-the-worlds-leading-net-exporter-of-financial-services/#:~:text=Despite increasing competition in global,an international financial centre' report.

Edited July 21, 2023 by ricardo

[Hook's-Walk-Canary 213]

On 03/02/2022 at 20:56, Creative Midfielder said:

Johnson is now claiming that being able to set up freeports is a Brexit benefit which is firstly a lie because the EU has plenty of freeports

Wrong again - The EU doesn't have freeports, it has 'Free Zones' , which are similar to England’s Freeports, but they've always been highly restrictive in terms of the incentives governments can offer to persuade companies to invest -- Governed by the EU’s draconian 'state aid' rules, there's a wide range of regulations that only bureaucrats in Brussels can give approval -- That's why a programme like the following in Plymouth wasn't attempted during the UK’s period of EU membership:

• a £6.5 million investment in a further phase of the Oceansgate development which will deliver 1,772 square metres of high quality lettable space for manufacturing and synthetic testing, creating 49 jobs.
• The second is a £9.1 million investment in industrial units at Langage Business Park which will deliver 5,615 square metres of Plans are being developed for £15.6 million of new investment across two Freeport sites in the Council’s ownership. The first is flexible, high quality, sustainable workspace, split across four different units at Beaumont Way and create 138 jobs.
• Devonport-based Babcock secured a multi-million pound contract in partnership with Devon defence vehicle designer and manufacturer Supacat. This will deliver 90 new jobs and enable Babcock to expand their operations in the Freeport’s South Yard tax site.
• A consortium led by the Council has been awarded £916,000 from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to develop a framework for testing autonomous and prototype maritime vessels for research and development.
• A green hydrogen generation plant at the Freeport’s Langage site is being developed by Carlton Power, with an initial capacity of 10MW (with plans to increase that to 40MW) to heat 14,000 homes. It plans to go operational in two years' time.
• 100 new carpentry jobs have been created, working for the premium boatbuilding company Princess Yachts.
• The Freeport has aligned itself with Plymouth and Devon Chamber of Commerce and Plymouth Manufacturers Group to target businesses with high import/re-export activity. Already this is reaping rewards with a pipeline of potential customs site operators situated within the Freeport’s Outer Boundary.

[Source: Plymouth City Council, July 2023.]

 

 

It's worth noting that Plymouth has a Labour-run Council which would not ordinarily be expected to be so supportive of a Brexit-derived benefit such as this. Nevertheless the sheer weight of inward investment and the job creation on offer means that they have thrown their weight behind the project 👍

 

[Hook's-Walk-Canary 213]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Bit of a win win on that score seeing as the financial services industry has  grown in the UK post-Brexit.

The UK’s economy is 80% based on services, no less, and one of the benefits of the new CPTPP deal is the liberalisation of the restraints on the UK’s services sector in being able to sell into one of the fastest-growing markets in the world.

When it comes to trade deals, the BBC and the government’s agencies such as the OBR and HM Treasury seem not to understand that international agreements such as CPTPP are not solely about trade in goods, 'though being CPTPP member will mean that more than 99 per cent of current UK goods exports to CPTPP countries will be eligible for zero tariffs. Dairy farmers, for example, will benefit from reduced tariffs on cheese and butter exports to Canada, Chile, Japan and Mexico. This builds on the £23.9 million worth of dairy products we exported to these countries in 2022.

Don't tell any of this to Rejoiniacs, they'll sh*t blue lights. Especially Keelansgrandmama.

Edited July 21, 2023 by Hook's-Walk-Canary
HE'S THE SHORT FAT ONE WITH THE HAIRY LEGS!

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

7 hours ago, Hook's-Walk-Canary said:

Already this is reaping rewards with a pipeline of potential customs site operators situated within the Freeport’s Outer Boundary.

[Source: Plymouth City Council, July 2023.]

 

 

 

 

A 'pipeline of potential', no surprise that you've fallen for a load of PR nonsense.

 

[Herman 9,826]

Brexit.

 

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

8 hours ago, Hook's-Walk-Canary said:

Wrong again - The EU doesn't have freeports, it has 'Free Zones' , which are similar to England’s Freeports, but they've always been highly restrictive in terms of the incentives governments can offer to persuade companies to invest

 

Cobblers, and we did indeed have free ports in this country whilst in the EU but the Tory government did away with them in 2012.

Because despite all the b*ll*cks we heard about them then, and we are now hearing about them again now, they were abandoned because it had been clearly demonstrated that whilst all the subsidies and tax incentives had a small positive effects in those very limited locations it was almost entirely at the expense of negatively impacting businesses outside the zones, and that the overall impact of freeports on our economy as a whole were negative rather than positive.

