Sour Grapes All Round!

[Jack Knave]

I can assure you Brownie that if you aren't waiting long now - you will be very shortly, unless something extraordinary is done about the funding of the NHS.

Thinks - like maybe a mythical figure of £350 million a week!

Seriously, 90% of Trusts including the one I work in are really, really struggling with debts that keep mounting due to having to make year-on-year efficiency savings - or as I like to think of them in my quaint, old fashioned way - cuts.

The public and staff will suffer, unless there are dramatic changes to the funding structure.

Not because of PFI payments?

[Jack Knave]

Cameron's problem was that he was fighting by Marquess of Queensberry rules when a baseball bat would have been more appropriate.

No he was not. He used project fear like the rest of them. He has also been playing dirty for years, lying through his teeth like the rest of them.

[Jack Knave]

Dear Bashers,

If I remember correctly, for all her failings, Maggie would never have let the likes of Farage or the EU get the better of her.

Gonnagle.

No, her own party!!!

[Jack Knave]

Actually the 52% of the voters who voted for Brexit are the ones at fault. The lies of the Brexit campaign were adequately pointed out but they decided to vote for yesterday anyway for various spurious reasons.

The fault lay with the EU and politics as usual. They voted for the future not the past.

[L.A.]

No he was not. He used project fear like the rest of them. He has also been playing dirty for years, lying through his teeth like the rest of them.

I always thought that 'Project fear' was a bit of an underestimate.  The effects of losing the single market would be cataclysmic for this country. As I pointed out to B.A. we are rather in the position of a (rather naive) person falling of a cliff - everything seems fine so far . . . 

The rocks at the bottom of the cliff are just starting to appear.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/nissan-hard-brexit-compensation-new-uk-investment-tariffs
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/jaguar-land-rover-brexit-ralf-speth-eu-british-cars
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/12/uk-economy-near-standstill-brexit-vote-hits-investment-bcc
https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-companies/

And a 'Hard' Brexit will be very hard indeed.

[Aruntraveller]

Not because of PFI payments?

Not in the case of the Trust I work at - or indeed many others. PFI was worked into the finances long ago. I don't particularly approve of it - but it is not the cause of the current issues.

[Sriram]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37532364

**********
Theresa May will formally begin the Brexit process by the end of March 2017, she has told the BBC.
The prime minister confirmed the deadline for triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which sets in place a two-year process of withdrawal.
She has also promised a "Great Repeal Bill" in the next Queen's Speech, which will overturn the act that took the UK into the forerunner of the EU.
It will remove the European Communities Act 1972 from the statute book.
**********

[SweetPea]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37532364

**********
Theresa May will formally begin the Brexit process by the end of March 2017, she has told the BBC.
The prime minister confirmed the deadline for triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which sets in place a two-year process of withdrawal.
She has also promised a "Great Repeal Bill" in the next Queen's Speech, which will overturn the act that took the UK into the forerunner of the EU.
It will remove the European Communities Act 1972 from the statute book.
**********

Thanks, Sriram, that's a good summary - and in the link - of Theresa May's conversation with Andrew Marr, this morning. If folk here missed it, it's worth iplayering - is about 30mins in length.

[wigginhall]

It seems a clever move by May, as presumably it will please the hard Brexit people.   It appears to get rid of EU law, but actually absorbs it into English law, (or is that UK law?).   Then the bits that the UK parliament doesn't like, can be got rid of.   However, that promises to be a long process.

I guess that behind the scenes the vexed question of trade deals goes on.   One of the problems with hard Brexit is that tariffs could be expensive.   I would guess again that the negotiators are seeking some kind of bespoke deal, with not very big tariffs, and exemptions on free movement, e.g. Polish builders allowed in, and so on.   May will hope to please both hard Brexit and soft Brexit people.   

[Hope]

No he was not. He used project fear like the rest of them. He has also been playing dirty for years, lying through his teeth like the rest of them.

If anything, he wasn't playing Project Fear enough.  That was the prerogative of IDS, BJ, NF, and MG.

