Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[OnionTerror]

It depends on how comprehensive a trade deal is.  If its to lift tariffs on specific sectors, then there's no reason why it would wouldn't take a year or two.  If its more extensive, then it'll take longer.

 

There's even talk of free movement between Australia, UK, New Zealand & Canada...

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634

Edited September 8, 2016 by Dave Beans

[Fairyland]

European bankers will be exempt from migration curbs after Brexit, Philip Hammond reveals

 

Time for career change!

Edited September 8, 2016 by Fairyland

[spyguy]

It depends on how comprehensive a trade deal is.  If its to lift tariffs on specific sectors, then there's no reason why it would wouldn't take a year or two.  If its more extensive, then it'll take longer.
 
There's even talk of free movement between Australia, UK, New Zealand & Canada...
 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634

It dependx how much they differ.

We can trade on WTO when we want.

[Will!]

Funnily enough I've spoken over the past ten days independently to two soon-to-be ex-senior civil servants and a junior civil servant who have some knowledge of the Department for Exiting the European Union. Chatham House rules, old boy, but the following common factors emerged:

1) The government does not want to face any kind of election before it has invoked Article 50. It believes that to do so would court electoral disaster.
2) The government does not want to reduce low-skilled immigration as this keeps down labour costs, but recognises that being seen not to do so costs them votes.

3) The government tried to modify Tax Credits last autumn and was thwarted by the House of Lords.  It will try again.
4) The government's intention is to remain within the European Economic Area.  The government believes that if the UK leaves the European Economic Area then the consequent economic shock will cost them the next general election.  No word on whether this would be through EFTA or a UK-EU bilateral agreement.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Will!

[knock out johnny]

Funnily enough I've spoken over the past ten days independently to two soon-to-be ex-senior civil servants and a junior civil servant who have some knowledge of the Department for Exiting the European Union. Chatham House rules, old boy, but the following common factors emerged:

1) The government does not want to face any kind of election before it has invoked Article 50. It believes that to do so would court electoral disaster.
2) The government does not want to reduce low-skilled immigration as this keeps down labour costs, but recognises that being seen not to do so costs them votes.

3) The government tried to modify Tax Credits last autumn and was thwarted by the House of Lords.  It will try again.
4) The government's intention is to remain within the European Economic Area.  The government believes that if the UK leaves the European Economic Area then the consequent economic shock will cost them the next general election.  No word on whether this would be through EFTA or a UK-EU bilateral agreement.

 

5) The government is fcked!

[Will!]

5) The government is fcked!

You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment.

[long time lurking]

Funnily enough I've spoken over the past ten days independently to two soon-to-be ex-senior civil servants and a junior civil servant who have some knowledge of the Department for Exiting the European Union. Chatham House rules, old boy, but the following common factors emerged:

1) The government does not want to face any kind of election before it has invoked Article 50. It believes that to do so would court electoral disaster.
2) The government does not want to reduce low-skilled immigration as this keeps down labour costs, but recognises that being seen not to do so costs them votes.

3) The government tried to modify Tax Credits last autumn and was thwarted by the House of Lords.  It will try again.
4) The government's intention is to remain within the European Economic Area.  The government believes that if the UK leaves the European Economic Area then the consequent economic shock will cost them the next general election.  No word on whether this would be through EFTA or a UK-EU bilateral agreement.

1 - 5 ...say`s they are up shit creek without a paddle then

 

So if i am reading No1 correctly you`er saying they are not looking to invoke A50 until after the next election ? 

 

No 2 is widely known ...but there`s the best part of 17 million people who strongly disagree with them ....could be a bit of a problem come the next GE 

 

I think Knock out johnny nailed it 

Edited September 8, 2016 by long time lurking

[Will!]

So if i am reading No1 correctly you`er saying they are not looking to invoke A50 until after the next election ?

They're looking to invoke Article 50 before any election.

[long time lurking]

They're looking to invoke Article 50 before any election.

My bad that was the only option :wacko:  

 

I still think they are looking at electoral disaster if they don`t sort out FOM before the next election,this will be the deciding factor for next GE just like it was the deciding factor in the referendum  

Edited September 8, 2016 by long time lurking

[OnionTerror]

I suspect that stricter immigration will only bring about more illegal immigration...overstayers from the EU will just go off the radar...

