Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[alphorn] 03/12/2018 22:55

Stoned - that is my style. It focuses on the main issue. It was also my style in business; don't wrap up stuff in verbiage.

I am surprised by all the cut & pastes with added vitriol and the almost total absence of any trading ideas. There are huge opportunities the past month and this month. Are most posters passive holders; no matter what happens?

[stonedyou] 03/12/2018 22:53

Mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg mogg

mogg


‘LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE!’ Rees-Mogg says 'establishment DOESN'T know best' - new

BREXIT POLL

EXCLUSIVE: Nearly two-thirds of voters want Britain to aim to be the most low-tax,

business-friendly country in Europe after Brexit, an exclusive opinion poll for

the Daily Express has revealed.




Sixty-five per cent of people quizzed in the survey backed a vision of a dynamic

economy "focused on building strong international trade links" following next

year's departure from the EU. And nearly half of voters (45%) would be prepared to

sacrifice some economic growth "in order to complete Brexit properly", the poll

found. Polling firm ComRes interviewed just over 2,000 UK adults online over the

weekend in the survey on current attitudes to Brexit commissioned by the Daily

Express.



Only just over a quarter (26%) of people quizzed in the survey supported Mrs May's deal

while 42% opposed it.

[stonedyou] 03/12/2018 22:47

Alporno you only deal one liners......

[xxxxxy] 03/12/2018 22:40

Nos da. Cymru am byth

[xxxxxy] 03/12/2018 22:40

Europe's power is easy to miss. Like an 'invisible hand', it operates through the shell of traditional political structures. The British House of Commons, British law courts, and British civil servants are still here, but they have all become agents of the European Union implementing European law. This is no accident. By creating common standards that are implemented through national institutions, Europe can take over countries without necessarily becoming a target for hostility.


That passage becomes highly relevant here, for two reasons. Firstly, as Leonard points out, the EU "operates through the shell of traditional political structures" and, secondly, it can "take over countries".
Mark Leonard, Centre for European Reform, 

[xxxxxy] 03/12/2018 22:38

The Political Declaration does not save us from the trap of the Withdrawal Agreement
25 November 2018 by Martin Howe


The key point to grasp is that this declaration is not legally binding, whereas the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) will be. 

And it is worse than that. The alternative to reaching an agreement with the EU will not be to walk away with no deal. If we do not reach an agreement with the EU, the hugely damaging so called “backstop” – the Northern Ireland Protocol – will automatically kick in. I have explained the problems with this Protocol in my previous post: The Northern Ireland Protocol is neither a “backstop” nor temporary

Warm words and phrases which mean little
The PD has a number of warm words and phrases which have been inserted into it in a fairly transparent attempt by the EU to help Theresa May with her political difficulties in selling the deal. When examined carefully, these mean little or nothing, or are contradicted elsewhere in the text.
By signing the legally binding WA in advance of entering negotiations on the future relationship, she will have thrown away in advance the UK’s two most powerful cards, which are (1) making huge payments into EU budget which we do not owe under international law, and (2) giving access for EU goods exports into the UK market. Worse still, she will have forced whoever becomes her successor to negotiate under the guillotine of the ‘backstop’ Protocol which will come into force at the behest of the EU or of any one of a the 27 EU Member States which has a demand to make of the UK.
Full text:

Do NOTE 'Warm words and phrases which mean little' Aspirational words, pretty words, equivocal words mean nothing in LEGAL terms. And in the end LEGAL STUFF matters all.

In many ways it makes the UK a colony of the EU

[xxxxxy] 03/12/2018 22:38

Simple things please simple minds.

[careful] 03/12/2018 22:34

Desperate Davies, his career is in its dying moments.
he had his chance and blew it.

The EU. court (which we had a member until recently),
will always rule on trading matters with the EU.
It is simple.

After Brexit, our courts will rule on trading disputes with the UK.
..people who trade with us will do it on our rules,
they will be rule takers.
It is simple, do not them confuse you.

In Northern Ireland, the EU. will decide the border checks of goods and cattle into the EU..
That is simple.

[alphorn] 03/12/2018 22:33

Stoned - you are a bit slow - refer #393. Keep up.

[stonedyou] 03/12/2018 22:22

Theresa May - Contemptuous dogs are snapping!!!!!!


‘This is NOT Brexit!’ David Davis ATTACKS May’s deal as MPs calls for CONTEMPT

PROCEEDINGS



DAVID Davis has launched a blistering attack against the Government, branding

Theresa May’s deal “not Brexit” and urging her to release the full legal advice

amid fears the UK will remain trapped forever in the EU’s customs union.



Former Brexit Secretary Mr Davis issued a stark warning to the Government, saying

the legal advice must be published in full to let MPs make an informed decision

over the Prime Minister’s deal. In a statement released today, Mr Davis said: "The

legal summary document is worse than we feared: the backstop customs union is

indefinite, the UK would be a rule taker and the European Court is in charge of

our destiny, rather than the sovereign UK Parliament. This is not Brexit. This

only reinforces what I’ve been saying for weeks: the legal advice must be

published in full so that the House of Commons can debate this properly."

