Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[grahamite2] 21/10/2019 16:38

Our future if we leave the EU will most likely be "Little Britain", as Scotland departs and Northern Ireland moves away.

What of it? Losing those two would be like losing Wolverhampton and Stoke Poges. England would still be a mighty economy and nation.

[grahamite2] 21/10/2019 16:33

For once I'd say Bercow has done right. What's the point of an indicative vote if the real thing is to be debated tomorrow?

[goldpiguk] 21/10/2019 16:28

Hi xxxxxy,

You are behind the times. A no deal Brexit is simply not going to happen in this Parliament. A very high stakes game of poker is being played out in the House of Commons.

It looked as though the Government did have the numbers to get the BJ deal approved in principle today. The Speakers ruling, which the Government knew would be to reject its planned vote today, means the Governments Bill can now be amended at Second Reading tomorrow.

What is happening is a tragedy for this country; Over three years of wasted time, causing division in the four nations making up the UK, huge family splits, frozen business decisions, and years of uncertainty.

The sooner this all stops the better, but sadly that looks highly unlikely. Divisions only look likely to be exacerbated over coming days.

Our future if we leave the EU will most likely be "Little Britain", as Scotland departs and Northern Ireland moves away. Brexit must be stopped using every democratic and legal means at our disposal.

Goldpig

[mr.elbee] 21/10/2019 15:43

Nowt to worry about..Ignore the dramatic noise..this is a stitch up between Junker and Boris and nothing..repeat nothing will get in the way.
So Bercows,letters,Ollies and the like are so much chaff in the wind.

The EU in all of its pomp and might are now 150% on the side of Boris. So who do you think will win ? And the longer it drags on the larger Boris' majority.

[But we still will have stitched up like a kipper]

But us investors will benefit mightily.

[mazarin] 21/10/2019 15:39

I’m sure the wider British public in general will believe Bercow’s rejection is yet another attempt by Parliament to thwart Boris’s deal and believe the two issues are separate questions. The reality is that both relate to the ‘meaningful vote’ on his deal. Letwin’s amendment was debated in consequence. Unfortunately time is against us. No doubt the government will now frame the ‘meaningful vote’ when the legislation bill is debated in tomorrow’s Parliamentary sitting

[mr.elbee] 21/10/2019 15:37

unknown apparently to the meeja,Nigel has committed to targeting any MP's seats who supported this sell out .

A bit different from before...and catastrophic for the tories.

No comment ,of course.

Nothing has changed and nothing ever will.
"The most closed democracy of all"[Lord Hailsham 1962]

[xxxxxy] 21/10/2019 15:36

Watched bit of parliament .SNP comes across as Cretins.Our embarrassing Celtc cousins.LEAVE and WTO

[lorian121] 21/10/2019 15:33

That's a funny sort of Democracy Crossing, losers sort.

[k38] 21/10/2019 15:30

Ian Blackford nothing to say as usual but complain. ...;))

[crossing_the_rubicon] 21/10/2019 15:29

Only an utter idiot and judas would sign Britain up for this....


The Revised Political Declaration

Introduction

So far as we are aware the only material changes in the Withdrawal Agreement (Treaty) are to the NI Protocol, which means that the critical ECJ oversight and Art 184 link to the Political Declaration remain. I am told by UKREP that there are two changes to other Articles in the Treaty but they were unable to tell us which ones.

Executive Summary

The Treaty permanently restricts our military independence, demands payment of an unspecified sum, prevents independent arbitration, grants EU officials immunity from UK laws, leaves us with EIB contingent liabilities running into tens if not hundreds of billions and will impose punitive laws on the UK during a transition which is likely to be extended until mid 2022 (just a few months before the next General Election).

The Political Declaration is such that a future FTA with the EU is made unpalatable because it will restrict our foreign policy and military independence as well as policies in trade, tax, fishing, environment, social and employment, competition and state aid. Free movement is replaced with vague notions of "mobility" and "non discrimination".

Specific Provisions in which the Withdrawal Treaty:-

1.Restricts Parliamentary independence

Just as before, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) governs the entire Treaty and EU law takes precedence - binding future British Parliaments and requiring judges to overturn laws passed by the British Parliament if the ECJ considers them to be inconsistent with obligations in the Treaty. (Articles 4, 87, 89 and 127).

2. Restricts independent trade policy

Although there is no longer any reference in the Political Declaration to "building on the customs territory" the new provisions may still create difficulties for the UK in agreeing trade deals because any FTA with the EU must satisfy principles and objectives that include "ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition" (para 17) and "deep regulatory and customs cooperation" (para 21). This will make it difficult for the UK to reduce non-tariff barriers as a means to facilitate a trade deal with a third country - particularly the United States.

