Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think it's pretty clear what I'm objecting to. But for the purpose of clarity it's the charactarisation of what I said as 'semantics'. That the 'lies'* told during the trade talks could somehow apply to somebody who died the year they officially started. You specifically said it was Thatcher who was responsible and I replied that this couldn't possibly be the case. Which you called 'semantics'.

*What the OP said, which I am not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with.

So semantics?

What is the plan for UK financial services in a crash out? I hear a lot of talk about tariffs and quotas but nothing, it seems, in relation to FS.

London is such a major contributor to the UK economy (for good or ill) yet there seems very little discussion about it.

I am not too aware of the industry, so excuse me for asking what may well be an easy question, but is a Hard Brexit expected to make any material difference to this area of the UK economy. I know about the movements of assets but even that seems to be shrugged off so leaves me thinking that overall there might not be much impact.

I guess my main point is that as far as I can see there is very little conversation about it in the UK, either in HoC or the media.

murphaph wrote: »

I assume May also lied to them much more recently.

The set of people May lied to recently is very large.

But lies were there from the start of the campaign

Leroy42 wrote: »

What is the plan for UK financial services in a crash out? I hear a lot of talk about tariffs and quotas but nothing, it seems, in relation to FS.

London is such a major contributor to the UK economy (for good or ill) yet there seems very little discussion about it.

I am not too aware of the industry, so excuse me for asking what may well be an easy question, but is a Hard Brexit expected to make any material difference to this area of the UK economy. I know about the movements of assets but even that seems to be shrugged off so leaves me thinking that overall there might not be much impact.

I guess my main point is that as far as I can see there is very little conversation about it in the UK, either in HoC or the media.

Financial services in the forms that have developed in London over the last few decades are pretty much toast. There will be no selling of financial services into the EU post brexit, hence the rush of capital out of the country. Other, more... Singaporean style FS might be a very different matter. I suspect that many hard brexiters are banking on this happening. Pun intended.

Not terribly important, but one thing I've noticed is that no matter whether folk take a remain or a leave position, everyone seems sure that the BBC coverage is biased against their side.

I've repeatedly noticed people comment on here about how the BBC is playing down Brexit impact in their writing, but on every single HYS on there, the comments are full of people accusing BBC of propagating the so called, 'project fear'.....and these are largely the comments with the greatest number of up votes.

Is this a sign that the BBC maybe isnt as biased as everyone thinks, or is there something fishy going on with comment voting on HYS to suggest a bigger voice exists than in reality?

Hurrache wrote: »

HYS?

'Have your Say', the comments section available on some BBC News articles.

I think it is more nuanced that simply bias.

IMO, the BBC is not biased, it is that they are giving equal weight to both sides when in many cases only one side has an actual argument. They have got so caught up in the idea of 'balance' that they live in fear of the Brexit side whom, as they have little actual detail to their argument, feel that not being given equal credibility shows them up for what they are.

Take QT for example. How many times has Farage been on it? And has he been called up on the numerous nonsense statements he makes?

Have a listen to Brexitcast. They are so focused on putting across the UK view and laying out what might happen (always positive) that they have completely failed to give a proper view of the cliff rushing towards them. I have no issue with them putting across the idea that the EU might cave, that TM's plan might work, but alongside that they should also be putting out the consequences if it doesn't and laying out the massive gamble that TM is undertaking.

RobMc59 wrote: »

I imagine as with Irish producers,the British farmers will increase production as required-if Britain has to become more self sufficient it will,just as Ireland will as we are constantly being told on this forum.

Do you not think uk farmers are at full production?! Know thing or two about it and they are generally very intensive as it is- so which environmental rules are you going to jettison so they can up it beyond current thresholds?

road_high wrote: »

Do you not think uk farmers are at full production?! Know thing or two about it and they are generally very intensive as it is- so which environmental rules are you going to jettison so they can up it beyond current thresholds?

Spoke to a large dairy farmer in the North y/day. They are totally in the blind and extremely worried.

EKRIUQ wrote: »

I find this amazing, 3,500 people lose their jobs and it barely makes the front pages of the daily news papers in the UK

Mentioned on some but the large papers don't have it on the front.

https://imgur.com/a/DpanbKe#s56NATn

If we are to look at it comparatively, 3,500 jobs in Swindon is not the same thing as Intel shutting down in Leixlip. In the latter case, there's probably not a person in Ireland who wouldn't know someone affected by such a closure.
But given the size of the UK, 3,500 jobs over there is more akin to 250 job losses over here. Pretty big, but it wouldn't be headline news here either.

