Ok, we are out, what now?

"But leaving the EU doesn't help - that was my point. The EU has done more to try and regulate tax havens than the British government ever has. If people voted as a protest against the elite, they have achieved nothing. I personally know two people who voted Leave for that reason - one is an wannabe anarchist and the other a hedge-fund manager. I don't identify with either."

From a post by daphne.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/07/02/the-us-has-agreed-on-country-by-country-reporting-rules-for-multinational-corporations/

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/06/29/we-got-so-close-to-country-by-country-reporting-in-the-uk-yesterday/

"Much more likely, all the UK’s tax havens who are at present largely protected from EU sanction by our membership will be subject to them, and most EU countries will be only too happen to place restrictions on these places for two reasons. One is the harm they cause. The other is that everyone knows that they are the soft underbelly of the City of London: this is where the attack on the City will be mounted. Brexit and leaving the single market could be very bad news indeed for the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories.

What is more, the UK will also be vulnerable because, quite surprisingly, it does not have double tax agreements with almost half of the EU’s member states. Tax deduction at source before money ever reaches London may be much more common than people realise as a result. I am grateful to Vanessa Houlder for pointing this out.

What surprised me was how popular the line against tax havens was. If they had friends at the event they were not putting their heads above the parapet. No one put forward the argument that tax havens were going to have a new field day, although what was agreed was that they still are. Howard Bilton’s claim that they are well regulated places and that Mossack Fonseca was the bad apple in the barrel was met with the scepticism both claims deserved."

From a third article. The UK as a tax haven? Perish the thought. Who in government would want that?

Oh good, another angry person selling copy.

This is really going to move the country on.

What's done is done. There will be no second referendum. It's absolutely pointless, except perhaps as a way of working through your grief, to rant on about this.

You aren't going to chance anything so what's the point?

It's not over until the Fat Lady sings- and I am not in the mood for singing.

I thought,Anya, that you were the one who said you were politically active when you were young; CND marches etc. So, what is wrong with those of us that disagree with the result of this referendum fighting on? Or is it only causes that you agree with that are right?

I think we should bide our time. Although I voted remain, my first reaction when I heard the the referendum result was that the EU should kick us out as fast as possible.

Now,I am beginning to think that keeping quiet and seeing what happens will be the better tactic. It is clear that getting out of the EU is going to be very complicated and the EU are not going to let us slip into a nice Brexit promised solution of all the carrots (free trade, free movement in Europe for UK citizens) but none of the kicks (no free movement for EU citizens into Britain).

I suspect negotiations with the EU will be prolonged and not advantagious and it may well be that the national sentiment begins to change, especially if international companies who opened big manufacturing facilities in the UK to get free access to Europe start to stop investing in the UK and start gradually transferring their European operations to other countries.

It may be possible to run another referendum in, say 5 years time, as we begin to experience the problems of Brexit. By then enough time will have passed that a demand for a referendum to stay in the EU can be configured as a referendum on acceptance of the new negotiations

Hmm...not sure about that M0nica, but who knows?

Talking of the Brussels elite, I was reading that the EU has about 600 trade negotiators. We have 20 because we've always relied on the EU ones. This may not bode well for our new trade negotiations when we finally get round to them.

I read we only have 3 negotiators

So instead of the Brussels elite, they want to be ruled by the Tory party elite. Did you explain that
Actually, no I didn't; I had never met this person or her friends before and, as a guest, I wasn't about to start lecturing them on where they had gone wrong with their thinking.
I just explained that I had not voted in the same way as them and thought we were better off in.

I listened to her and she had the courtesy to listen to me, but I would not have 'explained' where she was wrong.

Daphnedill....We have been hoodwinked over the EU many times since 1973,and by various political parties,that,s how we have remained in it.
The British Electorate were robbed of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty by Gordon Brown.
A large proportion of the UK would have voted against it, and we would not have been as entrenched into the EU as we are now.

A public referendum on the EU should have been given years ago.

Re trade negotiators.
Reporting varies up to 55 negotiators in the UK compared to hundreds in the EU.

New Zealand have several free trade agreements around the world ( 8 apparently)
and have offered their services to the UK to help with Brexit negotiations.

In the meantime- just as we knew it would (I mean it is absolutely clear re article 50):

The EU are stating that Britain must first leave the EU before trade negotiations can begin. Negotiating will begin as a third country, AFTER Brexit.

At the EU summit this week the 27 government leaders - without the UK - agreed Brexit "divorce" talks should begin and end before any talks on a new settlement for the UK, Chris Morris says.
Brussels sources told our correspondent there was a real determination among the leaders not to mix the two.
The statement from the 27 said they wanted the UK to be "a close partner of the EU". But they also spoke of an agreement to be "concluded with the UK as a third country".
The phrase "third country" means the UK post-Brexit.
Outside the EU, the UK would trade with the bloc under World Trade Organization rules, pending a possible new deal on free trade.
WTO conditions would mean trade tariffs and non-tariff barriers, as the UK would no longer be in the EU single market.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-...endum-36682735

Now a prospective immigrant from India has found teh perfect solution:

Cameron needs to immediately apply for Britain to become a Union Territory of the Republic of India.

