Europe --- In or Out

[Gemmill 46088]

Not to mention what will happen to the bowler hat and cigar industries when CT's cartoonlike bankers all leave.

[Park Life 71]

You boys be trippin if you think the Tories are going to harm the City. Where the feck do you think a lot of their donations come from? Btw Frankfurt is regulated up the arse and no bankers are in any hurry to move there.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Park Life

[Dr Gloom 22185]

And the less said about the private clubs there, the better

[Gemmill 46088]

You boys be trippin if you think the Tories are going to harm the City. Where the feck do you think a lot of their donations come from? Btw Frankfurt is regulated up the arse and no bankers are in any hurry to move there.

Aye I'm with Parky like. The city and the Big 4 accountancy firms will shape what this looks like. The establishment are not gonna let a little thing like democracy fuck with their easy lives.

[Billy Whitehurst 933]

Aye I'm with Parky like. The city and the Big 4 accountancy firms will shape what this looks like. The establishment are not gonna let a little thing like democracy fuck with their easy lives.

I agree, the Tory party are in the city's pocket to a certain extent.

 

I was just challenging Gordon Gekko Tree's assertion that hard brexit, if it hapenned, would have little impact on the city.

 

I'm not sure why I bothered to be honest.

[Christmas Tree 4851]

I agree, the Tory party are in the city's pocket to a certain extent.

 

I was just challenging Gordon Gekko Tree's assertion that hard brexit, if it hapenned, would have little impact on the city.

 

I'm not sure why I bothered to be honest.

No need at all. I posted a pretty sensible link from a very sensible chap right before your post that covered most of the bases. Edited September 20, 2016 by Christmas Tree

[Alex 35615]

Jolly good fellow

[NJS 4411]

No need at all. I posted a pretty sensible link from a very sensible chap right before your post that covered most of the bases.

A sensible chap whose organisation conspired with the banks to rate utter shit as triple A and massively contribute to the crisis as a result.

[Billy Whitehurst 933]

No need at all. I posted a pretty sensible link from a very sensible chap right before your post that covered most of the bases.

A lot of the points he raises are valid and will indeed result in a lot of front office jobs remaining as the reliance on English law and the inflexibility of employment law in many juristictions (although Hollande has already said that he would be willing to make concessions) will make it difficult to shift really high earners.

 

My point is that, the front office is underpinned by an army of workers, massively outweighing front office staff, whose roles are can be transferred relatively easily. A drop of 25% of these would have a significant impact as I describe above. It doesn't take a significant loss of jobs for this to have a major impact.

 

I don't necessarily agree with his point regarding the Universities. The UK universities are more generalist than, say, the French system which has a lot of business schools and graduates come a lot better prepared than their British counterparts.

[Dr Gloom 22185]

The reality is we won't know what 'Brexit means Brexit' actually means for sure until next year. But it's hard to imagine the Tories striking a deal that sees us lose access to the single market. It'll be absolute chaos if they do. They'll have to make concessions, which won't please the little Englanders who voted us into this predicament, but which will at least help prevent a market meltdown.

[Park Life 71]

We'll take the 7 year block on A7 countries that Blair turned down. That will be it reg immigration. As it's something we could have had anyway there will be no hassle from the Europeeens.

Edited September 20, 2016 by Park Life

[Christmas Tree 4851]

A lot of the points he raises are valid and will indeed result in a lot of front office jobs remaining as the reliance on English law and the inflexibility of employment law in many juristictions (although Hollande has already said that he would be willing to make concessions) will make it difficult to shift really high earners.

 

My point is that, the front office is underpinned by an army of workers, massively outweighing front office staff, whose roles are can be transferred relatively easily. A drop of 25% of these would have a significant impact as I describe above. It doesn't take a significant loss of jobs for this to have a major impact.

 

I don't necessarily agree with his point regarding the Universities. The UK universities are more generalist than, say, the French system which has a lot of business schools and graduates come a lot better prepared than their British counterparts.

But you said all this shifting of back office staff to India was already going on pre an event that nobody thought was going to happen. That's just basic cost cutting that's been going on for years and nothing to do with Brexit.

 

Very little will change in the city either down to the points already referred to, a good Brexit deal or government sweeteners.

[Billy Whitehurst 933]

But you said all this shifting of back office staff to India was already going on pre an event that nobody thought was going to happen. That's just basic cost cutting that's been going on for years and nothing to do with Brexit.

 

Very little will change in the city either down to the points already referred to, a good Brexit deal or government sweeteners.

If you read my post properly, you'll see that I said that these middle/back office jobs can't as easily be transferred to India/Eastern Europe (as the skill sets aren't there) whereas support staff can.

 

These middle/back office jobs could easily be transferable to other Western European countries as the skills/education levels are already there. To enable passporting, banks will have to have a significant presence in the EU so these jobs will likely shift should there be a hard Brexit.

 

Your assertion that all will be rosy in the city in the event of hard Brexit is simply incorrect. I work for one of these institutions, and certain departments are shitting themselves at the very real prospect of this happening. Unsuprisingly, I don't know of a single colleague who voted Brexit. For that matter, I don't have any colleagues who went to Eton, the Old Etonians tend to go and work in the cabinet rather than the city.

[Dr Gloom 22185]

 

 

The scale of disruption that Brexit could cause in the City of London has been revealed by figures showing that 5,500 UK-registered companies rely on “passports” to do business in other European countries.

More than 8,000 financial services firms based in the EU or the European Economic Area rely on single-market passports to do business in the UK, according to numbers from the Financial Conduct Authority released on Tuesday.

