Category Archives: Brexit.

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: HERE IS WHAT WE ALL HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD TO ON THE 29TH MARCH 2019.

08 Wednesday Aug 2018

Posted by in Articular 50., Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., England EU Referendum IN or Out., England., Our Common Values., Politics., Populism., Technology, The common good., The Obvious., Trade Agreements., Transition period or Implication period., Unanswered Questions., What needs to change in European Union.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

 

( A FIVE MINUTE READ)

DEAL OR NO DEAL BREXIT HAPPENS AT 11PM UK TIME ON FRIDAY 29 MARCH 2019.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of brexit"

WHAT WILL HAPPEN THEN?

As it has never been done before, I predict chaos, LEADING TO ONE OF THE BIGGEST POLITICAL COCK-UPS EVER WITNESS.

JUST LISTEN TO THE LEADER OF UKIP A WEEK OR SO AGO TELLING THE EU THAT IT WAS CREATED BY THE NAZIS.

I AM ALL IN FAVOR OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH.  LONG MAY HE CONTINUE TO ENHANCE THE PROSPECTS OF A DEAL ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHER IMBECILES WHO SHOULD HAVE THEIR EU PENSIONS CANCELLED.

So it would be more than naive to think that all will be honky dory after the 29th March next year.

JUST THINK how the implication of UK or EU citizens will be handled – recent arrivals. 

Will either have the same rights as those who came before?

What will the result of the house of commons and lords vote be on the deal?

The original referendum to leave is not legally binding and any withdrawal agreements will have to ratified by the UK Parliament.

Then there is the question of Subsidies.  An average of 55% of farm income comes from the EU’s reviled common agriculture policy – known as the CAP – and its subsidies. Losing these will cut swaths through agriculture and the landscape. The amount of its food that Britain grows is currently 60% and falling – in a world with ever more insecure food supplies: we are nine meals from empty supermarket shelves. Farming is small but with food processing makes up 13% of GDP, an industry bigger than cars and aerospace put together.

Then there is the question of visa-free travel.

The current EHIC card will become useless.

AT THE MOMENT THERE IS NO NEW MECHANISM FOR SETTLING DISPUTES

WHAT WILL HAPPEN INSIDE THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS WHICH IS NOT AN EU INSTITUTION.

GET THE TWENTY-SEVEN REMAINING COUNTRIES TO AGREE TO A DEAL NEVER MIND RATIFY IT WHILE THEIR ECONOMIES ARE LOCKED INTO THE EURO, AND RUN MORE AND MORE BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE –  IS PIE IN THE SKY.

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE SOLUTION IF STERLING IS TO STAY FREE – NO DEAL – TRANSITION  YES.

ALL OF THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.

I CLOSE OFF THIS POST WITH THESE THOUGHTS.

THERE IS NO PLAUSIBLE WAY TO GET FROM A NO DEAL TO CANCELLING BREXIT – AS THE EU WOULD HAVE TO AGREE ON WILLINGNESS TO DO SO.

ONE WAY OR THE OTHER NEW UK ELECTIONS WILL FOLLOW ADMID WORSENING MAYHEM AND GOVERNMENTAL PARALYSIS.

THERE WILL NEVER BE A COMMON RULE BOOK AFTER BRITAIN HAS LEFT.

WHY? BECAUSE THE UK WILL HAVE NO PART IN AMENDING ANY RULES.

God only knows what the financial costs will be as the break up will go on for years with all calculations subject to exchange rates.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

Advertisements

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IRELAND SHOULD HELP OUT ITS NEIGHBOUR ENGLAND WITH BREXIT.

26 Thursday Jul 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

 

( A TWO MINUTE READ)

AT THIS STAGE OF BREXIT YOU WOULD WANT TO BE BLINKERED NOT TO REALIZE THAT THE CONSEQUENCES OF A DEAL OR NO DEAL IS GOING TO HAVE AN IRREVERSIBLE IMPACT ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENGLAND AND IRELAND.

For some inexplicable reason after the result of the in our out referendum England pressed the Article 50 clause of the Lisbon treaty, ignoring the millions who vote to remain.

Now after two years of internal political fighting as to what it wants from the Eu in order to vanish from the restraints of one of the biggest marketplaces IN THE WORLD it has produced a negotiation position of cherry picking which is RIGHTLY total ruled out by the EU.

It seems that Direct democracy in the form of the referendum now governs England irrelevant of the outcome with elected representatives branded traitors if they raise the voices of those who vote against leaving.

IRELAND THAT IS LOOKING DOWN THE BARREL OF A GUN ECONOMICALLY AND GOD FORBID A RETURN TO THE TROUBLES IN NORTHERN IRELAND NEEDS TO GIVE THEM A HAND TO COME TO THEIR SENSES.

IRELAND SHOULD REQUEST THE EUROPEAN UNION TO EXTEND THE TIME LIMIT OF ARTICLE 50 FOR A FURTHER TWO YEARS.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of ireland flag"

NEVER MIND THE TRANSITION PERIOD.

BY THE TIME WE GET TO THAT THERE WILL BE LITTLE LEFT TO TRANSITION OTHER THAN LEGAL FEES.