It will be similar but even worse this time - Brexit benefit my @rse!!

[Herman 9,826]

 

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

55 minutes ago, Herman said:

Brexit.

 

Easily explained, he wasn't given the bicycle he voted for, it was the wrong type of ramp and the EU made the fire to punish him.

[Herman 9,826]

 

[Yellow Fever 3,837]

10 hours ago, Hook's-Walk-Canary said:

The UK’s economy is 80% based on services, no less, and one of the benefits of the new CPTPP deal is the liberalisation of the restraints on the UK’s services sector in being able to sell into one of the fastest-growing markets in the world.

When it comes to trade deals, the BBC and the government’s agencies such as the OBR and HM Treasury seem not to understand that international agreements such as CPTPP are not solely about trade in goods, 'though being CPTPP member will mean that more than 99 per cent of current UK goods exports to CPTPP countries will be eligible for zero tariffs. Dairy farmers, for example, will benefit from reduced tariffs on cheese and butter exports to Canada, Chile, Japan and Mexico. This builds on the £23.9 million worth of dairy products we exported to these countries in 2022.

Don't tell any of this to Rejoiniacs, they'll sh*t blue lights. Especially Keelansgrandmama.

The most apt and insightful acerbic comment I saw on CPTPP was by John Grace or John Rentoul (apologies to both).

It went something like - 

"The 0.08% predicted rise in GDP (over ten years) is within an accounting rounding error of being a deficit".

(Recall that GDP figures are often adjusted +/- 0.1 % every quarter!). 

Normally trade deals talk about benefits in the multi-billions of pound's per year, not a few million. You'd do well to also look at what the GDP growth figures actually are for the CPTPP. They really aren't what you think dominated as  they are by laggard Japan and now us.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

11 hours ago, Hook's-Walk-Canary said:

The UK’s economy is 80% based on services, no less, and one of the benefits of the new CPTPP deal is the liberalisation of the restraints on the UK’s services sector in being able to sell into one of the fastest-growing markets in the world.

When it comes to trade deals, the BBC and the government’s agencies such as the OBR and HM Treasury seem not to understand that international agreements such as CPTPP are not solely about trade in goods, 'though being CPTPP member will mean that more than 99 per cent of current UK goods exports to CPTPP countries will be eligible for zero tariffs. Dairy farmers, for example, will benefit from reduced tariffs on cheese and butter exports to Canada, Chile, Japan and Mexico. This builds on the £23.9 million worth of dairy products we exported to these countries in 2022.

Don't tell any of this to Rejoiniacs, they'll sh*t blue lights. Especially Keelansgrandmama.

Where did you copy that from Jools? Is Guido still going or are they all working on Murdoch's channel? You cannot think for yourself. You have to quote other people.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,595]

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

The most apt and insightful acerbic comment I saw on CPTPP was by John Grace or John Rentoul (apologies to both).

It went something like - 

"The 0.08% predicted rise in GDP (over ten years) is within an accounting rounding error of being a deficit".

(Recall that GDP figures are often adjusted +/- 0.1 % every quarter!). 

Normally trade deals talk about benefits in the multi-billions of pound's per year, not a few million. You'd do well to also look at what the GDP growth figures actually are for the CPTPP. They really aren't what you think dominated as  they are by laggard Japan and now us.

 

That's at the heart of why I struggle to take the forecast seiously: The implied precision of 0.008% is completely unrealistic without also including an error estimate, much akin to George Osborne's 'every household will be £4,300 a year worse off' if we leave the EU. They'd have been better off sticking to plain English and saying they don't expect it to make a difference.

Edited July 22, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,837]

5 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's at the heart of why I struggle to take the forecast seiously: The implied precision of 0.008% is completely unrealistic without also including an error estimate, much akin to George Osborne's 'every household will be £4,300 a year worse off' if we leave the EU. They'd have been better off sticking to plain English and saying they don't expect it to make a difference.

You got an extra zero in there but the point was that it's effectively zero.

[Herman 9,826]

 

[Herman 9,826]

It keeps on a rollin'.

 

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

 

 

[Pyro Pete 1,920]

Meanwhile, in the Daily Telegraph:

[dylanisabaddog 4,987]

This is my dog's artistic view of post Brexit Britain. She has suffered for her art and I feel her pain. The Tate have offered £100k but she's holding out for more because she thinks the Yanks are even more stupid than us. And, let's face it, it's better than anything else in The Tate. 