[Jack Knave]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37532364

**********
Theresa May will formally begin the Brexit process by the end of March 2017, she has told the BBC.
The prime minister confirmed the deadline for triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which sets in place a two-year process of withdrawal.
She has also promised a "Great Repeal Bill" in the next Queen's Speech, which will overturn the act that took the UK into the forerunner of the EU.
It will remove the European Communities Act 1972 from the statute book.
**********

The Repeal Act will be difficult and could be knocked about within the Commons, and from the Commons to the Lords and back, for ages. It could even trigger a GE. I expect one in May 2018.

[Jack Knave]

If anything, he wasn't playing Project Fear enough.  That was the prerogative of IDS, BJ, NF, and MG.

I think I've told you about this before. The term project fear is only valid if it is based on a lie. Most of what the Leavers said was essentially true.

[Aruntraveller]

I think I've told you about this before. The term project fear is only valid if it is based on a lie. Most of what the Leavers said was essentially true.

£350 million? The biggest lie of all. And still no apology, no shame, no nothing.

If the leave campaign was a brand it would have been taken off the shelf as unfit for sale for just the one lie.

[Jack Knave]

£350 million? The biggest lie of all. And still no apology, no shame, no nothing.

If the leave campaign was a brand it would have been taken off the shelf as unfit for sale for just the one lie.

I thought someone would bring that up.

Essentially true (read my post again for this phrase). The figure may not be totally on the ball but it is roughly right and the idea of this is also possible to some degree because of the money we will save from our EU membership fee. The aspiration was sincere and noble. It should also be born in mind that the Leavers were not in power and were not in a position to implement anything they said; they were not campaigning to get into power either - this is essentially a get out of jail free card, as there was no legal obligation hanging over their heads.

[JP]

I heard a pre referendum piece on Radio 4 about the £350 million where some finanicial bod did an analysis of the claim. According to him the figure was about correct however he did say that a fair bit comes back to the UK in the way of grants and subsidies etc, which any post Brexit government will need to maintain as payments but he concluded there was about £80 million from the £350 million which may be left over and that would more or less be available to the Government.

[Jack Knave]

I heard a pre referendum piece on Radio 4 about the £350 million where some finanicial bod did an analysis of the claim. According to him the figure was about correct however he did say that a fair bit comes back to the UK in the way of grants and subsidies etc, which any post Brexit government will need to maintain as payments but he concluded there was about £80 million from the £350 million which may be left over and that would more or less be available to the Government.

The thing about this figure is that the rebate has to be added to it, or retained, as it would be lost in due course, and if we had stayed the EU would have taken that as a green light that the people of the UK agreed with the EU ever closer together project and stopped the rebate.

As for the grants etc. these were for projects in the UK chosen by the EU, not by us, and so were not necessarily beneficial to us or to our liking. Often we had to put in money to these; so for example every £ the EU put into 'their' project we had to put in a £. Often these projects, like so many EU projects, did more harm than good. So this sum too has be included, or retained, in the 350 figure. It is true that we would have to keep up the subsidies etc. to the sectors who get them, such as the farmers, but we can now apply projects that do more good than the EU crap.

[L.A.]

It seems a clever move by May, as presumably it will please the hard Brexit people.   It appears to get rid of EU law, but actually absorbs it into English law, (or is that UK law?).   Then the bits that the UK parliament doesn't like, can be got rid of.   However, that promises to be a long process.

I guess that behind the scenes the vexed question of trade deals goes on.   One of the problems with hard Brexit is that tariffs could be expensive.   I would guess again that the negotiators are seeking some kind of bespoke deal, with not very big tariffs, and exemptions on free movement, e.g. Polish builders allowed in, and so on.   May will hope to please both hard Brexit and soft Brexit people.

If she is actually able to get a deal that pleases both sides it will surely be a miracle capable of qualifying her for sainthood.  There appears to be a fundamental incomparability.

If free movement of labour is curtailed, that will hit the agricultural sector, probably fatally for some areas. If we lose the single market, that will hit all those companies that set-up manufacturing plants in this country to serve the EU. Those ones operating on low profit margins will not be sustainable.

Just those two points alone would cause massive unemployment and loss of tax revenue, yet they seem to be inevitable with a Hard Brexit.

[L.A.]

Wonderful irony here:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/wetherspoons-tim-martin-loses-millions-brexit-result-leave-eu-referendum-a7114231.html

"Tim Martin, chairman and founder of the pub group JD Wetherspoon, has seen £18 million wiped off the value of his shares in the days following the Brexit vote - a very poor return on the £224,000 he spent on campaigning to leave the EU."

