After doing nothing for the last two years, the British PM Theresa May is traveling across Europe to ask for another extension. Will it receive a favourable view or be rejected outright.
Actually she has not really done nothing, she has done everything she can to stop Brexit, that might seem a bit harsh but, however, it appears to me that she has actually prevaricated over Brexit for the last two years.
Up to today it also appears that more than half of conservatives have failed to support the PM with Article 50 requests by either voting against or abstaining, more than half, that is ridiculous.
One of the people that could throw a spanner in the works is the French President Emmanuel Macron might reject the idea of an extension with a veto then we would have to leave on 12th April, however, we cannot as the commons have passed a law saying we cannot leave without a deal, so what then? Theresa May would have to revoke Article 50!
If that happens, the PM will resign, a new leader will be found and we start all over again with another referendum.
Wednesday, 10 April 2019
Monday, 8 April 2019
Two years of prevarication.
29 March 2017
Theresa May sends Article 50 notification letter
18 April 2017
Theresa May calls a general election for 8 June
8 June 2017
General election results in hung parliament
19 June 2017
The first round of Brexit negotiations takes place
8 December 2017
Joint report published by the UK & EU
15 December 2017
European Council concludes sufficient progress has been made to move on to the second phase of the talks
28 February 2018
The European Commission publishes a draft of the Withdrawal Agreement
26 June 2018
European Union Withdrawal Bill becomes an act
6 July 2018
Chequers meeting
8 July 2018
David Davis resigns as Brexit secretary, replaced by Dominic Raab
9 July 2018
Boris Johnson resigns as Foreign secretary
20 September 2018
An informal EU summit is held in Salzburg
14 November 2018
The UK & EU reach an agreement 'in principle' on the Withdrawal Agreement
15 November 2018
Dominic Raab resigns as Brexit secretary along with Esther McVey, Suella Braverman, Rehman Chisti and Shailesh Vara
16 November 2018
Stephen Barclay is appointed Brexit secretary
10 December 2018
The ECJ rules that a member state can unilaterally revoke Article 50
The prime minister postpones the first meaningful vote
12 December 2018
Conservative MP's trigger a no confidence vote in Theresa May, which she wins
15 January 2019
The government loses the first meaningful vote by 220 votes
16 January 2019
The government wins a no confidence vote in the commons
11 March 2019
Theresa Many travels to Strasbourg to finalise additional texts to the Withdrawal Agreement
12 March 2019
Theresa May's deal is defeated a second time by 149 votes
13 March 2019
MP's vote to reject the UK leaving the EU without a deal
14 March 2019
MP's vote to request an extension of the Article 50 period
20 March 2019
Theresa May requests an extension of Article 50 to the end of June
21 March 2019
EU agrees Article 50 extension to 12 April
27 March 2019
indicative votes held in the commons to find a Brexit consensus
12 April 2019
Current deadline for the end of Article 50
Theresa May sends Article 50 notification letter
18 April 2017
Theresa May calls a general election for 8 June
8 June 2017
General election results in hung parliament
19 June 2017
The first round of Brexit negotiations takes place
8 December 2017
Joint report published by the UK & EU
15 December 2017
European Council concludes sufficient progress has been made to move on to the second phase of the talks
28 February 2018
The European Commission publishes a draft of the Withdrawal Agreement
26 June 2018
European Union Withdrawal Bill becomes an act
6 July 2018
Chequers meeting
8 July 2018
David Davis resigns as Brexit secretary, replaced by Dominic Raab
9 July 2018
Boris Johnson resigns as Foreign secretary
20 September 2018
An informal EU summit is held in Salzburg
14 November 2018
The UK & EU reach an agreement 'in principle' on the Withdrawal Agreement
15 November 2018
Dominic Raab resigns as Brexit secretary along with Esther McVey, Suella Braverman, Rehman Chisti and Shailesh Vara
16 November 2018
Stephen Barclay is appointed Brexit secretary
10 December 2018
The ECJ rules that a member state can unilaterally revoke Article 50
The prime minister postpones the first meaningful vote
12 December 2018
Conservative MP's trigger a no confidence vote in Theresa May, which she wins
15 January 2019
The government loses the first meaningful vote by 220 votes
16 January 2019
The government wins a no confidence vote in the commons
11 March 2019
Theresa Many travels to Strasbourg to finalise additional texts to the Withdrawal Agreement
12 March 2019
Theresa May's deal is defeated a second time by 149 votes
13 March 2019
MP's vote to reject the UK leaving the EU without a deal
14 March 2019
MP's vote to request an extension of the Article 50 period
20 March 2019
Theresa May requests an extension of Article 50 to the end of June
21 March 2019
EU agrees Article 50 extension to 12 April
27 March 2019
indicative votes held in the commons to find a Brexit consensus
12 April 2019
Current deadline for the end of Article 50
My return
I have decided to come back to the blog.