In terms of local impact though it shouldn't be ignored. If we pessimistically say that the loss of 3,500 jobs will lead to 3,500 more indirect losses, that's a 6% increase in unemployment in Swindon. That's a massive blow to any region.

The UK's real worries are the big companies who are just about holding it together right now.

John Lewis is the largest private employer in the UK with nearly 100,000 employees. They saw their worse year for profits (since they started reporting them) in 2017/2018. Down to £100m from £450m the previous year.

For the first half of the 2018/2019 year, they reported a drop in profits to just £1.2m (not, that's not a typo). Unless they made £100m in profits for the second-half of the year, things are about to go very, very South in the UK's largest private employer.

Their year-end report probably won't come out till next month. They might (IMHO) time it deliberately to show what Brexit is doing and try to turn the public tide.

The news here isn't really that 3,500 jobs are gone. It's that this is just the beginning. The big job losses haven't even begun.

seamus wrote: »

If we are to look at it comparatively, 3,500 jobs in Swindon is not the same thing as Intel shutting down in Leixlip. In the latter case, there's probably not a person in Ireland who wouldn't know someone affected by such a closure.
But given the size of the UK, 3,500 jobs over there is more akin to 250 job losses over here. Pretty big, but it wouldn't be headline news here either.

In terms of local impact though it shouldn't be ignored. If we pessimistically say that the loss of 3,500 jobs will lead to 3,500 more indirect losses, that's a 6% increase in unemployment in Swindon. That's a massive blow to any region.

The UK's real worries are the big companies who are just about holding it together right now.

John Lewis is the largest private employer in the UK with nearly 100,000 employees. They saw their worse year for profits (since they started reporting them) in 2017/2018. Down to £100m from £450m the previous year.

For the first half of the 2018/2019 year, they reported a drop in profits to just £1.2m (not, that's not a typo). Unless they made £100m in profits for the second-half of the year, things are about to go very, very South in the UK's largest private employer.

Their year-end report probably won't come out till next month. They might (IMHO) time it deliberately to show what Brexit is doing and try to turn the public tide.

The news here isn't really that 3,500 jobs are gone. It's that this is just the beginning. The big job losses haven't even begun.

can't really buy that - the car manufacturing industry was specifically highlighted as not going to be impacted by Brexit..

And hey presto - here's one completely shutting its doors with no mention in the media? Not sure it's simply because of relatively small numbers. It's still 3500 people.

That bit about John Lewis is scary

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

McGuinness appeared in March 2018, one of the few episodes I can recollect. The infograph I posted stops at February of the same year.

McGuinness was only ever on the show once (and expressed surprise she had been invited).

Leroy42 wrote: »

What is the plan for UK financial services in a crash out? I hear a lot of talk about tariffs and quotas but nothing, it seems, in relation to FS.

London is such a major contributor to the UK economy (for good or ill) yet there seems very little discussion about it.

I am not too aware of the industry, so excuse me for asking what may well be an easy question, but is a Hard Brexit expected to make any material difference to this area of the UK economy. I know about the movements of assets but even that seems to be shrugged off so leaves me thinking that overall there might not be much impact.

I guess my main point is that as far as I can see there is very little conversation about it in the UK, either in HoC or the media.

Generally speaking, most FS firms will be setting up or have already set up a European "Bank", generally in places like Ireland or Luxembourg. A FS company employing thousands of people might only have 20 working for the "Bank" so it may not be a massively significant shift in staffing. They would however ultimately be transferring all of the assets of their clients from the UK to EU bank, so whilst it might not be a big staffing impact, it would likely be a large wealth transfer (as everyone is already hearing about & seeing)

That's not to say that they will be shutting down their UK operations, as most of the big firms have significant amounts of UK pension business, etc...

As I mentioned, their EU "Bank" may only be a relatively small operation relative to the overall size of the firm. It is essentially establishing a base that would fall under the EEA regulatory framework.

If however, their full servicing operation was based in the UK, then if they want to continue to service EEA business, they would have to set up an operation in the EEA, so would likely be a significant movement

For example I work for a company that set up a "Bank" in Europe (keeping details vague here, as I don't want to disclose any confidential info publicly). They already had operations in various European countries, but the main European bank was based in London (as would generally be the case for most international FS firms). As a result, all clients in the EEA will be transferred to the new European banking operation.

This is the case in all Brexit scenarios, whether it be crash out, soft brexit, etc... The asset transfer would be a planned process. A crash out though, may ultimately push up timelines for completion