These are multi national companies that operate all over the world, and the article is almost 11 years old.
Mr Grieve owns at least £240,000 worth of shares in companies operating in the southern African country such as Shell, mining firms Rio Tinto and Anglo American and the Standard Chartered bank. Defending his position, Mr Grieve said: "The Conservative Party has made it clear that companies operating in Zimbabwe must adhere to the highest ethical standards and I fully endorse that view."
But you somehow managed to not post the beginning of the article, which gives the full story.
I wonder how that happened?
The bit that said "They have done nothing wrong" particularly took my eye.
British firms warned on Zimbabwe
Some of Britain's biggest companies have been warned the "game is changing" when it comes to investing in Zimbabwe. Foreign office minister Lord Malloch Brown told firms such as BP, Barclays and Tesco they would find it harder to operate there as sanctions tightened.
He also urged MPs with shares in such companies to "look very carefully at their investment portfolios". Robert Mugabe is to be sworn in as the President of Zimbabwe after an election in which he was the only candidate. Lord Malloch Brown is flying to Egypt to join an African Union meeting which will discuss the election. He said there were "practical difficulties" for Britain in responding to an Italian call to shut embassies in Harare, because of the 14,000 British citizens currently in Zimbabwe.
All of these British and other companies will find that actually the knot is tightening Lord Malloch Brown Foreign office minister But he said all measures were being considered including tougher economic sanctions
"You start with political and economic pressures and you work up through the repertoire, but what you cannot accept is the status quo continuing. President Mugabe has to go," he told BBC1's Andrew Marr show 'Matter of conscience' Asked what this meant for British firms, he said: "These companies until now have been in the law as it currently stands, they shouldn't get the opprobrium for having somehow breached the law or been sanctions-busting. "The actions didn't govern the activities they were involved in. "But now the game is changing. Now, as I've said, everything is on the table and I think you will see, initially, not just deepened measures against these individuals who surround Mugabe, to hit their global wealth wherever it is.
But now the game is changing. Now, as I've said, everything is on the table and I think you will see, initially, not just deepened measures against these individuals who surround Mugabe, to hit their global wealth wherever it is. "But you will see measures against companies, international companies that trade with government entities, have government bank accounts. "I think all of these British and other companies will find that actually the knot is tightening and that a lot of activities they can do until now, they won't be able to do going forward." Asked about British MPs with investments in Zimbabwe, he said that up until now they had done nothing wrong "we are going to move the goalposts". "I think they, as a matter of conscience and, frankly, political good judgement are going to want to look carefully at their investment portfolios," he added.
But you somehow managed to not post the beginning of the article, which gives the full story.
I wonder how that happened?
The bit that said "They have done nothing wrong" particularly took my eye.
Legally they did nothing wrong, and i never said they did, it was their morals i am questioning, you dont seem to have a problem with that. But JRM opening a satellite office in Ireland is wrong in your twisted opinion.
Is it best to start a new thread on the morals or lack of them in politicians , this thread is about Brexit and is in danger of going way off course.
You never raised this when haysie mentioned JRMs and Mr Martins business ethics, strange you pipe up now.
Both of those were in relation to Brexit, and have been explained in what way. Zimbabwe ( as far as I’m aware) has nothing to do with Brexit. If you can point out how this is in relation to Brexit, please carry on.
Is it best to start a new thread on the morals or lack of them in politicians , this thread is about Brexit and is in danger of going way off course.
You never raised this when haysie mentioned JRMs and Mr Martins business ethics, strange you pipe up now.
Both of those were in relation to Brexit, and have been explained in what way. Zimbabwe ( as far as I’m aware) has nothing to do with Brexit. If you can point out how this is in relation to Brexit, please carry on.
Please tell me how JRMs decision to open a satellite office in Ireland is related to BREXIT ? Do i need your permission to post on this thread ?
But you somehow managed to not post the beginning of the article, which gives the full story.