Naturally the first thing I did was to see if I could login with the previous details, the answer was no.
It appears Blogspot has been taken over by Google, just like everything else, so now I have more accounts with exactly the same details, and this from the people who tell us to safeguard our information and not use the same password for every account.
OMGLOL ~ what a joke...
Naturally the first thing I did was to see if I could login with the previous details, the answer was no.
It appears Blogspot has been taken over by Google, just like everything else, so now I have more accounts with exactly the same details, and this from the people who tell us to safeguard our information and not use the same password for every account.
OMGLOL ~ what a joke...
Wednesday, 28 June 2017
Mixed Messages
Household debt may be soaring but Britons are finding it easier to pay the bills. In the second half of last year, 63 percent said they are keeping up with their credit commitments without any difficulties compared with 59 percent in the previous two years, according to the latest Wealth and Assets Survey from the Office for National Statistics.
The figures may do little to ease concerns at the Bank of England though, which said yesterday that it plans to increase capital requirements for U.K. lenders to tackle the risks posed by consumer-credit growth.
The figures may do little to ease concerns at the Bank of England though, which said yesterday that it plans to increase capital requirements for U.K. lenders to tackle the risks posed by consumer-credit growth.
Tuesday, 13 June 2017
Twitter and the President
President Donald Trump cannot be stopped from tweeting and otherwise talking about the Russia investigation. But by continuing to expostulate, he risks not only incriminating himself but irritating the prosecutor overseeing the probe.
Some observers speculated that the arrival of Trump’s personal lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, would spell the end of the president’s off-the-cuff comments. Not so. Whatever Kasowitz has told his long time client, the president is still running his mouth.
On Sunday morning, the president tweeted: “I believe the James Comey leaks will be far more prevalent than anyone ever thought possible. Totally illegal? Very ‘cowardly!’”
Two days earlier, during a testy Rose Garden press conference, he accused Comey of perjury during his testimony last Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee. In addition, Trump declared that the hearing failed to establish that he’d colluded with the Russians to manipulate the 2016 election or tried to stop the federal probe of whether Trump aides helped the Russians with their hacking. “No collusion. No obstruction. He is a leaker,” Trump said, the last part referring again to Comey, whom Trump fired as FBI director in May. Asked if he would testify under oath, Trump answered, “100 percent.”
So, why does this matter?
First, there’s the attorney’s rule of thumb that a client anywhere in the vicinity of a criminal investigation ought to keep his trap shut. “It is 100 percent clear that the rule in the normal criminal case is not a word from the client,” says Harry Litman, a former federal prosecutor who teaches at UCLA Law School and practices with the firm Constantine Cannon.
Trying to stop the President Donald Trump from tweeting will be the bigger challenge.
Tuesday, 11 April 2017
Paul Tucker is guilty
It has finally been broadcast by Panorama that the Libor fixing of 2008 was directed by Paul Tucker, the deputy governor of the Bank of England.
We knew this at the time but everyone being questioned whether by the press, media or parliament just lied as there was no actual evidence. That evidence is now available and Paul Tucker has to answer the question, why did you ruin so many people's lives back in 2008?
In July 2012 Paul Tucker sat in front of a parliamentary committee and said he did not lean on Bob Diamond the CEO of Barclays about setting Libor rates, he was right, he instructed Bob Diamond which is a totally different stance and one that makes Paul Tucker responsible.
Also in 2012 Sir Mervyn King, the Governor of the Bank of the Bank of England said: "Just as in 2008, there is a deep reluctance to admit the extent of the undercapitalisation of the banking system in many parts of the industrialised world." He added: "I am not sure that advanced economies in general will find it easy to get out of their current predicament without creditors acknowledging further likely losses, a significant writing down of asset values and recapitalisation of their financial systems. Only then will it be possible to return to a more normal provision of the vital banking services so crucial to an economic recovery."