All human comments appreciated

. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS​ HAVE LITTLE TO DO WITH LOOKING AFTER UK CITIZENS.

24 Tuesday Jul 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., England EU Referendum IN or Out., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Post - truth politics., The common good., Trade Agreements., Transition period or Implication period., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

( A THREE MINUTE READ)

The UK has consistently armed many of the most brutal and authoritarian regimes in the world.

WITH IT’S RECENT BREXIT RHETORIC IT WOULD NOW APPEAR THAT IT CAN’T WAIT TO OPT OUT OF THE EU NATIONAL ARMS EXPORT LICENSING CRITERIA. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF THE NEW BREXIT MINISTER"

UK arms manufacturers have exported almost £5bn worth of weapons to countries that are judged to have repressive regimes in the 22 months since the Conservative party won the last election. Out of 49 countries that are classed as “not free” by Freedom House, the independent organization that promotes democracy, 36 have bought British-made weapons under the current government.

Even when Saudi’s massive order book is stripped out, arms exports to repressive regimes have almost doubled since the Tory government was elected: orders to such countries, excluding Saudi, amount to almost £1.2bn, compared with £680m in the 22 months before the election.

Following the referendum on leaving the European Union, the Defence & Security Organisation, the government body that promotes arms manufacturers to overseas buyers, was moved from UK Trade & Investment to the Department for International Trade.

SETTING THE ARMS TRADE ASIDE THE UK SINCE JOINING THE EUROPEAN UNION (WHETHER IT HAS BEEN A NET CONTRIBUTOR OR NOT)  HAS NEVER ENGAGED WITH THE OVERRIDING ASPIRATION OF THE EU – PEACE.

With just three months to go to the October deadline, we are now witnessing the new UK Brexit chief Dominic Raab threating to renege on paying the Uk legal exit payments.

TO WALK AWAY FROM THE BREXIT DIVORCE WILL BRAKE INTERNATIONAL LAW.

THE AMOUNT OF £39 BILLION IS NOT A GRATUITY PAYMENT IT IS A LEGAL LIABILITY.

It represents liabilities to contribute towards pensions to public servants, agreed contributions to joint research and development programmes. It represents binding liabilities that in total are estimated to be £87bn. The EU has agreed to refund $48 bn,  this includes the refund of the UK’s share of the ECB.

Saying that the UK can walk away from its commitments is once more deceiving the people of England.

Do so and there will definitely be NO DEAL ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD other than with the 36 who have bought British-made weapons.

It will then be time to change the national anthem from God save the Queen to God Save The People.

There will be no transition period.

Trade with the EU will be under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. (Immediate customs and regulatory checks, tariffs.)

Sterling will fall- Inflation- unemployment- disruption at ports and airports- prices of consumer good to rise.

Mr Raab claims that the EU,s economy will be worse off.

Get real the EU27 economy is ten to eleven time the size of the UK’s.

With a no deal, the peoples legal status as citizens on both sides will become illegal immigrants as any rights agreed do not apply.

You can rest assured that nobody will ever try to leave the EU in the near future.

Dominic Raab name is derived from an Old-German personal name, which meant “raven.”

PERHAPS HE IS WELL NAMED TO REPRESENT A RAVEN MAD UK that thinks that the EU owes them a deal, on non – negotiated terms to leave. 

 All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE CALLS ON IRELAND AS A NATION TO CALL ON ITS IRISH UK RESIDENTS TO SUPPORT STAYING IN THE EUROPEAN UNION.

28 Thursday Jun 2018

Posted by in 2018: The Year of Disconnection., Articular 50., Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., Democracy, England EU Referendum IN or Out., England., European Commission., European Union., Modern Day Democracy., Politics., Populism., Post - truth politics., The Irish/ Northern Ireland border., The Obvious., Trade Agreements., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

 

( A five-minute read)

It is estimated that as many as six million people living in the UK have at least one Irish grandparent (around 10% of the UK population.)

BREXIT JUST LIKE THE FAMINE ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO WILL BE A WATERSHED IN THE HISTORY OF IRELAND.

Ireland is once more faced with the indifference of the English who when voting to leave the European Union had no consideration for its closes and biggest trading partner.

It would be fair to say like the Famine that Ireland will be once more the sacrificial lamb of the British political ambitions.

There are few democratic countries (where two out of its regions voted to stay and when combined with the two leave regions the overall majority was only a 3.8% majority.)  that would act on a nonlegal binding referendum which was conducted against a background of lies.

One would think that a majority of at least 5% ON SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE WOULD BE A REASONABLE REQUIREMENT.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of brexit"

If England looked after its people first rather than the glory of a past empire Brexit probably would have never happened. It was the dysfunctional economy of Britain that fueling the leave vote, not immigration.

On top of all of this when you see how different generations voted in the Brexit you realize that the relationship between different age groups in England is broken.

ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IT IS NOW HELL BENT ON DELIVERING THE WORST OF BOTH WORLD; IN OUR OUT. Big business versus the Nigel Farage’s of this world with a handful of Conservatives such as Micheal Gove, Boris Johnson a few Labour MPs.

At the moment dogs cats and ferrets can travel between the UK AND THE EU. Maybe after all of this, all UK citizens will be required to be micro-chipped against Brexit rabies.

