[Politics] Brexit

[ManOfSussex]

Are any Remainers unnerved by big business attempting to interfere in the democratic process in this way ? If not, you should be.

Like the Daily Mail and General Trust, Northern & Shell, Telegraph Media Group, Arron Banks..................

 

[Steve in Japan]

You are making quite an assumption. On the radio this morning they have been discussing that this could mean a re-interpretation of free movement. Apparently the original EU article talks about freedom of movement of workers which is different to the way it is currently being implemented. Merkel may want to discuss limiting free movement to those with jobs which would involve a work permit system.
This shouldn't come as a surprise. There is too much absolutism from both sides of this debate when what is needed is sensible compromise.

I found this on the Huffington Posts comments, regarding freedom of movement and what BoJo said yesterday, and I believe is factually correct. Although the last sentence probably indicates where the author's loyalties lie...

Johnson was talking about EU ‘’citizens’’...and he’s right. The free movement of citizens generally (as opposed to workers in particular) is a fairly recent EU development. The 1951 Treaty of Paris only allowed the free movement of workers in the coal and steel industries. That right was extended to all EEC workers (but not EEC citizens generally) via the 1957 Treaty of Rome.
It didn’t cause problems because the EEC at that time consisted of just 6 countries, all with highly-developed economies and roughly equivalent standards of living. Freedom of movement has since been extended to all EU citizens via various Directives and also political activism on the part of the ECJ.
The vast majority of the world’s 168 non-EU countries don’t allow free movement. They operate systems of visas and work permits, which are used to control immigration in terms of numbers and quality. They also happen to be leaving the stagnating trade-destroying unemployment-ridden EU for dead in terms of growth and job-creation.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Another front page report today in The Times. It also provides a further source to yesterdays front page. It's all presumably lies because:

1. It could be perceived as a negative Brexit news story.
2. It's in The Times
3. It's calls The Institute For Government 'experts.'

Here it is though.............

‘Chaos’ and confusion over plans for Brexit

Existential threat in Whitehall, experts warn

Deborah Haynes, Defence Editor | Francis Elliott, Political Editor

Brexit poses an “existential threat” to operations in some Whitehall departments, according to warnings highlighted by a leading think tank.

The Institute for Government said that Theresa May’s “secretive approach” was hampering preparations to leave the EU. The think tank, which has close ties to the civil service, cautioned that the Brexit process appeared “chaotic and dysfunctional” to some outsiders.

“Whitehall has most of the technical skills required to deliver Brexit,” a researcher wrote. “What Whitehall does not have is the capacity to deliver Brexit on top of everything else to which it is already committed.”

The warnings echo a memo written by a consultant to the Cabinet Office, leaked to The Times yesterday, which raised concerns about how well Whitehall was coping with the scale of Brexit-related projects. Downing Street reacted furiously, saying the “unsolicited” memo was drawn up by a consultant from the accountancy firm Deloitte.

Last night Deloitte issued a statement saying that the memo had been prepared “without access to No 10 or input from any other government departments”.

The Times understands, however, that the statement was issued after pressure from the government and amid fears that the firm could be stripped of future contracts. Although government departments provided no official input, a Whitehall source said the memo was informed by the views of civil servants at director and director-general level in the Cabinet Office and other ministries involved with Brexit.

Seeking to dismiss the memo’s warnings, the government also said that the author was not employed by the Cabinet Office. A spokesman said: “This unsolicited document has nothing to do with the government at all. It was produced by an individual from an external accountancy firm. It has no authority and we don’t recognise any of the claims it makes.”

It is understood that Deloitte has a long-standing consultancy contract with the department and the author is a member of the team. The team deals with leadership across the civil service, and Brexit has been part of the agenda since the referendum.

The leaked memo warned that Whitehall was working on more than 500 Brexit-related projects and that up to 30,000 extra civil servants may be needed. It also detailed a split within the cabinet, with the “three Brexiteers” — Boris Johnson, David Davis and Liam Fox — on one side and Philip Hammond, the chancellor, and Greg Clark, the business secretary, on the other.

In its own assessment of the impact of Brexit on the civil service, the IFG said the present situation would be “unsustainable” unless additional resources were allocated in the autumn statement a week today.

