Is this why they are delaying leaving ?

[DaveGrohl]

Another FACT - only 37.5% of the electorate actually voted LEAVE.

Over 25% of the electorate couldn't be bothered to vote....

If John Ward (the writer of the original post on this thread) is going to be spouting about FACTS then he really should get the critical FACTS straight.

Arithmetic is not Rocket Science, although some people do seem to have a problem with percentages.

Of course, a quick dose of pedantry will sort all this out.

 

[DaveGrohl]

Take the FTSE 5 year graph and you will see 4 years of a steady growth under the coalition until the referendum is announced. From then onwards the trend has been steadily down.

Complete and utter coincidence of course...

Steadily down over the last 4 years? What chart are you looking at?

 

[Courier]

Read the post again and look at the 5 year FTSE graph. 4 years on the rise from 2010 and then the most recent 12 months falling

 

[Clive]

Read the post again and look at the 5 year FTSE graph. 4 years on the rise from 2010 and then the most recent 12 months falling

must have missed the 2011 referendum - that seemed to really hit the market hard

 

[DaveGrohl]

Read the post again and look at the 5 year FTSE graph. 4 years on the rise from 2010 and then the most recent 12 months falling

Ok so I'm not au fait with the dates of political events so apols. A quick google gives me Wiki having the announcement date as Feb 18th? Then a quick look at the FTSE shows it's up from Feb 18th. No doubt I have the date wrong. Can you enlighten me?

 

[DaveGrohl]

Prob more revealing than the ahem "decline" is that all of Friday's "meltdown" has been regained and more in the space of no time at all. Notwithstanding the ability of Mr Market to fly in the face of logic for no apparent reason of course. The markets' ability to be illogical will always outlast your ability to remain solvent.

Markets directions are the result of people thinking they know better than their fellow men. History proves time and again that the moment of max pessimism is the time to buy, and the moment of max optimism is the time to sell. The world is awash with people who think they know better than that. All of which is irrelevant to an economy and the lives of most of the people in it.

 

[jellybean]

The original post is a bit scary if indeed that could happen. My feelings are all totally optimistic with regard to Brexit but i think we should start article 50 ASAP. Get sovereignty back, get democracy back, get freedom back and only then start any negotiations. Any temporary financial losses or inconveniences are as nothing compared to the prospect of continuing slavery. Giving the impression to the EU that we will only exit if we can do certain deals will tell them that we are weak and afraid. Surely we have not come this far to throw it all away!

 

[czechmate]

FACT: If the UK doesn’t have a signed deal by April 2017, Brexit is in grave danger
BY JOHN WARD JUNE 29, 2016
AFTER READING THIS, EVERYONE SHOULD SEE THE REAL DEADLINE AS MARCH 31st 2017
The Slog spent most of yesterday trying to separate fact from fiction on the subject of realising Brexit from the EU.My conclusion is that it is meant to work for the Fatties from Brussels, Frankfurt and NATO….but not for We The People….and the so-called leaders of Brexit are collaborating in an attempt to hide a crucial deadline.

At the moment, Article 50 allows an EU Member State to secede from the Union by giving two years notice to the relevant authorities.

However, as from March 31st 2017 – a date just nine months away next weekend – Article 50 will be subject to the dreaded Qualified Majority Vote (QMV)…that is to say, we will have to persuade a total of 14 EU Member States to support our decision to leave.

A number of seemingly random events over the last five days now appear to form some kind of pattern.

• Cameron resigns but delays triggering Article 50
• Back in 2010, the EU rule was we could leave if we applied Article 50, or repealed the European Communities Act 1972. These two caveats still apply, but only till 31st March 2017, after which date these two pieces of legislation will require a QMV.
• Boris Johnson calls a press conference to say there is “no need for haste” on Article 50
• Michael Gove endorses Johnson’s view
• The VoteLeave group freezes UKIP/Nigel Farage out of discussions about the process of Brexit
• The Blairite wing of Labour moves swiftly against Jeremy Corbyn, whom they know full well is in reality deeply suspicious of the EU
• The EC wakes up to the game plan, and Merkel suggests UK be given “as much time as possible” to decide when to trigger Article 50.

One doesn’t have to be a rabbit-hole conspiracist to suspect a unified Establishment strategy to dilute and even negate what 52% of the electorate voted for five days ago.

Like 25 million other Britons, I didn’t vote Leave to then be disenfranchised by either a rerun Referendum based on spurious Remain charges, or an attempt by Tory Party putchists using March 2017 to say, “awfully sorry, there’s nothing we can do”.