SO WE ARE LEFT WITH THE REALITY THAT THE POST BREXIT TRADE DEAL IS GOING TO BE THE MOST COMPLEX PART OF ANY NEGOTIATED DEAL AS IT HAS TO BE UNANIMOUS APPROVED BY 30 NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS SOME OF WHICH WILL NO DOUBT HOLD THEIR OWN REFERENDUMS.

ALL OF WHICH POINTS TO NO DEAL, AND YEARS OF BATTLING IT OUT IN COURTS PROCEEDINGS WITH A MASSIVE DIVORCE BILL TO BOTH SIDES.

SO THE QUESTION IS; WILL THERE BE ANOTHER UK REFERENDUM.

Not likely.

To rejoin would mean starting from scratch, with no rebates, the lost of sterling with and all current member agreeing to the UK rejoining.

As for clout outside the EU.

A UK in disarray will have a much influence on the world stage as the DUP is willing to give it at a price.

Forming its own Trade area is an artificial intelligence algorithm yet to be invented.

However, there is a way out of all of this.

The UK abdicates its powers to NORTHERN IRELAND.

ITS CITIZENS BORN AND TO BE BORN HAVE THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO CARRY BOTH UK PASSPORTS AND IRISH – THUS FUTURE ENGLISH GENERATIONS CAN REMAIN IN THE THE EU.

ALL THEY  WILL HAVE TO REMEMBER IS TO CARRY YOUR IRISH PASSPORT WHEN YOU ARE JOINING THE EU CITIZENS – ONLY QUEUE AT THE AIRPORT.

IT WOULD AVOID A HUGE LOSS OF FACE ON ALL SIDES.

One final observation;

The English don’t appear to understand that the European Union is governed by rules for a reason.

That reason is simple to understand.

The European Union is made up of countries that don’t quite trust each other.  They need rules to function, with an independent court to settle any problems.

Whoever thought that Northern Ireland would unite not just Ireland but the whole of the UK.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "picture of brexit"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY ASK’S : WHERE ARE WE WITH BREXIT.

09 Saturday Jun 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

 

( A three-minute read)

The March 29, 2019 deadline looms large.

A lot could still go wrong.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "picture of brexit"

Different member states have different priorities regarding future relations, which could give London a degree of leverage over the proceedings, while internal divisions are fragmenting May’s cabinet weaken the UK’s position for phase two of Brexit negotiations. Notably, the disagreements have thus far resulted in a lack of detailed proposals that may allow the EU to take the initiative, ensuring outcomes more favorable for Brussels.

The issue of where the UK will and will not uphold EU regulation standards has proved a persistent issue throughout the negotiations.

The UK wants to maintain EU regulations in some sectors, such as the financial passport while diverging from others, namely immigration.

The EU rejects such cherry-picking, maintaining an all-or-nothing approach to regulations.

Regarding the transition period, the UK wants a transition period without a pre-determined end-date, whereas the EU wants to end the transition by December 2020, as the new EU Budget cycle will kick in 2021.

The role of the European Court of Justice and the EU body of laws from which the UK wants exemption during any transition period (and in some cases, beyond) also remains an important source of disagreement.

Although negotiators reached an agreement on Northern Ireland’s border in phase one of the negotiations, it is by no means a closed chapter. The agreement implied the UK would propose a solution that avoids a “hard border,” but has yet to deliver one. Thus, the draft agreement released by the EU is not acceptable to the UK because it suggests a common regulatory area between Ireland and Northern Ireland if no other solution is found.

This means that for all practical purposes, Northern Ireland would remain part of the EU while creating a border on the Irish Sea.

Here is what will happen:

The UK continuing failure to come up with proposals will damage its economy further resulting in a general election. The election will in effect be a second referendum.

The resulting vacuum will affect the whole of the European Union.

Real Negotiations will be put on hold while some sort of agreement on mutual interest emerges. While £37 billion leaving bill will be jacked up.

The result of the elections will put the Uk in no position to walk away from the negotiating table, or even to threaten to do so if it wants the United Kingdom not to break asunder.

Britain will fall into a Brexit which will not deliver the benefits that it could or should to either side.

An EU disintegration will make the 2008 financial crisis look like a walk in the park.

The worst is to come.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHAT DO HEATHROW- GATWICK- THAMES WATER- BLACK CABS, AND 73-89-355-361 OXFORD STREET HAVE IN COMMON.

30 Wednesday May 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

 

( A Fifteen-minute read)

THEY ARE ALL OWNED BY SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUNDS.

While Dads Army negotiates the UK way out of the EU, 97 sovereign investors — state pension funds, central banks, and government ministries are collectively holding $12tn of  British assets.

The invisible hand of capitalism has the UK by the short and hairs.

We are a stone throw away from a crucial point in the current Brexit negotiation, should those who own Britain be nervous.

Given the uncertainty over taxes on imports and market access, when you wake up one morning and your investment is worth 20 percent less than the previous day, that’s going to have an impact on investors who are starting to question the future of Britain as an ‘investment hub’ in Europe.

The gap between the rhetoric of the economic recovery and Brexit negotiations is beginning to make the young of Britain to reject the status quo.

