Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Brexit Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Good description of Liz Truss “Always photographed appearing shocked and surprised that she has ever managed to end up there”.

    Comment


      Reuters reporting the IM bill has brought euro clearing back into question, at least till the end of the month, which is when the clearing houses would have to notify customers that they have to move their positions to the EU. Seems like the Commission is willing to take hostages too.

      Comment


        If I were a Japanese negotiator, I'll be wondering how soon this State Aid rule is going to be broken...

        Comment


          The EU would be negligent not to bring Euro clearing back into question

          This is just incredibly dumb from the Government. Cummings is nothing but a troll.

          Comment


            Wild conjecture: is the whole thing an attempt to drop Northern Ireland and blame it on the EU?

            Thinking about it, that's far too clever for the eighth-wits that rule us...

            Comment


              Originally posted by Moonlight Shadow View Post
              If I were a Japanese negotiator, I'll be wondering how soon this State Aid rule is going to be broken...
              Presumably if you're a Japanese negotiator you know exactly how much aid you got for the Nissan plant

              Comment


                This Thread explains the strategy

                https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1305787216216678400?s=21

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Ginger Yellow View Post
                  Reuters reporting the IM bill has brought euro clearing back into question, at least till the end of the month, which is when the clearing houses would have to notify customers that they have to move their positions to the EU. Seems like the Commission is willing to take hostages too.
                  FT now reporting pretty much the opposite, that the EU has proposed to extend the clearing oversight transition by 18 months.

                  Comment


                    Curious

                    Are there systems or other operational concerns?

                    Comment


                      I suspect they've just caved to the banking lobby.

                      Comment


                        may also need time to build the alternatives- and no doubt the banks are pretty split



                        The EU is preparing to offer its banks an 18-month extension on access to London’s crucial markets infrastructure as it seeks to prevent a jolt to financial stability when the UK’s Brexit transition period expires at the end of the year. The European Commission has proposed that access to UK-based clearing houses — which sit between deals and prevent defaults from ricocheting through the rest of the market — should remain undisturbed until the middle of 2022, according to plans seen by the Financial Times. The proposals reflect London’s pre-eminence in clearing euro-denominated derivatives, and suggests that financial services are a point of leverage for the UK in increasingly strained trade negotiations with the EU. But Brussels wants EU financial institutions to use the extra time as a breathing space to steadily “reduce their exposure to United Kingdom market infrastructures”, according to the seven-page proposal. The paper calls for “the scaling down of the reliance” on the UK and says the EU financial sector should develop “a clear process” for achieving this as it adjusts to life after Brexit, arguing the bloc cannot outsource oversight of such critical activities.

                        Clearing houses such as the London Stock Exchange Group’s LCH and London-based ICE Clear Europe are among the most critical institutions in the global financial system. Without action by Brussels, EU banks would automatically lose access to them from January 1 next year. This means banks would be forced to start removing their business from them starting next month — a costly and potentially disruptive task. EU national governments have until September 18 to review the commission’s proposal, which is expected to be adopted this month. The commission declined to comment. London dominates derivatives clearing, and handles the bulk of the €735tn market in Europe. L

                        CH alone clears about 90 per cent of all euro-denominated interest-rate-swap transactions. The eurozone offers few alternative venues that can cope with the volume of business. The EU is preparing legislation to toughen its oversight of UK clearing houses, and to pressure them to shift activities into the union, after the UK’s post-Brexit transition period expires at the end of the year. The Bank of England and the European Central Bank have warned that an abrupt cut-off would pose a threat to stability across the region. Recommended Inside BusinessMartin Arnold ECB supervisors turn the screw on banks’ Brexit plans The commission paper says that Brexit, coupled with the current high level of dependence on London, creates “risks for the financial stability of the Union and for the transmission and conduct of the Union’s monetary policy”. Last year, the EU empowered regulators to determine whether non-EU clearing houses should have to shift activities into the bloc to service European clients. Mandatory relocation could be necessary to give the EU enough oversight over infrastructure that is critical to the bloc’s financial stability. EU officials acknowledge that LCH is the prime target of the legislation. The move comes while the commission is still in a broader assessment of whether the UK should be granted other “equivalence” rights in financial regulations. These rights contain crucial permissions for institutions to access oversees financial services without running into regulatory barriers or prohibitive costs. Brussels has made clear that one of the biggest “equivalence” prizes on offer — the right for another country’s investment firms to operate across the EU — will not be granted to the UK yet, in part due to uncertainty over the UK’s future regulatory regime.