We voted Leave to be free from the EU, not to help Boris get the Tory leadership, or Labour to get rid of JeremyCorbyn.

But there is another factor that the site Constitution Unit points out….which I turn have checked out – and they’re right:

‘Parliament has no formal say over whether or when Article 50 is invoked, as this lies within the royal prerogative powers that are exercised by government. Government’s powers in matters of foreign policy are very extensive, and parliament has veto rights only in respect of treaties.’

Article 50 is a clause, not a treaty: the UK Parliament cannot veto Lisbon in its entirety, because it didn’t pass it. CU also opines – and if you read the linked piece, you’ll see that so far they’ve shown great prescience – the critical path of the timelines involved doesn’t compute:

‘ Both sides in the referendum campaign agree that this whole process would take several years, during which the UK would remain in the EU. The Remain side has always argued that the negotiations would be lengthy; the Leave side has now indicated that it would like to complete the process by 2020. Until the negotiation process is complete, the UK remains fully subject to its obligations under EU law.’

Spelling it out: we are subject to EU law over the next four years, but the Article 50 window of opportunity is just nine months. In those extra 3+ years, the EC could easily introduce and pass a directive changing the secession process further to make it impossible for the UK to leave. Even without that, the Commission can demand we get a QMV before Brexit will be allowed.

I’d love to be able to say, “But apart from that, Brexit is plain sailing”. But it isn’t. The negotations with the EU/EC/ECB and Eurogrope will take place on trade, administrative and legal levels. There will then be a deal on the table and Parliament would be required to approve it, because that would be a treaty. Westminster MPs are 4-1 in favour of staying in the EU. Under our somewhat haphazard and scribbled down mélange of usage and convention we call the Constitution, MPs would have every right to overturn last week’s referendum by turning the deal down and then drafting a reapplication for membership.

Remember: by, say, July 2020 most Brits will have forgotten all about the popular vote four years previously. Any and all kinds of events may well have happened to change everything. And the real push to Leave this time around lay with older respondents (some of whom will be dead) while the Remaindeers tended to be young (and more of them will have the vote).

I do not want to set hares running here: we knew all this stuff beforehand, but the assumption that most of we Brexiteers made in voting Leave was that Downing Street would move swiftly to invoke Article 50. Indeed, that is what the usual anti-UK MEP loudmouths were insisting on by Saturday morning.

However, only M. Plat Ecran Hollande of France has so far allowed vindictive emotions to continue that pattern of thought:

View attachment 353800

But Hollande is isolated now in the Brussels-am-Berlin power corridor, and the French electorate detests him. What we see above is more evidence of the widening rift between Germany and France.

The disturbing mainstream developments that put the spotlight on timetables now is that Merkel intervened to advise slowing down, Schäuble stayed silent, and Draghi at the ECB says he is “very sad” about the decision….while on this side of La Manche, Borisgove & Ptnrs, VoteLeave (justified doubts about their motives now) are umming and awing and delaying, Farage is frozen out of the Brexit talks, while Cameron and Osborne have been at pains to stress that this process will take time and nothing will happen until the Tories have a new leader in September.

That’s just six months before Article 50 changes from being a quagmire into a heavily mined field of quicksand. It’s as if we had all the time in the world. But time is the one thing we haven’t got.

The vote is over, and The People won. What’s becoming clear is that the élites within the Establishment are hesitating with a purpose. I think it’s time for both Nigel Farage and Kate Hoey to become vocal, and ask why this is happening….and make a much larger percentage of the electorate aware of the deadlines.

So why was the referendum in June? If what you are suggesting is the agenda, why wasn't it called for November or next February for example?

 

[roscoe erf]

lets hope they can delay it long enough to kill it.

and democracy with it

 

[deewill]

FACT: If the UK doesn’t have a signed deal by April 2017, Brexit is in grave danger
BY JOHN WARD JUNE 29, 2016
AFTER READING THIS, EVERYONE SHOULD SEE THE REAL DEADLINE AS MARCH 31st 2017
The Slog spent most of yesterday trying to separate fact from fiction on the subject of realising Brexit from the EU.My conclusion is that it is meant to work for the Fatties from Brussels, Frankfurt and NATO….but not for We The People….and the so-called leaders of Brexit are collaborating in an attempt to hide a crucial deadline.

At the moment, Article 50 allows an EU Member State to secede from the Union by giving two years notice to the relevant authorities.