He also doesn't seem to have noticed that he employs a huge number of EU citizens and many of his pubs couldn't function without them!

[L.A.]

The thing about this figure is that the rebate has to be added to it, or retained, as it would be lost in due course, and if we had stayed the EU would have taken that as a green light that the people of the UK agreed with the EU ever closer together project and stopped the rebate.

. . .

Exactly the kind of 'miss-selling' that brought massive fines and compensation claims in the PPI scandal - yet the Brexiteers get away Scot-free!

[Gonnagle]

Dear Forum,

Just where should this post belong ( careful ) The Tory party conference is all about brexit ( well blaming brexit ) Mr Hammond is for turning, Mr Osborne was a jolly nice fellow but brexit means we have to change, Mr Hammond is now saying we have to invest, more money for housing ( is that public or private ) more money for transport, so we give more money to private investors who run our transport

Well Mr Hammond, the SNP and Labour have been saying for ages that we need more investment, nice that you are taking their advice.

Theresa May is telling us that brexit means brexit but not a Norway deal and Boris is applauding her for her clarity, what bloody clarity!

The Tories at play, and that is all they are doing, playing with the life's of the great British public, and just to end my little rantette, at the conference they have a shooting gallery, yes! this is what the public want, more grouse shooting moors

Gonnagle.

[wigginhall]

This made me laugh. 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct1Ub3DXgAAftmJ.jpg

[jeremyp]

Yes, there is just so much shit heading for that fan. The motor industry are just starting to become vocal:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/nissan-hard-brexit-compensation-new-uk-investment-tariffs

Ideally any compensation would come out of the pockets of the 52% of voters who voted for Brexit. In reality, of course, we'll all end up paying.

[Hope]

Just where should this post belong ( careful ) The Tory party conference is all about brexit ( well blaming brexit ) Mr Hammond is for turning, Mr Osborne was a jolly nice fellow but brexit means we have to change, Mr Hammond is now saying we have to invest, more money for housing ( is that public or private ) more money for transport, so we give more money to private investors who run our transport

Maybe, but it is likely that the investment will go into infrastructure, which is run and organisaed by a part of the Departmnent of Transport (at least it is in England and Wales) - perhaps the Scottish equivalent is run by a private company. 

Well Mr Hammond, the SNP and Labour have been saying for ages that we need more investment, nice that you are taking their advice.

But as I pointed out in a previous post that was in reply to a similar comment by your good self, Gonners, investing doesn't necessarily mean that the investor comes out of the red.  Let's take an example.  House prices aren't going to faal all that much, unless several hundred thousand houses suddenly come onto the market.  The investment isn't in houses, but in employing the builders and I'm not aware that there are any major public construction companies, here in Wales, in England or in Scotland. 

Theresa May is telling us that brexit means brexit but not a Norway deal and Boris is applauding her for her clarity, what bloody clarity!

I doubt whether there is any chance of our getting a Norway-style deal.  After all Norway have never been part of the Union and therefore haven't riled the Union leaders by voting to withdraw - with all the complications and problems that that cause those very same leaders.

The Tories at play, and that is all they are doing, playing with the life's of the great British public, and just to end my little rantette, at the conference they have a shooting gallery, yes! this is what the public want, more grouse shooting moors

I believe that that shooting range is part and parcel of the complex they are using - not something that the Tories have brung in.

[jeremyp]

I think I've told you about this before. The term project fear is only valid if it is based on a lie. Most of what the Leavers said was essentially true.

Immigration a problem - lie
£350 million to the NHS - lie
Easily get bipartisan trade deals with other countries - lie
Reclaiming sovereignty - lie

[jeremyp]

I thought someone would bring that up.

Essentially true (read my post again for this phrase). The figure may not be totally on the ball but it is roughly right and the idea of this is also possible to some degree because of the money we will save from our EU membership fee. The aspiration was sincere and noble. It should also be born in mind that the Leavers were not in power and were not in a position to implement anything they said; they were not campaigning to get into power either - this is essentially a get out of jail free card, as there was no legal obligation hanging over their heads.

The figure was completely wrong. It was a lie.

The promise to give all the money to the NHS was reneged on the day after the vote.

Nigel Farage is against the EU but takes his salary from them. A liar.