                        Comment


                          Yes, La Repubblica suggests the former reason:

                          https://twitter.com/antoguerrera/status/1305757879740309505

                          Comment


                            Reading the article, the 18 months extension is somewhat shorter of what was expected and it seems to be in place to avert short term problems and give time to the EU to set in place a long term solution if the UK antics carry on.

                            Comment


                              Thread on the government's latest argument .

                              https://twitter.com/bricksilk/status/1304065058423611392

                              Saw this guy argue a case in court on EU and domestic law obligations relatively recently. He won, FWIW.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post
                                He's over-complicating it.

                                There basically were two types of laws or rights in the UK. There were those that a prime minister with a working majority can extinguish overnight on a whim. And there Were laws and rights that you have to leave the EU to extinguish. You've left the EU now. so prepare to have your rights and legal protections extinguished.

                                Once you think about that for a few minutes, it becomes clear that having supported any course of action other than an urgent second referendum was....not smart. Perhaps the demand for a second referendum wasn't quite the pointless distraction from the project of socialism that some people are prone to claim.

                                They might want to get a move on with creating that alternative to london clearing. Something that has been lost in this chat about violating international law, and people talking in the UK parliament is what exactly is the effect of this breaking the law in a limited and selective way. It is that the UK would become the single largest hub for smuggling anywhere on earth. Anyone anywhere, will be able to ship anything they want to the UK, Get on a boat to belfast, drive to rosslare and get on the ferry to cherbourg, and suddenly you're in the EU.

                                So this isn't just a matter of the UK breaking just any old international agreement with the EU. It's the UK raising the fucking pirate flag, and basically stealing from every EU government.. It's an open declaration of economic war, and not a little tariffs dispute.

                                Comment


                                  there are two issues- and with respect demanding a second referendum because you lost the first was not particularly smart. In fact the all or nothing approach was a tactical and strategic disaster-which handed the initiative to the pirates who don't giove a shit as long as they can deregulate


                                  there were plenty of ways of leaving the EU and staying in a Norway plus agreement. That was what the brexiteers initially said they wanted.

                                  https://twitter.com/adampayne26/status/1306167968947200000?s=20

                                  Comment


                                    You don't get it. Any form of brexit agreement is just a law that can be changed at the whim of a prime minister with a large majority and a malicious intent . If the last parliament had voted for a customs union deal, the current parliament would have just torn it up. There's no such thing as soft brexit unless you can keep the tories out of power in perpetuity. That's why you needed a second referendum.
                                    Last edited by The Awesome Berbaslug!!!; 16-09-2020, 11:58.

                                    Comment


                                      Lord Keen offers his resignation, if reports are to be believed. Lord Falconer gave him an absolute shoeing in the House of Lords.

                                      Meanwhile, Raab has gone to Washington to reassure the House that all is well. I'm sure the good folk of Olympia will be delighted to see him.

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Gangster Octopus View Post
                                        Ta.
                                        He is Cersei Symmonds' last partner before she fell for the charms of a clinically obese sociopath, old enough to be her father.

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Eggchaser View Post
                                          Lord Keen offers his resignation, if reports are to be believed. Lord Falconer gave him an absolute shoeing in the House of Lords.

                                          Meanwhile, Raab has gone to Washington to reassure the House that all is well. I'm sure the good folk of Olympia will be delighted to see him.
                                          haha, best place for him. He's only going to get shouted at and threatened if he turns up to washington DC.

                                          Comment


                                            Originally posted by The Awesome Berbaslug!!! View Post
                                            You don't get it. Any form of brexit agreement is just a law that can be changed at the whim of a prime minister with a large majority and a malicious intent . If the last parliament had voted for a customs union deal, the current parliament would have just torn it up. There's no such thing as soft brexit unless you can keep the tories out of power in perpetuity. That's why you needed a second referendum.
                                            If the last parliament had voted for a customs deal the current parliament wouldn't have assumed the shape it did

                                            Comment


                                              Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post

                                              If the last parliament had voted for a customs deal the current parliament wouldn't have assumed the shape it did
                                              As TAB has said, Johnson would still have argued in the election campaign that the House was tying his hands by denying him a clean Brexit, and would have achieved the same electoral result - the only difference would have been that the election itself would have happened before he met Leo in Cheshire.

                                              Comment


                                                Johnson would't have been the leader. Philip Hammond would have been Chancellor.

                                                Comment


                                                  Hmmm. The ERG/Gove/Johnson/Cummings axis would have brought it all down anyways.

                                                  Comment


                                                    Raab's visit to Washington went well:

                                                    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1306334039557586944

                                                    https://twitter.com/BrianOD_News/status/1306334436884131843

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X