 

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

[OnionTerror]

Well, it is down to will.

They don't have much illegal immigration in North Korea.

 

North Korea don't have 34 million visitors a year coming through their doors each year...and you'd come to the surface fairly swiftly if you didn't speak Korean...It also has a despot in charge, so it isn't much of a draw...

Edited September 8, 2016 by Dave Beans

[billybong]

They're looking to invoke Article 50 before any election.

 

and presumably that might include eu elections and even at some point UK local elections.  At some point excessive delay will seriously impact on those as well. 

Edited September 8, 2016 by billybong

[Royw6]

Funnily enough I've spoken over the past ten days independently to two soon-to-be ex-senior civil servants and a junior civil servant who have some knowledge of the Department for Exiting the European Union. Chatham House rules, old boy, but the following common factors emerged:
1) The government does not want to face any kind of election before it has invoked Article 50. It believes that to do so would court electoral disaster.
2) The government does not want to reduce low-skilled immigration as this keeps down labour costs, but recognises that being seen not to do so costs them votes.
3) The government tried to modify Tax Credits last autumn and was thwarted by the House of Lords.  It will try again.
4) The government's intention is to remain within the European Economic Area.  The government believes that if the UK leaves the European Economic Area then the consequent economic shock will cost them the next general election.  No word on whe this would be through EFTA or a UK-EU bilateral agreement.

Greatest of respects but this cannot be true. No civil servant is, or would be told about political intent. Even back benchers are not, the risks are too great. The above is fantasy and only the PM and her special advisers have any idea, sorry chappie it's just not credible.

[Confusion of VIs]

Funnily enough I've spoken over the past ten days independently to two soon-to-be ex-senior civil servants and a junior civil servant who have some knowledge of the Department for Exiting the European Union. Chatham House rules, old boy, but the following common factors emerged:

1) The government does not want to face any kind of election before it has invoked Article 50. It believes that to do so would court electoral disaster.

2) The government does not want to reduce low-skilled immigration as this keeps down labour costs, but recognises that being seen not to do so costs them votes.

3) The government tried to modify Tax Credits last autumn and was thwarted by the House of Lords. It will try again.

4) The government's intention is to remain within the European Economic Area. The government believes that if the UK leaves the European Economic Area then the consequent economic shock will cost them the next general election. No word on whether this would be through EFTA or a UK-EU bilateral agreement.

You missed out - ministers have been advised that it will take at least 18 months to recruit the team needed to negotiate article 50.

[Will!]

Greatest of respects but this cannot be true. No civil servant is, or would be told about political intent. Even back benchers are not, the risks are too great. The above is fantasy and only the PM and her special advisers have any idea, sorry chappie it's just not credible.

Politicians' intentions are often explicit in the instructions they give to civil servants. ("Make a plan to achieve X" or "Give me options to achieve X" or just "Do X".). When I was with the DWP I certainly knew the politicians' intentions but believe what you like.

[Confusion of VIs]

Greatest of respects but this cannot be true. No civil servant is, or would be told about political intent. Even back benchers are not, the risks are too great. The above is fantasy and only the PM and her special advisers have any idea, sorry chappie it's just not credible.

Having been a senior civil servant myself, I can tell you that it is absolutely the norm for civil servants at all levels to know very sensitive political details. The surprising thing is just how rare it is for potentially damaging information to be leaked to the media.

[Royw6]

Having been a senior civil servant myself, I can tell you that it is absolutely the norm for civil servants at all levels to know very sensitive political details. The surprising thing is just how rare it is for potentially damaging information to be leaked to the media.

Not true, no minister trusts civil servants or anyone else. ministers and politicians are so flakey and untrustworthy as to be uncomfortable, turn on a six pence and eat their own children if hungry. Senior civil servant or not, if you, or anyone, believes MPs or ministers they are beyond daft.

[XswampyX]

Not true, no minister trusts civil servants or anyone else. ministers and politicians are so flakey and untrustworthy as to be uncomfortable, turn on a six pence and eat their own children if hungry. Senior civil servant or not, if you, or anyone, believes MPs or ministers they are beyond daft.