There is a growing fear in the City that once UK leaves the EU it will lose its passporting rights, which automatically grant access to other members of the single market in various sectors of the financial services. This allows companies to serve clients across Europe without having to win licences in individual countries.

“The business put at risk could be significant,” said Andrew Tyrie, the MP who chairs the parliamentary Treasury committee, which published the figures it received in a letter from Andrew Bailey, chief executive of the FCA.

“None of the current off-the-shelf arrangements can preserve existing passporting arrangements, while giving the UK the influence and control it needs over financial services regulation as it develops,” said Mr Tyrie.

“No doubt the hard grind of establishing what best protects UK interests is already under way,” he added. “This issue needs to be right at the top of the in-trays of the chancellor, the governor of the Bank of England, and the UK’s lead negotiators.”

 

https://www.ft.com/content/9f0824d8-7f17-11e6-8e50-8ec15fb462f4

[Alex 35615]

Makes me laugh seeing utter chancers like Farage insisting Brexit should be delivered despite lying throughout the campaign about what he thought it should actually mean. Him and Boris and Gove and co should be strung up.

[Meenzer 15737]

#ProjectFear

[Christmas Tree 4851]

Makes me laugh seeing utter chancers like Farage insisting Brexit should be delivered despite lying throughout the campaign about what he thought it should actually mean. Him and Boris and Gove and co should be strung up.

Other than the estimates (£350 mill), I'm not to sure what he's lied about what it could mean. At the end of the day he had no power to deliver anything, only make suggestions.

 

Gove also was a long time subscriber to leaving the EU. Only really Boris who was the Johnny come lately out for political gain.

[Alex 35615]

Implying the deliverance of anything whilst having no power to deliver it is analogous with lying.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

Hanging onto the words of somebody implying the deliverance of anything without the power to deliver it is

[Dr Gloom 22185]

interesting to read martin wolf in the FT today arguing that Brexit lite won't hapen

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3982]

Other than every word which came out of his mouth, I'm not to sure what he's lied about what it could mean. At the end of the day he had no power to deliver anything, only make suggestions.

 

Gove also was a long time subscriber to leaving the EU. Only really Boris who was the Johnny come lately out for political gain.

 

Fyp

[Rayvin 5310]

interesting to read martin wolf in the FT today arguing that Brexit lite won't hapen

 

Why's that? And does he mean we'll get hard Brexit or just no Brexit?

[Christmas Tree 4851]

Why's that? And does he mean we'll get hard Brexit or just no Brexit?

Hard Brexit.

[Dr Gloom 22185]

He says it's going to be too tough to negotiate a soft Brexit and Brexit will mean hard Brexit.

 

By “hard Brexit” I mean a departure not only from the EU but also from the customs union and the single market. The UK should, however, end up with a free-trade arrangement that covers goods and possibly some parts of services and, one hopes, liberal travel arrangements. But the “passporting” of UK-based financial institutions would end and London would cease to be the EU’s unrivalled financial capital. The UK and the EU would also impose controls on their nationals’ ability to work in one another’s economies.

 

Should the UK leave the customs union and enter a free-trade agreement with the EU, rules of origin would apply to exports of goods from the UK to the EU. This standard bureaucratic procedure would be needed to ensure that imports into the UK did not become a route to circumvent the EU’s external tariff. Rules of origin would put UK-based exporters at a disadvantage vis-à-vis those based in the EU. The same would be true for, in particular, banks should the UK leave the single market.

 

Why then is a hard Brexit the most likely outcome? My belief rests on the view that this UK government will not seek to reverse the result of the vote and that it will feel obliged to impose controls on immigration from the EU and to free itself from the bloc’s regulations overseen by its judicial processes.

 

Continued membership of the customs union or the single market, from outside the EU, would deprive the UK of legislative autonomy. The former would mean it could not adopt its own trade policy. The latter would mean accepting all regulations relating to the single market, without possessing any say on them, continuing with free movement of labour, and, probably, paying budget contributions. A country that has rejected membership is not going to accept so humiliating an alternative. It would be a state of dependence far worse than continued EU membership.

 

The only reasonable alternative to hard Brexit would be to stay inside the EU. Parliament is constitutionally entitled to ignore the vote result. The people could also be asked if they wanted to change their minds. But the Conservatives would surely follow Labour into ruin if they tried to reverse the outcome. Their Brexiters would go berserk.

 

Of course, it is logically possible that the EU might alter the terms of engagement. It might, for example, change its mind on the sacred status of free movement. If it had done so, the referendum would surely have had a different result. But this now looks near inconceivable.

 

If “hard Brexit” is, indeed, the destination, the aim must be to get there with the minimum of damage to both sides. Some Brexiters propose that the UK should simply repeal the European Communities Act, rather than go through Article 50. That would violate its treaty obligations. Such egregious treaty breaking would hardly be a helpful precursor to the negotiation of new trade agreements.

He concludes by saying he would like a government that would offer a second referendum but he doesn't think it will happen.

 

Nothing has changed my view that the UK is making a huge economic and strategic blunder. The country is going to be meaner and poorer. David Cameron will go down as one of the worst prime ministers in UK history. But the halfway houses between membership of the EU and hard Brexit are uninhabitable. So what now has to be done is to move to the miserable new dispensation as smoothly as possible.

 

The UK has chosen a largely illusory autonomy over EU membership. That has consequences. It will have to accept this grim reality and move as quickly as it can to whatever the future holds.

[Rayvin 5310]

As I posted in the Politics thread...