Brexit deal

[SydneyRover]

Plus being mismanaged for all these years and we don;t even have trade agreements of any note set up with ready markets, if the UK was a business the receivers would have been called in already.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Plus being mismanaged for all these years and we don;t even have trade agreements of any note set up with ready markets, if the UK was a business the receivers would have been called in already.

Nah, if Britain was a business the asset strippers would wait for the value of country to tumble and then move in and make a killing.

[SydneyRover]

Voting for brexit is voting for an open season for carpetbaggers as they hang around like piranha in the sewers.

''Dominic Cummings accused of conflict of interest over NHS fund

Boris Johnson’s aide was consultant for AI startup that could win share of £250m fund''

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/11/dominic-cummings-accused-of-conflict-of-interest-over-nhs-fund

They already are Glyn

[wilts rover]

  I hope that most of you  do realise, that if Bojo does get a deal over the line, and the markets are looking like it is feasible, that is the opposition parties finished for quite a while.

You reckon.... Boris Johnson's Surrender Deal...

We're only making plans for Nigel

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1182683593073713154

[DonnyOsmond]

Sad times for Sunderland, already cut night work shift at the Nissan plant which has led to pay cuts to 3,000 members of staff and now Chairman of Nissan Europe is saying if there is no deal then job losses and even plant closure is a possibility.

https://twitter.com/itvtynetees/status/1182625970869682179?s=19

[Not Now Kato]

I bet you won't read about this in the Sun, Mail Express etc......
 
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/1307/contents/made
 
Explained here......
 
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/10/11/hmrc-plan-to-suspend-the-rule-of-law-in-the-event-of-brexit/
 
And Brexiters still think it's a good Idea!

[Sprotyrover]

I bet you won't read about this in the Sun, Mail Express etc......
 
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/1307/contents/made
 
Explained here......
 
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/10/11/hmrc-plan-to-suspend-the-rule-of-law-in-the-event-of-brexit/
 
And Brexiters still think it's a good Idea!

From the Blogg of Richard Murphy he isn't exactly sat on the fence at the Moment ,trying to brown nose his way into a Labour Govt should there ever be one again in my lifetime! (I'm 60)

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sproty?

And? Someone can have different political views to you and still be correct in the way they identify, interpret and report facts.

Your post sums up the shithole that we are in. "He's from the other side of the political fence to me, therefore I'll ignore him because he must be lying."

[Sprotyrover]

Sproty?

And? Someone can have different political views to you and still be correct in the way they identify, interpret and report facts.

Your post sums up the shithole that we are in. "He's from the other side of the political fence to me, therefore I'll ignore him because he must be lying."

Billy I didn't say I was ignoring him I merely pointed out quite correctly that his current Political stance puts him in the remain camp.
Also where in my post have I called the man a liar?

[BillyStubbsTears]

You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.

What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?

[Sprotyrover]

You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.

What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?

It's hardly an un biased source, he has a view but it's his interpretation of the Law, which in this case is not correct.

[BillyStubbsTears]

What's wrong about it?

[Not Now Kato]

You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.

What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?

It's hardly an un biased source, he has a view but it's his interpretation of the Law, which in this case is not correct.

I posted a link to the full government article.  So, having read it fully - what's your interpretation?

[albie]

The provisions on tax suspension are extremely disturbing, but the issue is below the radar.
Nobody knows about it, this level of detail is not covered in the media.

A further assessment of the relative costs of the options on the table is also beyond the media horizon;
https://www.ft.com/content/7cdfa832-e908-11e9-a240-3b065ef5fc55

This is in the FT, based on the IFS and Citi analysis....these are not Labour sources!

If the FT article does not open, it is summarised on Chris Giles twitter here:
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1181443140143779840

The real story is running in the background, not in the full view of the electors.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Having looked at the Statutory Instrument, I've no problem with it being there. It's the only way to allow HMRC the flexibility to organise themselves quickly enough to respond to whatever situation we end up in, probably at a moment's notice the way things are going. The Statutory Instrument has to include the language that people are getting their knickers in a twist about just to cover every possible contingency because...we're only three weeks away from the putative date of Brexit and still nobody has any idea at all what the final arrangement is going to be, including HMRC.

Which is why the continual adverts from the Gorvernment lecturing everybody else to be ready for Brexit are nothing but a sick (and expensive) joke.

[Sprotyrover]

You haven't and I shouldn't have said that. But it doesn't change the fact that you are playing the man, not the issue.

What difference does it make which "camp" he is in? And why on earth would you feel the need to point that out?

It's hardly an un biased source, he has a view but it's his interpretation of the Law, which in this case is not correct.

I posted a link to the full government article.  So, having read it fully - what's your interpretation?