However, as from March 31st 2017 – a date just nine months away next weekend – Article 50 will be subject to the dreaded Qualified Majority Vote (QMV)…that is to say, we will have to persuade a total of 14 EU Member States to support our decision to leave.

A number of seemingly random events over the last five days now appear to form some kind of pattern.

• Cameron resigns but delays triggering Article 50
• Back in 2010, the EU rule was we could leave if we applied Article 50, or repealed the European Communities Act 1972. These two caveats still apply, but only till 31st March 2017, after which date these two pieces of legislation will require a QMV.
• Boris Johnson calls a press conference to say there is “no need for haste” on Article 50
• Michael Gove endorses Johnson’s view
• The VoteLeave group freezes UKIP/Nigel Farage out of discussions about the process of Brexit
• The Blairite wing of Labour moves swiftly against Jeremy Corbyn, whom they know full well is in reality deeply suspicious of the EU
• The EC wakes up to the game plan, and Merkel suggests UK be given “as much time as possible” to decide when to trigger Article 50.

One doesn’t have to be a rabbit-hole conspiracist to suspect a unified Establishment strategy to dilute and even negate what 52% of the electorate voted for five days ago.

Like 25 million other Britons, I didn’t vote Leave to then be disenfranchised by either a rerun Referendum based on spurious Remain charges, or an attempt by Tory Party putchists using March 2017 to say, “awfully sorry, there’s nothing we can do”.

We voted Leave to be free from the EU, not to help Boris get the Tory leadership, or Labour to get rid of JeremyCorbyn.

But there is another factor that the site Constitution Unit points out….which I turn have checked out – and they’re right:

‘Parliament has no formal say over whether or when Article 50 is invoked, as this lies within the royal prerogative powers that are exercised by government. Government’s powers in matters of foreign policy are very extensive, and parliament has veto rights only in respect of treaties.’

Article 50 is a clause, not a treaty: the UK Parliament cannot veto Lisbon in its entirety, because it didn’t pass it. CU also opines – and if you read the linked piece, you’ll see that so far they’ve shown great prescience – the critical path of the timelines involved doesn’t compute:

‘ Both sides in the referendum campaign agree that this whole process would take several years, during which the UK would remain in the EU. The Remain side has always argued that the negotiations would be lengthy; the Leave side has now indicated that it would like to complete the process by 2020. Until the negotiation process is complete, the UK remains fully subject to its obligations under EU law.’

Spelling it out: we are subject to EU law over the next four years, but the Article 50 window of opportunity is just nine months. In those extra 3+ years, the EC could easily introduce and pass a directive changing the secession process further to make it impossible for the UK to leave. Even without that, the Commission can demand we get a QMV before Brexit will be allowed.

I’d love to be able to say, “But apart from that, Brexit is plain sailing”. But it isn’t. The negotations with the EU/EC/ECB and Eurogrope will take place on trade, administrative and legal levels. There will then be a deal on the table and Parliament would be required to approve it, because that would be a treaty. Westminster MPs are 4-1 in favour of staying in the EU. Under our somewhat haphazard and scribbled down mélange of usage and convention we call the Constitution, MPs would have every right to overturn last week’s referendum by turning the deal down and then drafting a reapplication for membership.

Remember: by, say, July 2020 most Brits will have forgotten all about the popular vote four years previously. Any and all kinds of events may well have happened to change everything. And the real push to Leave this time around lay with older respondents (some of whom will be dead) while the Remaindeers tended to be young (and more of them will have the vote).

I do not want to set hares running here: we knew all this stuff beforehand, but the assumption that most of we Brexiteers made in voting Leave was that Downing Street would move swiftly to invoke Article 50. Indeed, that is what the usual anti-UK MEP loudmouths were insisting on by Saturday morning.

However, only M. Plat Ecran Hollande of France has so far allowed vindictive emotions to continue that pattern of thought:

View attachment 353800

But Hollande is isolated now in the Brussels-am-Berlin power corridor, and the French electorate detests him. What we see above is more evidence of the widening rift between Germany and France.

The disturbing mainstream developments that put the spotlight on timetables now is that Merkel intervened to advise slowing down, Schäuble stayed silent, and Draghi at the ECB says he is “very sad” about the decision….while on this side of La Manche, Borisgove & Ptnrs, VoteLeave (justified doubts about their motives now) are umming and awing and delaying, Farage is frozen out of the Brexit talks, while Cameron and Osborne have been at pains to stress that this process will take time and nothing will happen until the Tories have a new leader in September.