There is no evidence to suggest that Sir Mervyn King was responsible or that he colluded with or even directed the actions of Paul Tucker at that time.
If the SFO [Serious Fraud Office] really want to nail the man at the top, they need go no further than Paul Tucker.
We knew this at the time but everyone being questioned whether by the press, media or parliament just lied as there was no actual evidence. That evidence is now available and Paul Tucker has to answer the question, why did you ruin so many people's lives back in 2008?
In July 2012 Paul Tucker sat in front of a parliamentary committee and said he did not lean on Bob Diamond the CEO of Barclays about setting Libor rates, he was right, he instructed Bob Diamond which is a totally different stance and one that makes Paul Tucker responsible.
Also in 2012 Sir Mervyn King, the Governor of the Bank of the Bank of England said: "Just as in 2008, there is a deep reluctance to admit the extent of the undercapitalisation of the banking system in many parts of the industrialised world." He added: "I am not sure that advanced economies in general will find it easy to get out of their current predicament without creditors acknowledging further likely losses, a significant writing down of asset values and recapitalisation of their financial systems. Only then will it be possible to return to a more normal provision of the vital banking services so crucial to an economic recovery."
There is no evidence to suggest that Sir Mervyn King was responsible or that he colluded with or even directed the actions of Paul Tucker at that time.
If the SFO [Serious Fraud Office] really want to nail the man at the top, they need go no further than Paul Tucker.
Sunday, 19 March 2017
Cheque books
I have just received an email from my bank telling me that my cheque book will be taken away from me in May 2017. This is not because I have been bad but because cheques have out lived their usefulness.
Cheques have been in use for more than 350 years, but they now appear to be on their way out as the internet and other forms of electronic payment bring us closer towards a cashless society. But what does this mean for people who rely on cheques?
The tide began to turn in 2007, when cheque usage fell to its lowest level in the UK. It was calculated that personal cheques accounted for only 6 percent of all personal transactions that did not involve cash.
The move away from cheques and cash has not been as rapid as the industry originally expected. In the mid-noughties estimates were that non-cash electronic payments would overtake cash payments by 2011. Now, this has been pushed back to 2015.
Mobile phone payment systems are being heavily touted as the ‘next big thing’ for non-cash payments, whereby if, for example, you want to pay for a service such as an electrician you can do so by exchanging text messages via telephone numbers that act as bank account details.
Charities such as Age Concern have also protested against the phasing out of cheques, rightly pointing out that many more mature people are not comfortable with using these new technologies. They have argued that paper-based forms of payment such as cheques should not be phased out until suitable alternatives for people of all ages are agreed upon. The Government appears to agree, and recently announced a formal inquiry into the proposed abolition of cheques and publicly stated that cheques will only be phased out if adequate alternatives are in place. They also accepted that cheques are still widely in use for sole traders, skilled tradesmen, small businesses, charities and schools, however cheques are on their death knell.
Cheques have been in use for more than 350 years, but they now appear to be on their way out as the internet and other forms of electronic payment bring us closer towards a cashless society. But what does this mean for people who rely on cheques?
The tide began to turn in 2007, when cheque usage fell to its lowest level in the UK. It was calculated that personal cheques accounted for only 6 percent of all personal transactions that did not involve cash.
The move away from cheques and cash has not been as rapid as the industry originally expected. In the mid-noughties estimates were that non-cash electronic payments would overtake cash payments by 2011. Now, this has been pushed back to 2015.
Mobile phone payment systems are being heavily touted as the ‘next big thing’ for non-cash payments, whereby if, for example, you want to pay for a service such as an electrician you can do so by exchanging text messages via telephone numbers that act as bank account details.
Charities such as Age Concern have also protested against the phasing out of cheques, rightly pointing out that many more mature people are not comfortable with using these new technologies. They have argued that paper-based forms of payment such as cheques should not be phased out until suitable alternatives for people of all ages are agreed upon. The Government appears to agree, and recently announced a formal inquiry into the proposed abolition of cheques and publicly stated that cheques will only be phased out if adequate alternatives are in place. They also accepted that cheques are still widely in use for sole traders, skilled tradesmen, small businesses, charities and schools, however cheques are on their death knell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)