We live in an era where heated rhetorical battles are fought over terms that have lost clear meaning.

It is this morass rhetorical debate that defines what is wrong not just with Brexit but what is wrong with capitalism and socialism.

There is no need for a referendum or survey to tell you the truth. You don’t need jargon or ideology for a case against the status quo.

Surely it’s time for England to focus its imagination on not making the past more beautiful than it ever was, rather than imagining a better future by focusing on what is truly critical.

The creation of real stakeholders in the country. Not just the rich but among it’s poor.

The big misconception of the EU is that it has to do with money.

All knowledge centers must be connected together to imagine a world in new and exciting ways.

Walling yourselves in for personal security and economic security will be a disaster in waiting.

Before Brexit barely a day went by without a major multi-billion dollar fund from one petro-state or another making some splashy acquisition.

You could say that London financial center for all attentive purposes turned a blind eye to – from  – why – where or how the money was acquired.

Chinese: firms bought up British assets worth $11.3bn (£9bn) last year and have spent nearly $50bn in the last decade on acquisitions into the country.

Norway:  It bought 73-89 Oxford Street — a development currently under construction — for £276.5 million and spent a further £124 million buying 355-361 Oxford Street.

The Norwegian fund — which is worth roughly £720 billion — already had a significant footprint in London, and owns a 150-year lease on roughly 25% of Regent Street, another of London’s most recognizable shopping streets.

The fund also owns parts of New Bond Street, properties on Savile Row, the street famous across the world for its tailors.

Outside London, it owns half of Sheffield’s Meadowhall shopping center.

As well as spending £400 million in London, the Norwegian fund bought a €1 billion (£850 million) office development in Paris and spent around $665 million (£534 million) on office spaces across New York, Washington DC, and San Francisco. It also purchased two further UK properties for a combined £5.7 million, with one retail unit, and one described as being used for “logistics.”

It also has 70 percent stake in five properties in Tokyo, Japan.

Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund Public Investment Fund, known as PIF, is turning the PIF into a global giant by giving it ownership of state-owned oil company Saudi Aramco, which is preparing for what could be the world’s biggest IPO.

The PIF is also behind several large real estate developments in the kingdom, including a new city called Neom that will be built on the Red Sea Coast, an entertainment city on the edge of Riyadh and another tourism project on the Red Sea.

The fund is also an investor in some of the kingdom’s largest firms, including Saudi Telecom Co., Saudi Arabian Mining Co., and National Commercial Bank. It also took a 16.32 percent stake in Almarai Co., the country’s biggest dairy producer, last year as the government supports national companies and develops them into regional and global leaders.

The UK will need inward investment, particularly when it leaves the EU. The main problem is that these funds are lack transparency.

Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) remain, significant investors, with the assets of the top 10 now amounting to c.$5.5trn.

At the macroeconomic level, the rise of SWFs illustrates the seriousness of current-account imbalances in the global economy that have their origin in the managed exchange rates operated by some of the countries in surplus.

The accumulation of reserves for investment by SWFs should not become an end in itself. 

A more specific concern raised by SWF investment in equities relates to the opaque way in which some SWFs function and their possible use as an instrument to gain strategic control. This concern sets them apart from other types of investment funds. More specifically, there is unease that – whatever the original motivation – SWF investment in certain sectors could be used for ends other than for maximizing return.

For example, investment targets may reflect a desire to obtain technology and expertise to benefit national strategic interests, rather than being driven by normal commercial interests in expansion to new products and markets.

By the same token, holdings could influence decisions by companies operating in areas of strategic interest or governing distribution channels of interest to the sponsor countries.

More generally, business and investment decisions could be influenced by the political interest of the SWFs owners.

Although in most cases, SWFs are portfolio investors and have avoided taking controlling stakes or seeking a formal role in decision-making in companies, concerns have been raised about the possibility of SWFs seeking to acquire controlling stakes in companies.

National security considerations have been acknowledged by some SWFs owners, who request clarity and certainty about investments that can be made and which areas might be “off-limits” to SWFs.

Since SWFs are managed independently from a country’s foreign exchange reserves, they are excluded from transparency mechanisms.

While they have existed for more than fifty years, over the past decade they have rapidly expanded to become a source of investment of systemic importance. They can offer a source of investment and market liquidity at a time of real pressure. Yet, as state-owned investment vehicles, some can raise questions about the risk that these investments may interfere with the normal functioning of market economies.

The longer-term impact of Brexit cannot yet be seen but you may rest assured that it will have its pro and cons when it comes to SWF who sole purpose is to generate income.

However, they are only part of the mix when it comes to who owns what in the UK there is another Sovereign wealth fund called the crown.  

The monarchy is still one of Britain’s most valuable institutions, with a value of £57 billion to the UK.

The 89-year-old’s estimated personal fortune, largely inherited from her family, is about US$425 million ($673 million), according to an analysis by the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. That’s a mere 3 percent of the wealth of the richest Briton, Gerald Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster.

THIS IS SOME OF WHAT IT OWNS.

The Crown Jewels 140 ceremonial objects boasting a spectacular 23,578 precious gemstones

The Queen privately owns an 18,433-hectare estate called the Duchy of Lancaster.