I have no intention whatsoever of wasting my weekend interpreting statute law to this forum .unless you pay me £1,000 per hour for my valuable time.
One little bit 4 c and 4 d  merely permits the HMRC to ease regulations for the public good,it's not a smugglers and Carpetbaggers charter!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sproty.

So yeah. As the man was saying. The Govt are giving HMRC the power to suspend collecting certain taxes in the event that Brexit is a clusterf**k.

Once again. What was he saying that you disagreed with? And if you're not disagreeing with him, why did you bring up his political leanings?

[Sprotyrover]

Sproty.

So yeah. As the man was saying. The Govt are giving HMRC the power to suspend collecting certain taxes in the event that Brexit is a clusterf**k.

Once again. What was he saying that you disagreed with? And if you're not disagreeing with him, why did you bring up his political leanings?

Because as you say it is merely a means to enable the HMRC to operate with some flexibility should the need arise.there was no need for him ti rabbit on the way he did!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sproty.

The point is WHY they need that "flexibility" (and by the way, when have you ever known HMRC be given sweeping powers to suspend tax before in your lifetime?)

You reckon planning like that is not something that the public should be aware of and discuss?

[Glyn_Wigley]

Sproty.

The point is WHY they need that "flexibility" (and by the way, when have you ever known HMRC be given sweeping powers to suspend tax before in your lifetime?)

You reckon planning like that is not something that the public should be aware of and discuss?

We used to have the power to give 'Indulgences' and waive Excise Duty, but that was on a case-by-case basis depending on the situation. I just see this as Indulgences writ large. Government Departments have had similar powers for years through Statutory Instruments.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

[Glyn_Wigley]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Fair dos.

[Not Now Kato]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.

Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
 
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this.  Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!

[Glyn_Wigley]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.

Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
 
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this.  Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!

Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.

Statutory Instruments are not Parliament 'abdicating responsibilty'. They are Parliament itself granting the authority to the Executive to act on their own initiative without having to pester Parliament by referring every tiny detail back to them. Parliament can scrutinise the use of Statutory Instruments in retrospect any time they want, should they think it necessary, because the ultimate authority is still that of Parliament.

[Not Now Kato]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.

Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
 
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this.  Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!

Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.

The argument that 'we've always done it like that' is hardly a sound basis to justify something!  We always used to send small boys up chimneys........

[Glyn_Wigley]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.

Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
 
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this.  Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!

Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.

The argument that 'we've always done it like that' is hardly a sound basis to justify something!  We always used to send small boys up chimneys........

It has to be done like that because there just isn't the time to put every tiny detail of every bloody policy through both Houses of Parliament, there simply isn't enough hours in the day to physically do it!

[Not Now Kato]

Glyn

Agreed, but it's the "writ large" bit that is critical, surely?

Only if it's used, and what it's used for. At the moment, it's just a necessary piece of delegated legislation that's needed to make any possible form of Brexit work without having to take the time to refer a decision back to Parliament in the short term. It certainly doesn't mean that Parliament is bypassed altogether, Parliament can scrutinise any usage of this Statutory Instrument whenever it likes.

Indeed it can, AFTER THE EVENT! And after the event there is nothing parliament can do about it retrospectively other than to say 'well that wasn't very good was it?' if they believed it was very bad for the country.
 
Brexit has been so badly thought through and so badly actioned that has led to a mess like this.  Abdicating responsibility is hardly taking back control, nor is it getting back our sovereignty - two of leaves principal drivers!

Yes, the same as every other use of Statutory Instruments...ever! This is NOTHING new, it's been standard practice for decades.

The argument that 'we've always done it like that' is hardly a sound basis to justify something!  We always used to send small boys up chimneys........

It has to be done like that because there just isn't the time to put every tiny detail of every bloody policy through both Houses of Parliament, there simply isn't enough hours in the day to physically do it!

Which is EXACTLY why Article 50 should NOT have been enacted until full detailed planning had been completed and all issues known and covered!  Not withstanding that, it's been three years now, time enough to understand the issues and plan for them, but we haven't!  For some strange reason Glyn you seem by your arguments to be defending the way Brexit has been run!  This whole thing is a total and utter cock up of unimaginable proportions and our government and the civil service appear to be in reaction mode as things that should have been known become known!  This is NOT the way to run a country!

[Glyn_Wigley]

I'm not defending the way brexit has been run, I'm defending the way Parliament is run. Even if every detail had been known well in advance, most of the authority to enact those details would have been delegated to the civil service to enact via Statutory Instruments, it would NOT have been put in front of Parliament in every minute detail, only the basic framework goes before Parliament. If you don't believe me, go and look at just about any piece of legislation in the past century. Including the Article 50 triggering Act itself - it's virtually nothing but Statutory Instruments!

[SydneyRover]

I think Corbyn has to change on brexit to get the support he needs for the top job but he must be seen as a major threat to the tories when you look at how much time the murdoch press spends trying to undermine him.