The Political Declaration requires that a FTA "ensure no tariffs, fees, charges or quantitative restrictions across all sectors with... ambitious customs objectives that are in line with the Parties' objectives and principles" (para 22). This does not exclude the possibility of a Customs Union. It is not clear how the UK could protect its industries against dumping by third countries with which the EU has FTAs.

The problem also remains that there is no definition in the Withdrawal Treaty for the word "goods"

and so its scope will be interpreted as the ECJ determines from time to time (Articles 127, 184).

3. Prevents an independent tax policy

The Political Declaration still obliges the UK to adopt a future relationship which will impose EU State Aid rules and "relevant tax matters" on the UK (para 77), the EU specifically intends to curb the UK's ability to have "harmful tax practices", the Withdrawal Treaty also applies EU law to the UK during the transition period (Article 127) - allowing the EU to sue the UK, including infringement proceedings for: as yet unidentified breaches of State Aid rules (which can take the form of tax exemptions); and billions in unpaid VAT on commodity derivative transactions dating back to the 1970s (Articles 86 and 93).

4. Controls Fishing

The CFP continues in UK waters during the transition period (which can be extended) but the UK will have no say in its implementation or enforcement. After the transition, the Political Declaration requires "cooperation on... regulation of fisheries, in a non-discriminatory manner" (para 72), which is code for continuing the current arrangements for EU access to UK waters.

The Political Declaration also requires that any FTA "ensure service providers and investors are treated in a non-discriminatory manner, including with regard to establishment" (para 29) - this would prevent the UK from introducing the modern equivalent of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 which sought to protect the British Fishing Fleet's quota from being bought-up by foreign owners (and which was the subject of the infamous litigation in Factortame).

5. and 6. Prevents independent military action

The Treaty permanently restricts the UK's sovereignty by preventing the UK from taking "any action likely to conflict with or impede" EU foreign policy (Article 129(6)). It is instructive that this contrasts with almost all the other sub-sections of Article 129 - each of which include language limiting them to the duration of the transition period.

It is also very revealing in the Political Declaration that critical parts of the section on foreign policy and security are not reciprocal. For example, para 99 confirms that the future relationship will not "prejudice the decision-making autonomy of the EU" but no such language is afforded to the UK - we are merely permitted to "maintain the right to determine how [to respond] to any invitation to participate in operations or missions".

Additionally, in the Political Declaration the parties "agree to consider" security collaboration in the European Defence Agency, the European Defence Fund and PESCO "to the extent possible under [EU law]" (para 102(c)) which is a prescriptive obligation and not merely a permissive option. Despite making payments to the European Defence Agency during the transition period, British troops in EU battlegroups will not be led by British staff officers (Articles 129(7) and 156-157).

7. Restricts Foreign Policy

The UK will be bound by international agreements concluded by the EU despite having no influence in their negotiation during the transition period and must "refrain, during the transition period, from any action... which is likely to be prejudicial" to the interests of the EU (Article 129(3) and (6)).

8. Demands Payment of a sum to be decided by the EU

Possibly a 39bn payment to the EU according to HM Treasury but as that amount can't anticipate EU fines and contingent liabilities it's just a minimum figure (Articles 138-144, and 152-155).

9. Replaces one Commission with another

A new body is established with 'powers equivalent to those of the European Commission' (Article 159).

10. Prevents independent arbitration

The UK is expressly denied the right to take any dispute about the Treaty to the international courts and must accept the exclusive jurisdiction of the Arbitration Panel (half of whom are appointed by the EU) and, via it, judgments of the ECJ (Articles 168, 174).

11. Grants EU officials immunity

The EU and its employees are to be immune to UK regulations, criminal law and exempt from tax (Articles 101, 104, and 106-116).

12. Imposes a gagging order on the UK

The UK must keep all EU information confidential but the EU can use UK information as it sees fit. (Articles 74 and 105).

13. Leaves the UK with EIB risks but no profits

We abandon rights to not only past and future profits made from our investment in the EIB, but also our share of assets of the EIB and yet remain liable for contingent liabilities of up to 500bn euros of guarantees given to the EIB via the EU budget (Articles 143, 147, 150).

14. Imposes EU public procurement rules

EU public procurement rules continue at least during the transition period (Articles 75-78 and 127).