That’s just six months before Article 50 changes from being a quagmire into a heavily mined field of quicksand. It’s as if we had all the time in the world. But time is the one thing we haven’t got.

The vote is over, and The People won. What’s becoming clear is that the élites within the Establishment are hesitating with a purpose. I think it’s time for both Nigel Farage and Kate Hoey to become vocal, and ask why this is happening….and make a much larger percentage of the electorate aware of the deadlines.

Sorry but this complete tosh. The idea that the other EU member states can refuse to accept the UK is leaving is I assume simply propaganda from a Brexiteer worried that the UK parliament will do its best, as it should, to negotiate an appropriate deal with the EU before leaving, even if that delays the formal notification of Article 50. If I am wrong please indicate which article of the current EU treaties makes this stipulation but in the meantime, I suggest others think about how nonsensical the idea is that the other EU members could stop us leaving by saying "they don't agree". My guess is that some Brexiteers, including the author of this article, are terrified that any delay will only expose further the extreme economic jeopardy the UK faces if we leave the EU and parliament may then have second thoughts. Farmers everywhere in the UK are now exposed to the biggest threat to their livelihoods for generations and propaganda like this is only further evidence that there are still those who, having taken us all to the edge of the precipice, are intent that we jump blindly and do not look first.

FACT: If the UK doesn’t have a signed deal by April 2017, Brexit is in grave danger
BY JOHN WARD JUNE 29, 2016
AFTER READING THIS, EVERYONE SHOULD SEE THE REAL DEADLINE AS MARCH 31st 2017
The Slog spent most of yesterday trying to separate fact from fiction on the subject of realising Brexit from the EU.My conclusion is that it is meant to work for the Fatties from Brussels, Frankfurt and NATO….but not for We The People….and the so-called leaders of Brexit are collaborating in an attempt to hide a crucial deadline.

At the moment, Article 50 allows an EU Member State to secede from the Union by giving two years notice to the relevant authorities.

However, as from March 31st 2017 – a date just nine months away next weekend – Article 50 will be subject to the dreaded Qualified Majority Vote (QMV)…that is to say, we will have to persuade a total of 14 EU Member States to support our decision to leave.

A number of seemingly random events over the last five days now appear to form some kind of pattern.

• Cameron resigns but delays triggering Article 50
• Back in 2010, the EU rule was we could leave if we applied Article 50, or repealed the European Communities Act 1972. These two caveats still apply, but only till 31st March 2017, after which date these two pieces of legislation will require a QMV.
• Boris Johnson calls a press conference to say there is “no need for haste” on Article 50
• Michael Gove endorses Johnson’s view
• The VoteLeave group freezes UKIP/Nigel Farage out of discussions about the process of Brexit
• The Blairite wing of Labour moves swiftly against Jeremy Corbyn, whom they know full well is in reality deeply suspicious of the EU
• The EC wakes up to the game plan, and Merkel suggests UK be given “as much time as possible” to decide when to trigger Article 50.

One doesn’t have to be a rabbit-hole conspiracist to suspect a unified Establishment strategy to dilute and even negate what 52% of the electorate voted for five days ago.

Like 25 million other Britons, I didn’t vote Leave to then be disenfranchised by either a rerun Referendum based on spurious Remain charges, or an attempt by Tory Party putchists using March 2017 to say, “awfully sorry, there’s nothing we can do”.

We voted Leave to be free from the EU, not to help Boris get the Tory leadership, or Labour to get rid of JeremyCorbyn.

But there is another factor that the site Constitution Unit points out….which I turn have checked out – and they’re right:

‘Parliament has no formal say over whether or when Article 50 is invoked, as this lies within the royal prerogative powers that are exercised by government. Government’s powers in matters of foreign policy are very extensive, and parliament has veto rights only in respect of treaties.’

Article 50 is a clause, not a treaty: the UK Parliament cannot veto Lisbon in its entirety, because it didn’t pass it. CU also opines – and if you read the linked piece, you’ll see that so far they’ve shown great prescience – the critical path of the timelines involved doesn’t compute:

‘ Both sides in the referendum campaign agree that this whole process would take several years, during which the UK would remain in the EU. The Remain side has always argued that the negotiations would be lengthy; the Leave side has now indicated that it would like to complete the process by 2020. Until the negotiation process is complete, the UK remains fully subject to its obligations under EU law.’

Spelling it out: we are subject to EU law over the next four years, but the Article 50 window of opportunity is just nine months. In those extra 3+ years, the EC could easily introduce and pass a directive changing the secession process further to make it impossible for the UK to leave. Even without that, the Commission can demand we get a QMV before Brexit will be allowed.