Whilst historically speaking it seems only right and proper to give India a chance to rule Britain for a few hundred years - it actually makes a lot of sense for the British too!

Worried about jobs? India’s economy is growing 4x faster than Europe’s and will overtake the entire EU’s sometime in the 2030s - becoming twice the size of the EU economy by 2050.

In economic terms alone every young Brit should wish to replace their garish red EU passport with a classy blue Indian one ASAP.

Worried about the future of the NHS? India already provides nearly as many Doctors to the NHS as the EU does - and that doesn’t even include those of Indian origin, born or educated, in Britain. 25,055 Indian v 30,082 EU.

Worried about diversity? With over 100 different languages spoken everyday and adherents of every religion - even Britain’s favourite materialist consumption - there truly is something for everyone here!

Worried about being understood? English is one of India's two official languages - which will be a huge relief for all those have struggled to communicate with their continental neighbours for all these years.

Worried about not being part of something bigger? India has more than twice the population of the EU. Half of which are under 35, so the bonus is no more worries about an ageing population!

Worried about where to go on holiday? The Himalayas are nearly three times the height of the Alps and thousands of miles longer - there are more sandy beaches along India’s coastline than all the Costas you can dream of - and India has tropical rainforests and even a desert too! Plenty of visa free inter-railing adventures as well on the world’s largest railway network.

Worried about not being ruled by an unlected bureaucracy in a far away land? We’ve got that covered as well! Nowhere on the planet has perfected the shuffling of paper and writing of rules better than New Delhi - what’s more India’s civil servants salaries are more than 10x lower than Brussels. Talk about getting more for less!

British MPs, the whole of Whitehall and even the Royal Family (subject to the return of the Kohinor) can all be pensioned off at the fast expanding and internationally renowned Best Exotic Marigold Hotel chain in Jaipur.

Which would free up the Houses of Parliament, Buckingham Palace and much of Central London to become a permanent Bollywood film set. With more viewers than Hollywood this is sure to help keep London’s tourist economy going - which within a decade or two will be mostly Indians in any case.

Embrace the 21st Century. Swap Brussels for Delhi. Say Goodbye to Little Europe and Namaste to Incredible India!

Yours in waiting,
An Immigrant of British Origin,
New Delhi, India

Hmm hmm hmm

I've just come up with a great idea, which might solve some problems.

Let's give England back to Rome. The Romans never conquered Scotland, so the Scots can do what they want - as can the Welsh and Irish. The UK would have to let a few Italians live her, but we could kick everybody else out. I know that would be a problem for mixed-race people or those with foreign spouses, but I'm sure would sort that out...errrmmm...maybe not .

It seems people want to turn the clock back to the 1960s (remember those days? melamine tea services, green peppers and yoghurt = exotic items, rubbishy British-made cars), but why stop there? Let's go back to a golden age! Anybody know of one?

BSE beefburgers. One of our greatest contributions to Europe. Yummy.

... I am not even allowed to give blood here in Europe- as I might be a BSE carrier as I lived in the UK at the time, and very near to where it all started (yeah- mad cow indeed you may say).

Sorry dd, there's a flaw in your return to Rome. According to Mary Beard, who I revere for many things including being totally unconcerned about what other people think of her, the Roman's developed their empire by allowing anyone to settle anywhere and making it relatively easy to become a Roman citizen. So that wouldn't go down too well with a lot of people in the UK.

I guess Golden Ages depend on how much money you have and how little social conscience. Given that I've already thought the late 20's and early 30's looked pretty good. Assuming I had plenty of money, of course !

I bet not even Cameron and Osborne thought of that, granjura, when they said that we should do more trade with India and China.

I am deeply embarrassed by the apostrophe in Roman's.

The Roman army were recruited from every area which the Romsns conquered, so from parts of what is now Europe (including Wales) and beyond

I can spell Romans but can't get back to correct it!

www.ancient.eu/map_pelagios/

Empires come and go

Was not were !

Well, the Roman idea is out then!

You've hit the nail on the head about Golden Ages. There's never been one in the UK, unless you were rich, able bodied, straight, male, non-Jewish, white (except Irish).

It seems that China is falling out of love with the UK.

www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/with-brexit-china-could-be-losing-its-best-friend-in-the-eu/2016/07/01/1d5de592-3ed2-11e6-9e16-4cf01a41decb_story.html

daphne melamine tea services are very 'retro' - probably worth quite a bit

I don't think the 1920s were all like Downton Abbey