I wonder how that happened?
The bit that said "They have done nothing wrong" particularly took my eye.
Legally they did nothing wrong, and i never said they did, it was their morals i am questioning, you dont seem to have a problem with that. But JRM opening a satellite office in Ireland is wrong in your twisted opinion.
I am not sure if you cant, or don't want to see what Lord Snooty has done.
He is The Chairman of The ERG Group, and the most vociferous of The Brexiteers. He swears by no deal, and says the country will be better off leaving, even though he has been recorded saying that this may take 50 years.
If the country is going to be better off out, then why would he suddenly open an office in Ireland? Unless it was for the purpose of EU access. Every time another business threatens, or decides to move to Europe. He writes it off as project fear. So what does he know, or think that is going to happen, that makes the expenditure associated with opening the Irish office worthwhile. Whatever it is he certainly is not informing the public.
This in my view is hypocritical, and I am not interested in your view.
On the other matter.
Firstly the article clearly states that they had done nothing wrong, but the goalposts were being moved. So the rules were changing.
Should I feel guilty for filling up my car with Shell, or BP petrol.
Some of the other companies mentioned were the likes of Tesco, and Barclays Bank.
I used to have an account with Barclays, and still have two credit cards with them. Was I in the wrong?
One of my friends worked for BP his whole life.
I used to work for a company that spent millions every year with a company that was owned by Rio Tinto.
Do you really think that the millions of people that own shares in Tesco, BP, and Barclays think that they have somehow assisted Robert Mugabe in some way.
These are stock market quoted companies.
If you buy shares in Tesco, you own shares in the company,
You cant buy shares in Tescos Harare branch.
That's all I have to say to you. I don't intend to reply to any more of your posts.
I don't intend insulting you, and wish you all the best on the forum, but please don't send me any posts, because I seriously wont be replying.
UK firms plan mass exodus if May allows no-deal Brexit
Thousands of British companies have already triggered emergency plans to cope with a no-deal Brexit, with many gearing up to move operations abroad if the UK crashes out of the EU, according to the British Chambers of Commerce. Before a crucial week in parliament, in which MPs will try to wrest control from Theresa May’s government in order to delay Brexit and avoid a no-deal outcome, the BCC said it believed companies that had already gone ahead with their plans represented the “tip of the iceberg” and that many of its 75,000 members were already spending vital funds to prepare for a disorderly exit. It said that in recent days alone, it had been told that 35 firms had activated plans to move operations out of the UK, or were stockpiling goods to combat the worst effects of Brexit.
Matt Griffith, director of policy at the BCC’s west of England branch, said that many more companies had acted to protect themselves since May’s Brexit deal was decisively rejected by MPs in the Commons earlier this month. He said: “Since the defeat for the prime minister’s deal, we have seen a sharp increase in companies taking actions to try and protect themselves from the worst effects of a no-deal Brexit. No deal has gone from being one of several possible scenarios to a firm date in the diary.”
Labour MP Yvette Cooper has revealed to the Observer that two major employers in her West Yorkshire constituency – luxury goods manufacturer Burberry and confectioner Haribo – had both written to her, warning of the damaging effects of no deal on their UK operations. Burberry employs 750 people in Castleford, and Haribo 700 across her constituency.
Battle of the Brexit blockers: Theresa May faces an all-out assault on Tuesday's critical Commons vote as hundreds of MPs try to grab control and delay Britain's departure from the EU More than dozen amendments have been tabled for Brexit update to Commons Downing Street fears that Speaker John Bercow will side with the Brexit blockers Theresa May is expected to demand changes to the Northern Irish backstop Major threat to Brexit is Labour’s Yvette Cooper's amendment that would let Parliament seize control of Brexit if Mrs May does not pass deal by next month
Theresa May faces an all-out assault on Tuesday as hundreds of ‘Brexit blocker’ MPs try to grab control and delay Britain’s departure from the EU. The Prime Minister is braced for a series of crippling attempts to destroy her wafer-thin grip on the Commons from Labour and Tory Remainers, with Downing Street expecting defeat over its battle to keep a No Deal option. More than a dozen amendments have been tabled for the Brexit update to the Commons that was forced on Mrs May by Tory Remainer Dominic Grieve.