It is administered separately from the Crown Estate. Part of that is the Savoy Estate, a stretch of prime real estate in central London which houses the iconic Savoy Hotel.

Sandringham House, an 8,000-hectare estate in Norfolk.

Balmoral Castle, 20,000-hectare Scottish estate.

The Duchy of Lancaster also holds around a dozen historic properties, including Lancaster Castle and Pickering Castle in Yorkshire.

The Duchy delivers an annual income of around £18 million ($25.5 million), which is paid directly to the ruling monarch.

Regent Street & St James’s Market, London: The Crown Estate owns the entirety of Regent Street in London, one of the UK’s best-known shopping streets. It also owns prime retail property across the UK in locations including Oxford, Exeter, Nottingham, Newcastle, Harlow, and Swansea.

The Crown Estate owns around 106,000 hectares of farmland across the UK.

The Crown owns the rights to salmon fishing and gold mining in Scotland.

Windsor Castle & Great Park, Berkshire: The 6,400-hectare Windsor estate in Berkshire is part of the Crown Estate’s portfolio.

The Crown Estate holds around 11,000 hectares of forestry in areas including Berkshire, Somerset, and the Cairngorms in Scotland.

The Crown Estate owns a £1.1 billion offshore energy empire which includes 30 wind farms.

The Crown Estate announced in June last year that it returned a record £328.8 million ($464 million) to the Treasury in 2016 as the value of the overall estate rose to an astonishing £13.1 billion ($18.5 billion).

England might do well to pay attention to Micheal Collins words.

I quote.

” The object in building up the country economically must not be lost sight of. The object is not to be able to boast of enormous wealth or of a great volume of trade for their own sake. It is not to show a great national balance sheet, nor to point to people producing wealth with the self- obliteration of a hive of bees. The real riches of the Irish nation will be the men and woman of the Irish Nation the extent to which they are rich in body and mind and character.”

Or perhaps both the EU and England should take a feather out of the way E Bay Works.

You are only as good as your product and feedback. E Bay did not just create an online market it created a self-governing community.

Apple has shifted its tax liability in the UK to Ireland.

Amazon dominates retail in the UK.

Google dominates the browser market

There are currently no less than 97,000 properties owned by foreign firms in England and Wales.

The NHS is increasingly being infiltrated by American health providers.

The major public utilities – energy, railways, and water – are all to a significant degree foreign-owned

Nuclear power stations are owned and managed by the French company EDF (something the French would never allow in their own country) and that Hinckley Point C is a joint French/Chinese project.

If there anything to be learned from the above it is that we have a clash of mindsets: one pragmatic, the other dogmatic.

Neither understands the other.

Those incompatibilities are being played out today in front of our very eyes in the phony war over the negotiation. The EU is still of the belief that it runs the negotiation. It will not show flexibility because that’s not how it works. The UK, on the other hand, will not do as it’s told. That’s not how the UK works.

It will not comply with the EU’s negotiation strategy of meekly signing up to a large financial settlement before being fobbed off with a lousy trade deal. The UK would rather be damaged than humiliated by the EU.

The EU believes it will win because it refuses to believe the UK will walk. It will sign whatever is put in front of it. But this is to make the exact mistake that it has always made; it’s a misjudgment of how UK politics work.

The clearest indictment of the status quo is the status quo itself.

The Basic necessities such as food shelter are what’s needed, not Aircraft carriers.

Britain has suffered from decades of under-investment in public infrastructure.

Britain has deep structural problems. Manufacturing has been hollowed out. The gap between the richest and poorest parts of the UK is wider than in any other major EU country.

An excessive reliance on consumer spending focused on the bigger picture:

The only choice in a subsequent referendum that would be acceptable to many citizens is that between what the UK and EU actually agree in the withdrawal agreement and no deal whatsoever.

There is today, a very real risk of a no-deal outcome. This would be a traumatic and disruptive exit and bad for both sides. We have to hope this doesn’t happen.

Each side truly believes the other is deluded.

We cannot retreat from the world. We have to make sure that we get the best of our imaginations – while not letting our imaginations get the best of us.

Another vote is inevitable.

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. BORDER OR NO BORDER BETWEEN NORTHERN IRELAND AND IRELAND WHAT IS THE TRUTH?

29 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

 

( A fifteen-minute read)

Claims that there will or won’t be border controls on the island of Ireland are predictions, not facts, at this stage but Brexit means that the UK’s only land border will also be an external border from the EU’s point of view.A sign close to the Letterkenny - Strabane border in the Irish Republic.

That matters for two main reasons.

One is immigration and the other is the trade in goods, neither of which have many controls on them within the EU.

Any hard border would have massive economic, political and security implications.

Outside the EU’s Customs Union, it will be necessary to impose customs checks on the movement of goods across the border.  Because if there is no EU-UK agreement on free trade in goods, there will be some British taxes on imports from Ireland, and vice versa.

There is talk of a deal, that would be confined to goods originating in the UK or the EU.

This is the pattern for the EU’s free trade agreements with countries such as Norway and Canada. Without these ‘rules of origin’, and a way of enforcing them, goods made in a country like China could be imported through Ireland, avoiding UK import taxes.