I’d love to be able to say, “But apart from that, Brexit is plain sailing”. But it isn’t. The negotations with the EU/EC/ECB and Eurogrope will take place on trade, administrative and legal levels. There will then be a deal on the table and Parliament would be required to approve it, because that would be a treaty. Westminster MPs are 4-1 in favour of staying in the EU. Under our somewhat haphazard and scribbled down mélange of usage and convention we call the Constitution, MPs would have every right to overturn last week’s referendum by turning the deal down and then drafting a reapplication for membership.

Remember: by, say, July 2020 most Brits will have forgotten all about the popular vote four years previously. Any and all kinds of events may well have happened to change everything. And the real push to Leave this time around lay with older respondents (some of whom will be dead) while the Remaindeers tended to be young (and more of them will have the vote).

I do not want to set hares running here: we knew all this stuff beforehand, but the assumption that most of we Brexiteers made in voting Leave was that Downing Street would move swiftly to invoke Article 50. Indeed, that is what the usual anti-UK MEP loudmouths were insisting on by Saturday morning.

However, only M. Plat Ecran Hollande of France has so far allowed vindictive emotions to continue that pattern of thought:

View attachment 353800

But Hollande is isolated now in the Brussels-am-Berlin power corridor, and the French electorate detests him. What we see above is more evidence of the widening rift between Germany and France.

The disturbing mainstream developments that put the spotlight on timetables now is that Merkel intervened to advise slowing down, Schäuble stayed silent, and Draghi at the ECB says he is “very sad” about the decision….while on this side of La Manche, Borisgove & Ptnrs, VoteLeave (justified doubts about their motives now) are umming and awing and delaying, Farage is frozen out of the Brexit talks, while Cameron and Osborne have been at pains to stress that this process will take time and nothing will happen until the Tories have a new leader in September.

That’s just six months before Article 50 changes from being a quagmire into a heavily mined field of quicksand. It’s as if we had all the time in the world. But time is the one thing we haven’t got.

The vote is over, and The People won. What’s becoming clear is that the élites within the Establishment are hesitating with a purpose. I think it’s time for both Nigel Farage and Kate Hoey to become vocal, and ask why this is happening….and make a much larger percentage of the electorate aware of the deadlines.

 

[D14]

lets hope they can delay it long enough to kill it.

Why? coming out of the the EU is the best thing that could happen to this country. If it does not happen then there will be 17 million people extremely upset for starters. Then whilst the other 15 million will get what they want, they will realise that they don't live in a democratic country so they themselves will start to wonder what the future holds for them if it becomes pointless voting for anything.

Nobody would vote in a general election again on mass also.

 

[Brisel]

Any statement that starts with the word FACT is usually complete fiction!

 

[Muck Spreader]

I am just wondering if Lord Leveson could ever live long enough to complete the enquiry into Brexit which is bound to happen and get all the facts.

 

[baabaa]

if the 350 million/week stopped flowing brussels way,
wonder how long we would be members?

 

[Brisel]

if the 350 million/week stopped flowing brussels way,
wonder how long we would be members?

Damn right. No payment = breach of contract. Contract ends.

They haven't yet got an "boys" to "send around" to make us pay up.

 

[exmoor dave]

Damn right. No payment = breach of contract. Contract ends.

They haven't yet got an "boys" to "send around" to make us pay up.

Is that why they want a army? Debt collectors with m16's &tanks?

 

[Brisel]

Is that why they want a army? Debt collectors with m16's &tanks?

And in the case of the French & Italians, equipped with a white flag kit and plenty of reverse gears!

(based on WW2 history)

 

[The Agrarian]

I wouldn't read into the referendum announcement as being too much to do with the five year FTSE100. The market is more interested in central bank intervention than any other individual factor.

With the falling pound, our equities have suddenly become a lot cheaper for wealthy American investors.

 

[exmoor dave]

I wouldn't read into the referendum announcement as being too much to do with the five year FTSE100. The market is more interested in central bank intervention than any other individual factor.

With the falling pound, our equities have suddenly become a lot cheaper for wealthy American investors.

Lloyds recently put out $700m of bonds in the US......... It was over subscribed by 7 times!
So I guess wealthy Americans see our banks as reasonable investments.

 

[Roger Perry]

Not all banks but the better funded ones I am sure seem like a bargain.

Travel and anything British is being promoted right now as a great opportunity for American buyers.