15. Makes the UK a bystander in laws that govern it

The UK is permitted to send a civil servant to Brussels to observe the EU passing laws designed to disadvantage our economy during the transition (which might last many years) (Article 34). For example, the EU is discussing regulating London's huge Foreign Exchange Markets and also imposing a financial transaction tax that would be collected at our expense by HMRC but sent to foreign governments.

[crossing_the_rubicon] 21/10/2019 15:13

@Graham

279861 spot on. Concur 100%

[excell1] 21/10/2019 15:01

Bercow is going to be an absolute pain in the backside until he goes.Roll on...

[alphorn] 21/10/2019 14:52

He could have allowed the house to debate a photocopy.

ROFLMAO

[ekuuleus] 21/10/2019 14:52

Not sure how it's against parliament procedure, they only voted on the Letwin amendment so surely they should still vote on the actual bill.

They actually voted on May's bill 3 times (plus all the amendments).

Since Bercow has already consulted with EU, clearly they don't want the deal (or no deal) going through, only a delay to kick in.

[lorian121] 21/10/2019 14:51

Enjoying a nice glass of wine here on the beach in Greece, here's to you Mr Bercow

[xxxxxy] 21/10/2019 14:31

Remainers are antiDemocracy

[xxxxxy] 21/10/2019 14:30

James McNicholas 21 Oct 2019 1:54PMFew certainties have emerged from the decision to leave the EU, taken by the people of the UK in 2016.Cast into doubt have been cherished principles, and brought into enduring disrepute, hallowed institutions. We must now be unsure of the sincerity and honesty of some MPs; we may no longer be certain about the impartiality of the most senior judiciary; the procedures of the House of Commons have become chaotic and cast the fitness for purpose of our Parliamentary democracy into serious doubt; our Government has been deprived of the ability to govern, by the machinations of our political Establishment, and the use of law to effect political ends.Our main political parties have broken apart, with some rancour, a realignment which is ongoing.Indeed it is no longer clear that a majority of our democratically elected representatives are prepared even to respect the meaning of democracy in any but the most narrow, legalistic and technical sense - the latest scam being to seek to overturn the Referendum result, with another in which the question expressly excludes what some polls indicate is the most popular public choice, being to leave with no deal.We have also contrived to sour our relations with the other nations of Europe, whilst trying to extract ourselves, very clumsily, from the institutions of the EU.There is however one inescapable conclusion that we may draw with confidence. The first cause of our unhappy state, whatever else may have occurred since, was the decision to join the European Community in the first place in 1972. Had that decision not been taken, we would not now be laying waste to the Constitution and reputation of the UK.I do not doubt for a moment that we will eventually leave the EU, though still more of our institutions will be damaged in the process.When we do, we must recognise without compromise, that it was not, and is not, for us.

[poikka] 21/10/2019 14:14

"If Johnson does manage the double whammy of passing a deal and winning a majority, don’t expect the People’s Voters or the No Dealers to simply shut up and go home. The latter will continue to apply pressure against any kind of trade deal, while the former will turn their push for a second referendum into a straight-up ‘Rejoin the EU’ campaign."

That is precisely what the missus and I were talking about today. How to avoid that?

You cannot stop demos, well, not reasonably, but we can have an election that gives the leavers a working majority in the HoC, and more importantly we could have a Speaker who is truly impartial.

[grahamite2] 21/10/2019 14:00

The way things are going, Crossing, I think we'd do better to have a government of army officers and only army officers.

Democracy as we knew it has been completely smashed up by the remoaner extremists and we could do with starting again ab initio.

[crossing_the_rubicon] 21/10/2019 13:58

Bojo WA Treaty means UK could be in EU transition until December 2022.

That would mean naff all changing more than 6 years after country voted for radical political change.

Voting for what’s on table endorses that possibility.

[crossing_the_rubicon] 21/10/2019 13:58

@Graham,

But the shift on the FTA negotiation side could see extensions that drag out our BRINO membership till 2022!!!!!

How much damage can the EU do us in 3 more years????
Too much

Hence I want a clean break - then negotiate a FTA from a WTO baseline....

Out, no £££, no ECJ supremacy.Up to EU to negotiate fairly unless they want all UK-EU traded to be subject to tariffs going forward.

UK consumers already shifting their spending patterns.
Decent page on FB - Buy British for Brexit.

[crossing_the_rubicon] 21/10/2019 13:56

graham,

Drax is the kind of MP we need in HoC - far too many Lawyers, traitorous scum that they are. Honourable exceptions of course. Cash for example.

We have far too many overpaid monkeys getting remunerated well above their capabilities.