One way or the other with or without a trade deal, there is still a need for some way of checking on the goods being taken across the border, either to work out the taxes due on them or to verify that they don’t need to be paid.

It’s time to stop the bull shit > so let’s try and sort out the realities from the fantasies.

For there to be no border there will have to have “regulatory alignment” with the rest of Ireland in order to keep the border free of controls. This can only be achieved if Northern Ireland remains in the EU either by uniting with Ireland or breaking away from the UK.

If not Brexit will restore the old border created by the partition of Ireland?

Should arrangements be permanent or temporary? How hard or soft should the border be: electronic, policed or militarised?

The chances of either of these happing are zero.

There was a very strong ethnonational basis to voting in the Referendum.

It seems 85% of Catholics voted Remain, compared to only 40% of Protestants.

I would say that both less-educated Protestants/unionists and Catholics who voted for the UK to leave the EU but undoubtedly did not imagine they were voting for Northern Ireland to become distinct from the rest of the UK?

I would also say that any border no matter what form it takes will undermine the Catholic/nationalist sense of connection with the rest of Ireland?

So alongside the logistical questions – about the technology needed to manage such a porous border – lie these equally important identity issues.

As for Migration:

World War II aside, there has never been controls on migration between the UK and Ireland. People can use the open border to travel illegally from Ireland to Northern Ireland and on to the rest of the UK, and likewise in the other direction.

This is currently addressed by “Operation Gull”, in which immigration officers check passengers on routes between Northern Ireland and the island of Great Britain. This is designed to compensate for the lack of checks on unauthorized travel across the north/south border. Claiming this won’t change after Brexit assumes that these measures will still be enough to police the open border which is totally impossible.

If the UK wants to put restrictions on EU immigration or short visits, that will generate more illegal cross-border movement. At the moment, Operation Gull only has to catch unauthorized migrants from non-EU countries.

There’s never been a situation where Ireland accepted free movement of people and the UK didn’t.

No matter how you address the border Brexit has serious consequences for political stability and has placed the constitutional question, which has largely been parked over the past 20 years, back on the table.

Politically, Northern Ireland can only work on the basis of sharing and interdependence.

The whole ethos of the Good Friday agreement was about breaking down barriers and allowing people to lead their lives on a north-south and east-west access. Yet Brexit entails new divisions and borders.

An outcome in which Northern Ireland continued to participate in the single market would allow Northern Ireland to fully engage in both the EU single market and the UK’s internal market. This can only be achieved through Northern Ireland remaining in line with EU law and regulations. Operating to these higher standards should not compromise simultaneous engagement with the rules of the market in Great Britain.

In this sense, Northern Ireland could be a bridge.

Indeed, a satisfactory compromise around this type of approach could bring much needed political stability and cohesion to Northern Ireland.

Unfortunately, although Northern Ireland overall voted was to remain within the EU Mrs. May bribed the DUP for support to prop-up her minority Tory Government.

In the end, the British Government will endeavor to fudge the Northern Ireland’s current constitutional position by sacrifice the Good Friday agreement in exchange for their whole vision of a glorious post-Brexit future based on Britain’s ability to do great trade deals and be a trusted partner on the world stage.

Yet to get there they now have to start by tearing up two of the most important international deals Britain has signed in its recent history, both of them legally binding.

All human comments appreciated. All Like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WHAT EVER ABOUT EU SECURITY THERE CAN NEVER BE A EU ARMY.

19 Monday Feb 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., European Union., Unanswered Questions., What needs to change in European Union.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

( A seven-minute read)

It appears that Theresa May has little or no understanding of the mean of the word Union or for that matter Nato Motto, “animus in consulendo liber”

(A satisfactory translation of the phrase has not been found, although a French version“l’esprit libre dans la consultation” comes close. Renderings in English have ranged from the cryptic “in discussion a free mind” to the more complex “man’s mind ranges unrestrained in counsel.”)

It is complete hogwash to be saying England wants to leave the EU’s common foreign and security policy as early as next year but would show flexibility around the UK’s red lines to secure a new security treaty. Dropping out of the single market and refusing to adhere to judgments of the European court of justice (ECJ) means the country would no longer be able to participate in joint institutions such as Europol, EU police databases or EU military missions.

So would someone please explain to me what she means when she says ” participated in EU agencies while also having its “sovereign legal order.”

If you are no longer in Europol and you have ditched the EU’s common foreign and security policy how can you “respect the role of the European court of justice”

On the other hand it seems to me that all the talk about a European Army/Security and its joint headquarters is another attempt to set up a new bureaucratic structure in order that European officials can continue to exist in comfort, producing paperwork and public declarations, just as they do in the EU and the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly (PACE).

Many Europeans have argued that the members of the European Union can exert greater influence in the world if they act together rather than separately; and that following the decline of Europe’s major powers, individual states’ power can collectively create a more powerful and credible European voice on the world stage.

The EU rarely manages to speak with one voice in any meaningful way.

There may well be a massive chasm between Europe, England, and US in terms of military capability but the fight against militants needs not more troops, but extensive and professional law enforcement agencies, a wide network of agents and other anti-terrorist structures.

They cannot be an army with rockets, tanks, bombers, and fighters – you do not fight against terrorists with heavy military equipment.

