Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Pienaar's gloves]

This the EU horse, it just keeps on going round and round but has now been stopped.

View attachment 31093

Is it about time you got off it and give us a rest from all your postings of doom.

"There is a body of evidence contrary to my beliefs, I think I'll try to kill the debate."

 

[Seathestars]

The leaked memo:

- The Political Domain

The Prime Minister’s over-riding objective has been to keep her party from repeating its history of splitting four times in the past 200 years over global trade - each time being out of power for 15-30 years. The public stance of Government is orientated primarily to its own supporters, with industry in particular being on the radarscreen - yet.

The Government’s appeal to the Supreme Court has to be seen in this light - it is about avoiding any more public debate than necessary because it will expose splits within the predominantly “remain” Conservative MPs and intensify the pressure from predominantly “leave” constituency parties. A General Election is only a last resort for three reasons - boundary changes (that favour the Conservatives) will not be effective until 2019; the Fixed Term Parliaments Act obstructs Prime Ministerial freedom to call an election at will; and it may suit major decision makers to slowly shift away from more difficult aspects of Brexit on the grounds that Parliament has forced them to do so.

The divisions within the Cabinet are between the three Brexiteers on one side and Philip Hammond/Greg Clark on the other side. The Prime Minister is rapidly acquiring the reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself - which is unlikely to be sustainable. Overall, it appears best to judge who is winning the debate by assuming that the noisiest individuals have lost the intra-Government debate and are stirring up external supporters.

The Supreme Court appears likely to delay its ruling until early January and, assuming it sustains the High Court, a short enabling bill will then be submitted to Parliament, permitting the Government to invoke Article 50 in March as planned. The Government will probably be able to face down wrecking amendments, but the debate in Parliament will certainly shift expectations of what will be achieved/sellable in Brexit negotiations. Remain supporters can be expected to reserve their fire until winners and losers emerge from negotiation and the political atmosphere allows more sophisticated assessment of choices.

- The Government Domain

Individual Departments have been busily developing their projects to implement Brexit, resulting in well over 500 projects, which are beyond the capacity and capability of Government to execute quickly. One Department estimates that it needs a 40% increase in staff to cope with its Brexit projects. In other words, every Department has developed a “bottom up” plan of what the impact of Brexit could be - and its plan to cope with the “worst case”. Although necessary, this falls considerably short of having a “Government plan for Brexit” because it has no prioritisation and no link to the overall negotiation strategy.

However, it may be six months before there is a view on priorities/negotiation strategy as the political situation in the UK and the EU evolves. Despite extended debate among Permanent Secretaries, no common strategy has emerged, in part because the potential scope and negotiating positions have to be curtailed before realistic planning can happen, in part because of the divisions within the Cabinet. It is likely that the senior ranks in the Civil Service will feel compelled to present potential high level plan(s) to avoid further drift.

Departments are struggling to come up to speed on the potential Brexit effects on industry. This is due to starting from a relatively low base of insight and also due to fragmentation - Treasury “owning” financial services, DH-BEIS both covering life sciences, DCMS for telecoms, BEIS most other industries, DIT building parallel capability focused on trade etc.

Capability-building is making slow progress, partly through deliberate control by the Cabinet Office and partly from Treasury’s opening negotiating position that Departments will meet Brexit costs from existing settlements - although no one is treating that position as sustainable. Expectations of increased headcount are in the 10-30,000 range. Initiatives to build capability are getting off the ground - the Diplomatic Academy is providing trade training programmes, Cabinet Office is discussing system-wide capability programmes.

The Autumn Statement on 23rd November is expected to provide some headlines in terms of infrastructure investment, making the UK fit for growth and the inclusive economy. It will not provide resources for the Civil Service to grow its Brexit capacity and capability. In fact, we are more likely to see a further squeeze on Departmental operating costs to compensate for new spending.

:: The Industry Domain

Government expects lobbying on three levels to continue:

1. Company-specific decisions - the Nissan investment decision is a prime example. These are viewed as major opportunities/threats for Government. Other major players can be expected to, similar to Nissan, point a gun at the Government’s head.

2. Industry insights - the major challenge for industry and Government are “the unknown unknowns” where industry has to educate Government fast on the most important negotiating issues - e.g., they think they know about talent, but know they know little about data.

3. Overall business concerns - the province of CBI and largely dealt with as a PR issue.

Industry has two unpleasant realisations - first, that the Government’s priority remains its political survival, not the economy - second, that there will be no clear economic-Brexit strategy any time soon because it is being developed on a case-by-case basis as specific decisions are forced on Government.

I think the Government have just denied knowing anything about this memo, hope I'm talking about the same one.

 

[The Esk]

Is it about time you got off it and give us a rest from all your postings of doom

I'm just pointing out the complete idiocracy of the position we find ourselves in at home, in the EU, and with the US.

The suggestion is we might need up to 30,000 extra civil servants to sort out 'Brexit' should it occur. The much maligned bureaucracy of the EU has 24,000 civil servants in total.

If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I think the Government have just denied knowing anything about this memo, hope I'm talking about the same one.

Would you expect anything else?

 

[Gladystweet]

I think the Government have just denied knowing anything about this memo, hope I'm talking about the same one.

Yes you are. The government has absolutely no knowledge of this 'leaked memo' nor do they recognise it.