[xxxxxy] 03/12/2018 22:12

The Withdrawal Agreement is toilet paper containing dangerous FAECAL MATERIAL

[alphorn] 03/12/2018 22:10

max - you don't have a guess?

x5 is filtered - I can't read any more of that Redwood stuff. ;)

[maxk] 03/12/2018 22:02

So what do you think will happen next? It is only then that we (posters) can consider what to do.

As a starter:
- The WB will be defeated and TM will attempt to modify and re-present.
- The WB will be defeated and TM will be ousted. Tories remain in power
- The WB will be defeated and an election of sorts will take place.



No idea Alp, your guess is as good as mine .. we are not playing by strict logic logic rules here, but political logic, not the same thing.



anyway, triple xxx has supplied a suitable reply in #

xxxxxy
3 Dec '18 - 21:53 - 238391 of 238391

[xxxxxy] 03/12/2018 21:53

Martin Howe QC responds to No. 10’s ‘rebuttal’ of his Spectator article
December 2018 by Martin Howe

My response: These astonishing and humiliating procedures derived from the Association Agreements of the former Soviet republics of Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine plainly do not respect the principle that the court of one treaty party cannot resolve disputes between the two.

Where the treaty obliges the UK to apply EU law or rules based on it, this procedure will require the substance of the dispute to be decided by the ECJ and not by the panel. The arbitral panel will be in the same position as our Supreme Court now is regarding EU laws. The UK Supreme Court formally “resolves the dispute” by passing the formal judgment in the case, but is obliged (1) to refer any doubtful questions of EU law to the ECJ, and (2) is bound to follow and apply the answers given by the ECJ, whether it agrees with them or not.

Allowing our treaty obligations to be decided in this way by a court of  the other treaty party is totally contrary to international treaty practice under which sovereign states simply do not agree to this happening. It means that our treaty obligations can be effectively rewritten in the future – through the ECJ promulgating a “reinterpretation” of EU rules we have agreed to follow. Our treaty obligations will be changed by an organ of the EU, without the UK having any say.

Most disturbingly, paragraph 124 of the political declaration makes clear that the UK government has caved in to making these arrangements  in the withdrawal agreement a permanent feature of the UK-EU relationship, while paragraph 83 will give the ECJ a similar role in the field of extradition and other criminal law measures.

7. This draft agreement will not take us closer to an acceptable final deal with the EU. Instead, it locks us down by throwing away in advance our two strongest negotiation cards: EU budget payments of £39 billion and the future access to our market for EU goods.

Downing Street: This agreement confirms that as we leave the EU the days of sending vast payments to the EU are coming to an end. The financial settlement reflects a fair settlement of our rights and obligations as a departing member of the EU. It is estimated to be much lower than some of the estimates we heard – as high as £100bn and it is agreed in the spirit of our future relationship.
Under international law the UK owes at most a small fraction of the sums the withdrawal agreement would make us liable to pay. This was confirmed by Dominic Raab as the government’s internal legal advice on the Today programme on 22 November 2018, and accords with the conclusions which I have explained in a 30-page report available at the Lawyers for Britain website.


In fact £39bn is probably an under-estimate of what we will end up paying. The government in yet another foolish capitulation which is contrary to international treaty practice, have agreed in Art.160 to give the ECJ rather than an independent panel the right to rule on the size of the EU’s financial claims. If the transition period is extended, the UK’s financial obligations will automatically increase by tens of billions.

8. It would not let us forge our own trade policy with other parts of the world.
Downing Street: The political declaration is clear that whatever is agreed in the future partnership must recognise the development of an independent UK trade policy beyond this economic partnership. During the IP we will be able to negotiate, sign and ratify free trade agreements with rest of world partners, ready to bring them into force thereafter. Even in a backstop, we could implement any elements that do not affect its functioning — such as those aspects related to services and investment.
My response: As I have already said, the theoretical right to conclude trade agreements will be of no practical use if those trade agreements cannot extend to doing deals on tariffs with prospective trading partners. Further, no serious trading partner will think it worthwhile to conduct negotiations with us with a view to bringing a deal into force as soon as we escape from the transition period and the Protocol if we are unable to give any assurance as to when – or even whether at all – we will be able to escape from the Protocol.

Full article

[stonedyou] 03/12/2018 21:51

Brexit: Government may have broken rules by not publishing legal advice - Speaker


The UK government may have broken Parliamentary rules by not publishing Brexit legal advice, the Commons Speaker has said.

John Bercow said "there is an arguable case" that a contempt of Parliament has been committed.

It means MPs will debate and vote on Tuesday on whether or not to refer the case to the Standards Committee.

This is likely to delay the start of the debate on Theresa May's Brexit deal.

Mr Bercow was responding to a call from senior MPs in six parties - Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP, the Democratic Unionist Party, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party - for contempt proceedings to be launched.




They say the government has gone back on a binding vote to release "any legal advice in full".

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

.