Having a joint court to arbitrate between states is a pragmatic solution to security cooperation.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF THE EU ARMY"Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF THE EU ARMY"

One way or the other, Europe cannot afford two parallel armies for several reasons. Firstly, even now, a number of states are in no hurry to allocate 2 percent of their GDP to NATO’s overall defense budget, which relies mainly on Washington paying 75 percent of the total. Also, there are not enough human resources for the new army.

Furthermore, in an army, which is based on a unity of command and unquestioning obedience to the commander or boss, there cannot be any independent structures in principle. Otherwise, it is not an army, but a bad collective farm of bewildered soldiers receiving orders in twenty different languages.

So would someone tell me on what principle an integrated European army should be created?

In 2000, the EU announced proposals for an army of 100,000 (60,000 of whom could be deployed at 60 days’ notice for up to a year at a time). Britain’s Conservative Party commented at the time that this would effectively destroy NATO. Either troops already committed to NATO will be counted twice, or, in the worst case scenario, troops will be withdrawn from existing NATO missions.

But if a European army is created all the same, how will Russia react?

The Russians will work with it as they do with NATO. Let us just hope that the relationship will start with a clean slate and become a friendly one.

Sovereignty, however, cannot be traded for influence.

The ability to project power, whether regionally or globally, depends on several factors, including leadership, credibility, military capability, popular support, and dependable allies. The EU lacks all of these qualities.

The EU has no standing army. Instead, under its common security and defense policy (CSDP), it relies on ad hoc forces contributed by EU countries for:

Joint disarmament operations
Humanitarian & rescue tasks
Military advice & assistance
Conflict prevention & peacekeeping
Crisis management, e.g. peacemaking & post-conflict stabilization.

Since the Maastricht Treaty of 1991, the European Union has sought to forge a Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) precisely to take the lead in times of global crises. Since January 2007, the EU has been able to carry out rapid-response operations with 2 concurrent single-battle groups, each comprising 1500 soldiers.

The EU failed to comprehend the sheer complexity of the problems of an EU Army because of its own institutional and military limitations, and the very different historical perspectives and poli­cies of its 12 constituent members.

For example, Austria, Ireland, Finland, Sweden, and Malta have chosen to pursue neutrality. It is highly improbable that these countries which don’t even belong to NATO will enroll their citizens in a European military alliance.

Article 42 of the Lisbon Treaty clear STATES  that any further co-operation in the area of defense should be consistent with Nato commitments.

Even though terrorism is a serious issue, centralizing security and defense policies on the European level isn’t a useful way of fighting such a diffused and complex threat. If a Foreign policy is an attribute of statehood that must remain at the nation-state level if it is to be meaningful or effective.

Is it not pathetic to witness Mrs. May linking an economic deal to crime-fighting measures and to the sharing of intelligence.

It’s like a naughty school child sharing a secret for a smartie.

Without group security goals, building a common defense policy is neither realistic nor useful.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF THE EU ARMY"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

THE BEADY ASKS: HAS ENGLAND SOLD OFF ALL OF IT’S INHERITED SILVERWARE AND IS NOW SET FOR BANKRUPTCY 

18 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

( A three minute read)

Brexit negotiations are about to restart and we just witness the collapse of one of the UK biggest private companies.

Although few people yet realize it, the UK is bankrupt:Notes and coins.

The Government cannot pay its debts nor will it be able to pay for its departure from the EU unless it get an extended transition period, even then it will be on HP terms.

Unfortunately, the Government’s official debt is not the real problem:

The Government’s ‘official’ debt is only a small percentage of its true debt exposure. The official debt is merely the tip of a very large hidden iceberg.

The Government’s true debt is the present value of all the commitments it has entered into, on the expectation that these commitments will be paid for by future taxpayers.

One recent estimate suggested that a UK citizen born in 2011 will inherit, on birth, a debt of perhaps £200,000, and it could easily be much more.

It is simply inconceivable that debts on this scale will be paid off in full.

Nor will they be.

These were not debts that youngsters freely took on, but obligations incurred on their behalf in many cases before they were even born.

The moral question of course is:

At what point does the debt become so large that future children will be born into a new form of slavery, entering the world shackled by the debts of their forbears?

The whole political system is creating a huge intergenerational Ponzi scheme, passing the buck from one generation to the next, until the whole rotten system inevitably collapses under its accumulated weight.

With the collapse of Carillion the government is losing all control of its finances and will once again end up printing money to pay off its debts, so leading to hyperinflation and economic collapse.

the actions are both immoral and reckless with crippling liabilities on top of the national debt, two-thirds of which is made up of “unsustainable” public sector retirement monies.

Overall, the real cost of debt to every man, woman and child in the UK is £53,822 each or over a £100,00 if you are graduating University student.

Since the global financial crisis erupted in 2007. The Bank Of England  has pumped £445bn electronic money into the economy, by what is called quantitative easing programme

 Public sector pensions are a ticking debt bomb with around £1.3trillion needed to cover 93 per cent of the benefits that are currently unfunded.