The think tank said it had been told by civil servants that Brexit represented an “existential threat” to the operation of Whitehall departments whose budgets and staffing had been sharply reduced in recent years. Moreover, secrecy at the top of Mrs May’s administration was causing “significant uncertainty” and preventing civil servants from planning far enough ahead.

While accepting that going public on her Brexit plans would create “party political management” problems, Joe Owen, an IFG researcher, warned: “Silence is not a strategy. Failure to reveal the government’s plan to reach a negotiating position is eroding confidence among business and investors, and encouraging unhelpful speculation about what the final destination might be.”

In its statement, Deloitte said that the piece of work was “primarily for internal audiences” but did not contradict claims that it was also intended for the Cabinet Office and other departments handling Brexit. Downing Street effectively confirmed it had been circulated within government, though not “widely”.

Revealing the pressure placed on Deloitte, a Whitehall source said it was made clear that Mrs May was “personally affronted” by the leaked memo. “No 10 were coming down hard on Deloitte so there was a negotiated statement which balanced distancing the government from the memo without denying that it had been the subject of conversations,” the source said.

Deloitte earned £119 million from government departments in the past three years.

Doubt was also cast on government claims that the memo had been written by Deloitte to tout for business. “This document is clearly not a pitch. It is a series of observations and trying to explain what is going on,” the source said.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/chaos-and-confusion-over-plans-for-brexit-m6bpc3d2h

 

[beorhthelm]

Another front page report today in The Times. It also provides a further source to yesterdays front page.

it doesnt provide a further source though does it? it finds a sympathetic expert to quote, so rehashing the same news from yesterday. which wasn't exactly a lot of news l in the first place - yes, Whitehall will need recruit some people to do Brexit on top of normal business. then it embelishes it with hyperbole of "existential threat", which means Whitehall departments would be at threat of being closed, clearly not the case, when really they mean they have a heavy work load ahead.

 

[ManOfSussex]

it doesnt provide a further source though does it? it finds a sympathetic expert to quote, so rehashing the same news from yesterday. which wasn't exactly a lot of news l in the first place - yes, Whitehall will need recruit some people to do Brexit on top of normal business. then it embelishes it with hyperbole of "existential threat", which means Whitehall departments would be at threat of being closed, clearly not the case, when really they mean they have a heavy work load ahead.

The Times does use the phrase 'a Whitehall source' though, hence my use of the word 'source'. If you wish to class this individual as a 'sympathetic expert', I'm not going to argue. I was merely providing the article for all as a Times subscriber.

I'm sure all Whitehall departments and the Government know exactly what they're doing and everything will be just fine.

 

[vegster]

The Times does use the phrase 'a Whitehall source' though, hence my use of the word 'source'. If you wish to class this individual as a 'sympathetic expert', I'm not going to argue. I was merely providing the article for all as a Times subscriber.

I'm sure all Whitehall departments and the Government know exactly what they're doing and everything will be just fine.

Indeed, Boris has said everything will be fine, I'm sure we all trust him so no need to worry... Much.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

it doesnt provide a further source though does it? it finds a sympathetic expert to quote, so rehashing the same news from yesterday. which wasn't exactly a lot of news l in the first place - yes, Whitehall will need recruit some people to do Brexit on top of normal business. then it embelishes it with hyperbole of "existential threat", which means Whitehall departments would be at threat of being closed, clearly not the case, when really they mean they have a heavy work load ahead.

Indeed. Looks like a feeble attempt to justify yesterdays story. Civil service might need more staff shock. Sir Humphrey getting stroppy?

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Overwhelmed with responses I see. Shocking standard of journalism by The Times bigging this memo up but they were pro remain and their coverage since the referendum has been rather partial to my eyes. Might well cancel my subscription .....

Out of interest, which newspapers do you feel are less partial than The Times?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Indeed, Boris has said everything will be fine, I'm sure we all trust him so no need to worry... Much.

He's got this....

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...hnsons-brexit-vision-not-fair-british-people/

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Out of interest, which newspapers do you feel are less partial than The Times?