 

[Surfer 1,547]

" 48% of those who voted in the EU referendum wanted to stay in the EU, but they were stripped of their 'true citizenship' of the EU en masse along with those who did, amounting to a form of collective punishment. "

Let me help 

"48% of those who voted in the EU referendum wanted to stay in the EU, but they were stripped of their 'true citizenship' of the EU en masse along with those who did, amounting to a form of collective self-punishment. In every aspect of society, we must recognize that the people have spoken, and honour that decision. And, as so many who voted to leave have since died, it is our sacred duty to honour their memories and not allow the people who remain, or have come of age, an opportunity to speak on this subject again"

 

 

[Well b back 3,280]

Some interesting articles relating to post Brexit trade deals, who to believe hey.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-trade-deals-benefits-pac-b2038227.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cptpp-brexit-benefits-trade-uk-b2379742.html

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

 

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,595]

6 hours ago, Surfer said:

" 48% of those who voted in the EU referendum wanted to stay in the EU, but they were stripped of their 'true citizenship' of the EU en masse along with those who did, amounting to a form of collective punishment. "

Let me help 

"48% of those who voted in the EU referendum wanted to stay in the EU, but they were stripped of their 'true citizenship' of the EU en masse along with those who did, amounting to a form of collective self-punishment. In every aspect of society, we must recognize that the people have spoken, and honour that decision. And, as so many who voted to leave have since died, it is our sacred duty to honour their memories and not allow the people who remain, or have come of age, an opportunity to speak on this subject again"

 

 

You’re not helping at all. You’re just spouting nonsense. We were granted eu citizenship as individuals when the uk signed Lisbon There is nothing in the text that says eu citizens lose their ‘true eu citizenship’ if their state later leaves. A judge in the ECJ decided that while throwing our so-called individual rights under the bus.You clearly don’t understand what citizenship actually means.

‘Collective self-punishment’ is a stupid, petulant comment. How can those who didn’t vote to leave be considered to be punishing themselves? The EU describes EU citizenship as a direct relationship between the individual and the EU, not collectives of people.

The EU still exists so there’s no reason not to have protected our rights as recognised eu citizens at an individual level like real rights should be under any legal system that stipulates rights that’s not a sham.If not, show me where in the Lisbon treaty it says eu citizens will lose rights awarded to them by the EU if their state later leaves. I’ll wait. 

People wax lyrical about the EU protecting people from their states. What a load of rubbish.

It was a corrupt political decision by the ECJ not to do the just thing and honour its own rhetoric about EU citizenship instead of stripping 60m of EU citizenship in one fell swoop.

Now please bore off with your ridiculous vexatious apologism for the EU’s failure to practise what it preaches about citizens’ rights and ‘emancipating’ EU citizens from their state.

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

8 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

Now please bore off 

 

 

[TheGunnShow 6,010]

13 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

 

 

Nothing else needs to be added. And it should make it crystal clear why Priti Patel and Suella Braverman are and were dangerously incompetent and unfit for purpose.

We should have invested in better and more facilities for handling asylum issues, not try to fob it off on France/the rest of Europe. As much as I'm not always a fan of the state employing more people, I'd think there's always room for border guards and more staff for handling asylum enquiries!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,595]

38 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Nothing else needs to be added. And it should make it crystal clear why Priti Patel and Suella Braverman are and were dangerously incompetent and unfit for purpose.

We should have invested in better and more facilities for handling asylum issues, not try to fob it off on France/the rest of Europe. As much as I'm not always a fan of the state employing more people, I'd think there's always room for border guards and more staff for handling asylum enquiries!

Why would anyone possiblty add anything to some nonsense likening undocumented illegal migrants to paying tourists who came in with a passport and will go home again of their own accord when they run out of money?

As far as fobbing off is concerned, it's the continent turning a blind eye happy to let people they are purposely avoiding processing make a life-threatening journey elsewhere.

Edited July 24, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[TheGunnShow 6,010]

10 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Why would anyone possiblty add anything to some nonsense likening undocumented illegal migrants to paying tourists who came in with a passport and will go home again of their own accord when they run out of money?

As far as fobbing off is concerned, it's the continent turning a blind eye happy to let people they are purposely avoiding processing make a life-threatening journey elsewhere.

Yet France takes on considerably more asylum claims than the UK and both pale in comparison to Germany. Moreover, the UK - due to general incompetence, has a backlog of over 150,000 cases. The issue is how badly organised we are, and it is getting worse due to said government incompetence.

Top facts from the latest statistics on refugees and people seeking asylum - Refugee Council

The notion that mainland Europe is fobbing numbers off on the UK doesn't really wash that well, not to forget that the EU still doesn't take on that many relative to countries adjacent to crisis with Turkey and Palestine being particularly obvious cases.