If we vote for Brexit what happens

setmefree2

All this presents Labour with a series of achievable goals – as an opposition in Westminster, in London, as the likely winner in many of the forthcoming mayoral battles, and at Holyrood. The first aim should be: not just oppose hard Brexit, but prevent it.This entails the Labour front bench committing to an attempt to remain inside the European Economic Area.

Conclusion - Ignore the Referendum result. People didn't vote to take back control of their trade deals.

The wariness – shared by some on the Corbyn side, as well as the Labour right – is born of the assumption that if you commit to the single market, you must accept free movement of labour. The party’s new spokesman on Brexit, Keir Starmer, expressed perfectly what is wrong with this approach: first it’s a negotiation, not a finished relationship; second, you start from the economics, not the migration issue.

Conclusion - Ignore the referendum result people didn't vote to take back control of their immigration policy.

Leaving the single market will be a macroeconomic disaster, compounded by a social catastrophe, in which all the European protections – of citizens’ rights, labour rights, consumer and environmental standards – will get ripped up. That’s why the Labour front bench must commit to staying inside the single market, while seeking a deal on free movement that gives Britain time and space to restructure its labour market.

Conclusion - Ignore the referendum result people are thick and us, the elite, know better.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/10/paul-mason-how-left-should-respond-brexit

setmefree2

One of the world’s biggest banks is moving traders from Europe to London in a huge vote of confidence in the City.
In defiance of talk that the Brexit vote will see thousands of bankers forced out of town, Dutch giant ING is shifting 40 traders from Amsterdam and 20 from Brussels to its London headquarters in Moorgate in the heart of the Square Mile.
ING says support staff are likely to follow, but that it is too early to say how many.

City veteran David Buik, of Panmure Gordon, said: “The sooner the prophets of doom realise that financial markets are global and not parochial the better. ING is one with the foresight to recognise the fact that London is the quintessential financial centre.”

The fall in the pound is making it cheaper for European and American banks with assets in euros or dollars to hire London bankers.

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/brexit-cheer-as-ing-traders-move-to-london-a3369236.html

"It makes more sense to regroup functions that belong together," spokeswoman Carolien van der Giessen told AFP, adding that ING will deal with the consequences of Britain's departure from the EU when its modalities become clear.
"Even if Brexit has important consequences, they are currently very difficult to envisage. When the time comes, we'll see what we can do," she said.
In the meantime, the City of London remains attractive because of "a great pool of talent", she said.

https://www.enca.com/money/what-brexit-top-dutch-bank-moves-traders-to-london

setmefree2

Carlos Ghosn and UK prime minister have ‘productive’ meeting

Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn has met with UK prime minister Theresa May today, in a meeting that follows recent remarks by Ghosn that raised question-marks over future UK investment by the company due to Brexit and uncertainty over future UK-EU trade conditions.
In a statement Carlos Ghosn said that "following our productive meeting, I am confident the government will continue to ensure the UK remains a competitive place to do business. I look forward to continued positive collaboration between Nissan and the UK Government."

Theresa May said that the UK government "is committed to creating and supporting the right conditions for the automotive industry to go from strength to strength in the UK, now and into the future."
She said she was "pleased to have met with Mr Ghosn today to discuss our shared belief that Britain remains an outward-looking, world-leading nation in which to do business. We will continue to work with Nissan as we develop the environment for competitiveness of the automotive industry here in the UK to ensure its success."

http://www.just-auto.com/news/carlos-ghosn-and-uk-prime-minister-have-productive-meeting_id172761.aspx

Kohoutek

Rinoa wrote: »

http://order-order.com/2016/10/14/single-market-membership-immigration-not-trade-preconditions/

Your point is...?

The US isn't the UK. Does the US have a financial services industry and car industry which is dependent on full access to the single to be competitive?

Thrugelmir

gfplux wrote: »

Conrad, as an observer of your new religion I am interested in your time lines.
Could you flesh out this new dawn for Britain.
How about putting it down in this thread plus or minus a couple of years.
There are bound to be bumps in the road or does your new faith say that it will be smooth sailing.
Thanks.

There is no time line. Nor is anything ever plain sailing. Always has been pot holes in the road. Up to people themselves to shape the future of the UK. The nanny state doesn't work as Brown's tenure has subsequently proved. Nor is globalisation the be all and end all. Totally the reverse.

Thrugelmir

Kohoutek wrote: »

Your point is...?

The US isn't the UK. Does the US have a financial services industry and car industry which is dependent on full access to the single to be competitive?

BMW would be stuffed if taffifs were to be imposed. Considering the X series is manufactured in the US and imported back into Europe.

The fine on DB was in direct retaliation for the EU's fine on Apple. Watch this space. As the EU has rulings to make on other US companies yet.

CLAPTON

Kohoutek wrote: »

Your point is...?

The US isn't the UK. Does the US have a financial services industry and car industry which is dependent on full access to the single to be competitive?

what's your point
the UK doesn't have a financial services industry that depends upon full access to the single market to be competitive.

wotsthat

setmefree2 wrote: »

It's true that Sturgeon has put Scotland in an even worse position than rUK. In the future rUK will be trading with the pound and will be trading with the rest of the world on a UK WTO schedule. Scotland - who knows - could be the Euro, could be the pound - could be trading on an EU WTO schedule - could be a UK schedule?

Who the heck would invest in Scotland?

Yet when it's suggested that the uncertainty of Brexit affects investment in the UK it's dismissed as unpatriotic scaremongering.

setmefree2

wotsthat wrote: »

Yet when it's suggested that the uncertainty of Brexit affects investment in the UK it's dismissed as unpatriotic scaremongering.

But anyone investing in England, Wales and Northern Ireland knows that in 10 years, say, we will be using the pound and that we'll be on a UK WTO schedule. Who knows what Scotland will be doing?

wotsthat

I'll use what the Brexiteers see as a killer argument in favour of Scotland. There are plenty of countries that aren't part of the EU and do just fine. By the same logic there are plenty of countries that aren't part of the UK and do just fine.

Scotland will be worse off leaving the UK for the same reason the UK will be worse off leaving the EU. Dramatically reduced free trade at least for a period of time.

Economic damage is inevitable in both cases. Brexiteers and Scottish Nationalists either don't care or believe the benefits over the longer term will be worth it.

My view is Scottish Nationalists mainly belong to the former and Brexiteers the latter.