Most/all papers have their agendas. I thought The Times coverage on the run up to the referendum was reasonably balanced despite their pro remain stance but disappointed with their post vote coverage. "Leaked memo prepared for the Cabinet Office" ....

 

[vegster]

He's got this....

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...hnsons-brexit-vision-not-fair-british-people/

I think we are working on getting Churchill's bust back on the Oval Office desk... That should fix everything.

 

[beorhthelm]

He's got this....

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news...hnsons-brexit-vision-not-fair-british-people/

i heard his interview, where he says free trade outside a customs union is "intellectually impossible and politically unavailable". well he's half right, its of course politically unavailable and that is a big problem. however intellectually impossible? of course its possible if there is a political will and suitable compromise, you dont *have* to have a customs union (restricting trade with other nations) to engage in free trade with another country. its just the terms that EU currently insist on. this is typical of the hard line EU stance, wont debate, just rule out anything (until it becomes politically expedient to do otherwise of course). Dijsselbloem also dismissed Merkel's comments on free movement, and she is the master of adjusting course to suit.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

More positive news on the employment and wages front today I see. Combined with the surprise fall in the Inflation rate quite a good week then.

"a vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy. That shock would push our economy into a recession and lead to an increase in unemployment of around 500,000" - HM Treasury

On course to be fastest growing economy in G7 2016, UK unemployment falls to 11 year low - Reality

 

[ManOfSussex]

More positive news on the employment and wages front today I see.

49,000 increase in employment in the 3 months to September, when 91,000 was forecast, which is down from the 106,000 in the 3 months to August and October saw the biggest rise in JSA claims since May.

For some reason the financial company I work for has frozen any additional recruitment for the remainder of the year too.

There is another side to your positive coin.

 

[Gwylan]

I found this on the Huffington Posts comments, regarding freedom of movement and what BoJo said yesterday, and I believe is factually correct.

Johnson was talking about EU ‘’citizens’’...and he’s right. The free movement of citizens generally (as opposed to workers in particular) is a fairly recent EU development. The 1951 Treaty of Paris only allowed the free movement of workers in the coal and steel industries. That right was extended to all EEC workers (but not EEC citizens generally) via the 1957 Treaty of Rome. ]

The author is talking rubbish. It takes a few seconds to look up the text of the Treaty of Rome and article 3c states "(c) the abolition, as between Member States, of the obstacles to the free movement of persons, services and capital;"

Absolutely nothing about workers.

Bojo, not for the first time, is talking absolute bollocks

 

[mikeyjh]

Bloody hell, I don't often listen to PMQs but thought I'd listen today to hear the 'plan'. There is no plan, May is presiding over a complete shambles, she has nothing and has restorted to many personal attacks but it's completely unable to answer any question regarding the 'plan'. It's all so depressing.

 

[mikeyjh]

Indeed, Boris has said everything will be fine, I'm sure we all trust him so no need to worry... Much.

We also know that Brexit means Brexit, it's just that none of us know what Brexit is, Boris thinks he probably knows, the PM says she knows and the leave campaign themselves? Well they definitely don't know:-

"We will also follow the impact on the economy and the political framework that’s in place. Our focus will be assuring that the will of the British people is implemented. There are various trading models that could be explored, for example, a Norway-plus type model, or a looser Canada-style relationship"

 

[beorhthelm]

The author is talking rubbish. It takes a few seconds to look up the text of the Treaty of Rome and article 3c states "(c) the abolition, as between Member States, of the obstacles to the free movement of persons, services and capital;"

Absolutely nothing about workers.

you might refer to Article 48 that details the freedom of movement of workers, rather than the executive summary.

 

[Gwylan]

you might refer to Article 48 that details the freedom of movement of workers, rather than the executive summary.

I wasn't referring to an executive summary. I was referring to Artlcle 3 of the Treaty itself - its fundamental principles. Article 48 refers specifically as to how workers should be treated eg not discriminated against as regards pay, workers' rights etc.

But Articles 1 to 8 are the important ones: they're the guiding principles of the European Community (as it was then), all other articles follow on from those eight basic points

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

Ipso Mori poll shows majority of people think the tories are doing a bad job of handling Brexit.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...s-mishandling-brexit-poll-finds-a3396961.html