 

[The Esk]

I think the Government have just denied knowing anything about this memo, hope I'm talking about the same one.

I think the memo was prepared by Deloitte, it's not from within Government itself.

 

[Seathestars]

I think the memo was prepared by Deloittes, it's not from within Government itself.

How clever of them, they leak this doom and gloom memo and everyone comes running to them for financial advice.

 

[SNova]

PETER HITCHENS: Forget the EU vote - all Britain really needs is patriotic leaders

This is what happens when you call in the cowboys to do an important job. It goes wrong and you can't afford to fix it. You thought you could trust the Tory Party. You thought you could ignore our rather good constitution and bypass it with a referendum. I did warn you.

In May 2013, I pointed out the dangers of a referendum, asking: 'Has Parliament been abolished? Has a constitution been quietly introduced, which demands that such issues are decided by plebiscite, and makes the result of such plebiscites binding on Parliament?

'I've heard no such proposal, and can't see how it could be so, given the cowardly, ignorant or plain stupid attitudes of most MPs to this question.

'It's certainly understood, by constitutional lawyers, that such an obligation is important for any serious plebiscite, and its presence or absence in any legislation will be crucial. I suspect it will be absent.' And so it was.

Now you find out you were wrong, who are you going to call? For years I explained that the only way out of the EU was to replace the Tories with a genuinely patriotic conservative party that could win an Election. The referendum proves that the votes were there.

In October 2011, I said: 'Even if they succeeded in getting their referendum, and even if they succeeded in winning it… it would not bind the British government. The only real solution is for a General Election to be won by a party committed to secession.'

We would then have had an actual government determined to do what the people wanted, without any need to hurry to prove itself, and with a good idea of how it would use our new-found independence once we regained it. Instead we had a cynical campaign led by people who still cannot escape the suspicion that they never intended to win and were shocked and dismayed when they did.

And we have a pantomime horse – a policy being ineptly and half-heartedly implemented by people who don't support it. And we have a constitutional crisis, as I said we would on June 12 when I also correctly predicted that 'Leave' would win.

So I can't join in the bizarre and rather lawless squawking of rage at the High Court's ruling that Parliament must vote on Article 50. It is a perfectly reasonable judgment, based on my favourite bit of the Constitution, the 1689 Bill of Rights which guarantees our freedom far more surely than any human rights rubbish.

Actually this doesn't mean that Parliament will block our formal exit from the EU. Only a small coven of kamikaze MPs would dare to do that. The elite have other, cleverer plans.

But it does mean that Chairman May will now have the excuse she needs to fudge our exit. Parliament, and the Civil Service, will 'take back control' of the process. And what we will get will almost certainly be the Norway option – continued access to the Single Market and very little control over our borders.

We will move from being halfway into the EU to being halfway out of it. The referendum's simple requirement, that we leave the EU, will be fulfilled, beyond question.

But of course that wasn't all that millions of people voted for. If we want the rest of it, especially border control, we simply cannot rely on the existing parties or the establishment to get it.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co...ritain-really-needs-is-patriotic-leaders.html

 

[The Esk]

How clever of them, they leak this doom and gloom memo and everyone comes running to them for financial advice.

Deloitte are the largest provider of consultancy services to the UK government.

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Deloitte are the largest provider of consultancy services to the UK government.

And we all know how they 'earn' their moolah.

If you have an hour spare...

 

[Joey66]

Before the referendum DC PM let a committee look at the idea of leaving the EU cost wise when the report came back he was not pleased as it was a split vote so he told the chairman to have the vote to squash it - when defeated by the referendum in the despatch box he stated he or his successor would have to go back to that committee's findings which was in favor of the advantages of leaving the polictical EU union - the civil servants the government have taken on are working on untangling us from EU law like David Davis job will be redundant when we leave - also it is cheaper than hiring part time legal briefs as the started of to do its a 43 year relationship that has to be undone in the lawful manor have you seen the scrolls of documentation in the archives of parliment from the EU? massive scrolls of it all intertwined with our laws, and mostly theirs some good some ridiculous - a small price to pay when we save 8.5 billion net per year after leaving!

 

[Barnfred 55]

I think some things should be left in history, to open this can of worms what can it achieve.

I know it's not quite the same thing but if the government had their way they would have done the same thing with Hillsborough. And I'm sure the people who have actually been affected by it would have welcomed a can of worms being opened.

I agree with most of your posts in his thread mate but our opinions will have to differ on this one.

 

[Toffeelover]

"There is a body of evidence contrary to my beliefs, I think I'll try to kill the debate."

Good Luck.

 

[Toffeelover]

I'm just pointing out the complete idiocracy of the position we find ourselves in at home, in the EU, and with the US.

The suggestion is we might need up to 30,000 extra civil servants to sort out 'Brexit' should it occur. The much maligned bureaucracy of the EU has 24,000 civil servants in total.

If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable.

Please Esk just give your self a rest, time will tell what is needed just pointless speculation ATM.

 

[Toffeelover]

I know it's not quite the same thing but if the government had their way they would have done the same thing with Hillsborough. And I'm sure the people who have actually been affected by it would have welcomed a can of worms being opened.

I agree with most of your posts in his thread mate but our opinions will have to differ on this one.

Hillsborough was different, people died.