So we have elected representatives that lie to the population to get elected and then lie to the civil service to keep their nefarious plans secret.... who exactly caries out these dastardly plans then? The far right fascist faeries from the imagination of the so called 'unbiased' BBC?

You need to see a shrink. asap!

[Royw6]

Blank

Edited September 9, 2016 by Royw6

[Royw6]

So we have elected representatives that lie to the population to get elected and then lie to the civil service to keep their nefarious plans secret.... who exactly caries out these dastardly plans then? The far right fascist faeries from the imagination of the so called 'unbiased' BBC?

You need to see a shrink. asap!

It is sweet you believe in the establishment so deeply, the benevolent leaders, hard working, honest and diligent public sector.

The government love the pliable public like you who believe anything they are told.

[Riedquat]

It is sweet you believe in the establishment so deeply, the benevolent leaders, hard working, honest and diligent public sector.

The government love the pliable public like you who believe anything they are told.

All leaders like that are apparently in the EU, so we shouldn't leave.

[VeryMeanReversion]

You're not paying the employer NI - by definition your employer is. It doesn't come out of your pre-tax pay.

Using salary sacrifice, my employer adds the NI they save into my pension. So I do actually get to keep that money.

[VeryMeanReversion]

I was talking Income tax @60%, let that demographic feel the same pain most trades men and the rest of the working class has felt in the last decade or so ,i think their opinion on unlimited migration would change ....wake up and smell the coffee

All the items I listed are basically income tax, just with multiple names to obfuscate. All I need to know is "Income goes up by £1, how much do I keep".

Note that the trades (typically) avoid the additional 9% graduate tax as well. That £50K graduate earner gets to keep ~25p of the next pound they earn.

The trade guys that built my extension seemed to like paying 0% via cash payments.

[billybong]

It depends on how comprehensive a trade deal is. If its to lift tariffs on specific sectors, then there's no reason why it would wouldn't take a year or two. If its more extensive, then it'll take longer.

There's even talk of free movement between Australia, UK, New Zealand & Canada...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-13/australia-canada-nz-support-eu-style-free-movement-poll-says/7242634

Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians and Britons would like the right to live and work in each other's nations without the need for a visa, a new poll suggests.

Key points:

Non-EU residents to face tougher criteria to stay in UK

Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders overwhelmingly in favour of free movement

Free movement idea popular with punters, not among ruling politicians

The survey, carried out by The Royal Commonwealth Society, shows significant levels of support for a European Union-style system of free movement between the four nations.

Seventy per cent of Australians were in favour of the idea with only one in ten opposed.

Where does one go to vote in these polls which sprout up making claims with ever increasing regularity. It's not direct democracy to have a select number of people constantly voicing their own opinion through the media with the flimsy excuse of being part of some poll.

For sure there'll be plenty of people who want that. How soon before Australia, UK, New Zealand & Canada expands into the rest of the Commonwealth etc - just like the eu expansion to include EE countries.

Just turn up, move in and start work.

Move into where?

Start work where?

No work - what happens then? What's the benefit system like?

What are the numbers?

Etc etc

It's a clear problem matching what people want and what's practical - and for those people that aren't most nations first choice it's yet more entry points.

If it's a possibility in the not too distant future it'll be essential that the current Brexit (Leave the eu) discussions take it into account in finalising issues such as the British benefit system relative to other countries. Also in housing policy as well as infrastructure etc - and who pays what to fund it all.

It's fascinating to see an apparent reversal in their world order plans and immediately another plan pops up.

Edited September 9, 2016 by billybong

[Riedquat]

For sure there'll be plenty of people who want that. How soon before Australia, UK, New Zealand & Canada expands into the rest of the Commonwealth etc - just like the eu expansion to include EE countries.

That people can overdo something and screw up a good idea isn't an argument against a good idea in the first place, just against people who don't know when to stop. Freedom of movement between Australia, the UK, New Zealand and Canada probably wouldn't cause problems for any of those countries, in the same way as it didn't in the EU before the idiotic expansion, so I don't have a problem with the idea. The idea that some people will abuse a good idea is an argument for giving those people a kick, not for throwing away the idea.