[careful] 03/12/2018 21:31

Great news on the backstop.
we can benefit from the customs union forever.
Well done Theresa, outsmart them.

[stonedyou] 03/12/2018 21:27

Who`s a treacherous DOG!!!!!!





Tory Brexit anger as Attorney General says backstop ‘indefinite’


The government’s top law officer angered Conservative Brexiteers and opposition

MPs from all parties as he presented the government’s legal position on the Irish

border backstop, admitting the UK could be kept under EU trading rules

indefinitely with possibility to leave unilaterally.Attorney General Geoffrey Cox

could face possible suspension from the House of Commons if the Speaker finds him

in contempt of parliament, after opposition parties claimed he had failed to

produce the full legal advice demanded by MPs.Tory Brexiteers shouted “it’s a

trap” as Mr Cox set out the government’s legal stance on the backstop, which will

act as an insurance policy preventing a hard border in Ireland if there is no

trade deal agreed between the UK and EU by the end of the transition period.The

Attorney General admitted that the UK would be “indefinitely committed” to the

backstop if it was activated, and told MPs there was “no unilateral right for

either party to terminate”. Mr Cox told MPs that the Prime Minister’s deal was

a “calculated risk” but insisted: “I do not believe we will be trapped in it

permanently”.However, when asked by SNP MP Joanna Cherry whether there is anything

in international law to prevent the backstop becoming permanent, Mr Cox

replied: “As a matter of international law, no.”


Appealing to dozens of his Conservative colleagues set to vote against the deal,

Mr Cox said: “I make no bones about it - I would have preferred to have seen a

unilateral right of termination in this backstop.”He added: “I’m prepared to lend

my support to this agreement because I do not believe that we’re likely to be

entrapped in it permanently.”





Earlier, the UK Government published its 43-page Legal Position On The Withdrawal

Agreement that confirmed the Irish backstop would continue to apply “unless and

until it is superseded” by a subsequent agreement.It also says the UK faces making

additional payments to Brussels if the Brexit implementation period is

extended.Opposition parties including Theresa May’s DUP allies said the document

and the Attorney General’s statement failed to meet the terms of a vote demanding

publication of the full legal advice and asked Speaker John Bercow to launch

contempt of Parliament proceedings.In the Commons chamber, Mr Cox told MPs to

stop “braying” for the full legal advice be published, and said: “There is nothing

to see here!”




It is time they grew up and got real,” the Attorney General added. “The public

interest is at stake, what part of that proposition is the opposition not capable

of understanding.”




Last night a letter to the Speaker was signed by shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir

Starmer, DUP Westminster leader Nigel Dodds and senior MPs from the SNP, Liberal

Democrats, Plaid Cymru and Green PartyIf Mr Bercow agrees to launch contempt

proceedings, a debate in the Commons could follow with the possibility of MPs

voting on whether to suspend the Attorney General from parliament.Shadow Brexit

Secretary Sir Keir Starmer said: “The Government has failed to publish the

Attorney General’s full and final legal advice to the Cabinet, as ordered by

Parliament.“We have therefore been left with no option but to write to the Speaker

of the House of Commons to ask him to launch proceedings of contempt.”



Ms Cherry, a qualified QC, added: “The binding motion passed by this House on 13

November ordered the production of any legal advice in full, including that

provided by the Attorney General. What he has produced is a legal commentary not

legal advice.“The Attorney General said that he wished he could comply with the

order of the House but he cannot. A theatrical lawyer might say it looks like an

open and shut case of contempt.”

[polar fox] 03/12/2018 20:59

maxk,

You may be interested in this tweet:

Latest @ConHome survey:

1) 67.8 per cent of Party member respondents think MPs should vote against May's EU deal hxxps://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/12/our-survey-almost-seven-in-ten-party-members-say-that-conservative-mps-should-vote-against-mays-deal.html …

2) The proportion wanting May to quit now has hit half for the first time:

unquote

Also, based on survey data from Con Home, the Meaningful Vote is expected to be lost by about 181 votes next Tuesday.

[alphorn] 03/12/2018 20:40

Max - your views please on my post would be appreciated re. next steps.

I have my coffee!

[maxk] 03/12/2018 20:35

G+T Alp, a large one :-)




Opposition parties launch joint contempt proceedings against ministers over Brexit legal advice – Politics live




1h ago
19:32


Geoffrey Cox's statement - Snap verdict

Andrew Sparrow Andrew Sparrow



Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, has achieved something remarkable; he has united all the Commons opposition parties (and the DUP, which is not sure at the moment which side it’s on) who now want to see him face disciplinary action for not publishing his full Brexit legal advice. John Bercow, the speaker, has promised a decision very soon, possibly tonight, and so it is probable that within the next day or so we may get a full-blown Commons debate on the government’s contempt of parliament. We don’t know yet what the motion would say. Normally in these circumstances it would just be a referral to the privileges committee for an inquiry, but given the point made by Labour about the need to resolve this quickly (see 6.56pm), MPs could soon be voting on whether or not to suspend Cox from the Commons.