Britain ‘set for BANKRUPTCY amid £1.85 trillion of hidden debt’

Future generations will inherit a bankrupt country, with two new worthless aircraft carriers, an unusable nuclear deterrent, a high-speed rail system going nowhere, a health service in tatters, a broken up UK, a State funereal that going to cost millions, a pound that worth toilet paper, etc

Make no mistake about it: The country is bankrupt.

Benefits across the board will be cut, massively: the government will renege big-time on many of its commitments, breaking its health, pensions and other promises on a huge scale.

The social and economic consequences don’t bear thinking about.

The cost of Brexit by now should be apparent with a loss of £350m a week to the UK economy.

If you asked me Brexit is far from inevitable.

The collective failure of the English to understand that in a world driven by technology there is no such thing as Sovereign.

The whole fabric of England is at the moment jeopardize.

There are still fifteen months until Britain departs.

I am convinced that the British people provided they are provided with a credible and ambitious social plan that recognizes that the balance of advantages lies in continued EU Membership.

Through humility and what is called cop on.  A new settlement addressing Britain’s inequalities and the EU need to reform can be achieved. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of brexit"

I can hear the outs saying look at Greece.

The Greek government, which faces more debt repayment deadlines this summer, said it was hoping for a “positive conclusion” to the protracted review of its bailout programme. It has lost more than 25% of its GDP – the biggest downturn to be experienced by an advanced western economy in peacetime – since its financial collapse seven years ago.

So England can rest assured that Brexit will have ‘Grexit’ for company. A debt payment of €7 billion is due in July.

Or Greece could just default out of the euro zone.

Stranger things have happened: Before the term “Brexit” was invented, “Grexit” was the far better-known word — and the more plausible scenario.

All Human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IT HAS ALREADY STARTED- BREXIT BULL SHIT. .

11 Monday Dec 2017

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

 

( Three minute read)

We said that. We did not say that:  If you do that. If you don’t do that: Alignment, no Alignment: Agreed not Agreed: Explicable not Explicable: Phase one Phase two: This amount that amount, on the table off the table:  Deal or no Deal:  In our Out:  sets out the terms of the divorce and paves the way for Phase 2 of negotiations on future relations between London and the Twenty-Seven.

Anyone with an ounce of sawdust between their ears knows all of the above is total bollix. 

Just look at some of the blonker’s reactions.

“Theresa May won,” said Michael Gove, pro-Brexit environment minister who is eyeing his estate.

Philip Hammond, hailed the “boost for the British economy” that represents a text that lifts some uncertainties.

Nigel Farage, “the move to the second phase of humiliation” 

The only comment that might come true if the EU block his pension or at least have it payed out of the settlement. 

It time for some hard facts:

The ambiguity of Friday’s agreement on Ireland alone illustrates the difficulties that lie ahead.

Or

Spain that argues that any agreement would require its blessing, because the area is not part of the UK, as is the case with Northern Ireland, but a colony with a disputed status. It is likely to wield a veto over any Brexit deal for Gibraltar after the EU-27 backed Madrid in its draft negotiating guidelines for forthcoming divorce talks between the UK and the bloc.

Both are a poisonous topic for the upcoming negotiations.

Not only has Brexit become a subject of confrontation between the two communities of Northern Ireland, but the insoluble Irish equation sums up the central dilemma, that of the choice between a “hard Brexit” and an agreement maintaining the maximum of links with the EU.

It’s generally agreed that the “divorce deal,” setting out the arrangements for Britain’s departure from the EU, can be sealed by Brussels and London.

But Britain’s new relationship with the bloc is a different matter.

Under Article 50 an exit deal requires a qualified majority (72% of members states) to pass, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, whereas a comprehensive new partnership deal (or “mixed agreement”) requires unanimous assent in the Council and ratification by national or subnational parliaments.

If the deal “is being ‘loaded up’ with competencies of the member states, this would turn it into a mixed agreement [affecting both EU and national legislation], which would require unanimity in the European Council and the ratification of all member states for it to be sealed. Even a transitional deal could affect national legislation.

Therefore, any change of government or head of state near the deadlines for talks or ratification will introduce uncertainty into the process. 

There are another 12 elections scheduled across the 27 member states during the two-year negotiation period.

All countries work to slightly different time frames, but the systems of proportional representation and coalition politics in most EU states often result in extended periods following elections where there is no official government; the record being 541 days following the 2010 Belgian general election. For example, in 2013 it took 86 days to form a coalition government in Germany.

Will there be new faces?

If the national parliaments of the 27 countries remaining in the EU — and perhaps also some regional parliaments — are all to get a say, it could make the passage of the Brexit deal impossible. However the European Union’s 27 remaining national parliaments are unlikely to have the power of veto over a future Brexit trade deal with Britain.

One way or the other the best, the cheapest and the least complicated deal would be a no deal.

Transitional trade agreements are politically highly explosive.

Do not anticipate the perfect unity of Twenty Seven.  

England wants a level playing field so as to be able to do trade deals outside the EU.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the wto"

Blinded by their refusal to see the Europe as a project policy beyond the single market,

Let them do so .

However under WTO the rules are simple. It requires every country to reduce their tariffs and subsidies to the same level, but in reality these cuts are applied selectively in favor of rich countries.

There can’t be have your cake and eat it.

Al human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.