And Downing Street fears that Speaker John Bercow will side with the Brexit blockers by ignoring attempts by Mrs May to use her own amendments to unite her party and her DUP allies behind changes to her Brussels deal. Mrs May is expected to give ground on Brexiteer demands to return to the EU and demand changes to the Northern Irish backstop, with several backbench amendments tabled. Amendments with Government support would usually be called by the Speaker, but Mr Bercow has repeatedly shown he is prepared to ignore such conventions.
More than a dozen amendments have been tabled for the Brexit update to the Commons that was forced on Mrs May by Tory Remainer Dominic Grieve, right. A major threat to Brexit has also emerged from Labour’s Yvette Cooper, left, whose amendment would let Parliament seize control of Brexit if Mrs May does not pass her deal by next month
Last night some MPs were even urging an orchestrated Commons walk-out to try to destroy Mr Bercow’s authority.
UK ready to declare martial law to avert no-deal Brexit chaos The government is gaming the use of drastic powers to halt unrest if the UK crashes out of the EU
Whitehall officials have been gaming a state of emergency and even the introduction of martial law in the event of disorder after a no-deal Brexit, it has emerged. Mandarins are considering how to use the sweeping powers available under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 to stop any civil disobedience resulting from the nation leaving the EU on March 29. Curfews, bans on travel, confiscation of property and, most drastic, the deployment of the armed forces to quell rioting are among the measures available to ministers under the legislation. They can also amend any act of parliament, except the Human Rights Act, for a maximum of 21 days. Robert MacFarlane, the deputy director of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat, has been involved in discussions about the practicalities…
Corbyn CRISIS: Labour facing mass exodus over leader's disastrous Brexit handling JEREMY Corbyn is fighting a grassroots crisis amid claims about 150,000 Labour members have deserted the party over the leader’s stance on Brexit
Mr Corbyn has repeatedly said Brexit would still go ahead if he won a general election prompting vast swathes of Remainers to defect to the pro-EU Liberal Democrats and Green Party. The exodus is so entrenched senior party activists have resorted to questioning deserters over why they are leaving. Labour sources have told The Times the overwhelming response is because of Jeremy Corbyn’s handling of Brexit.
Most who have left are in favour of holding a second referendum, an option Mr Corbyn has only gone as far as to say is “on the table” rather than committing to as Labour Remainers are demanding. There are claims some regional Labour parties have lost up to a third of their membership since 2016 with about 150,000 members quitting the party in the last 12 months - a figure the party has denied. But there was a further spike in resignations after Mr Corbyn demanded a general election saying overturning Brexit would not be a manifesto pledge.
Some who have left Labour have blamed the People’s Vote campaign for showing up Mr Corbyn non-committal to a second referendum which they see as the best way of keeping Britain in the European Union.
He is going around the country telling lies, and clearly hasn't a clue.
The fact that much of what he was saying wasn't true was pointed out to him in the first pub.
He ends up discouraging questions, because he has been found out.
Despite this, some members of the public, haven't seen through him and are still regarding him as credible.
This is what is dangerous. some of the public are believing his lies.
These are not opinions, these are lies that are being presented as the truth.
In the second pub his opening statement is all lies.
The ports wont block up. A lie. The Governments own report says that freight trade could drop by between 75% and 87% for up 6 months. So the ports will block up. We have to find, and train 8,000 customs officials to cope with the extra checks. We cant do this before March, so there will be delays.
Planes will fly. It would be true to say that some planes will fly. However in his no deal scenario, some of them wont. There will not be a problem for planes flying into Europe, provided an agreement is reached. However there will be a problem for our planes flying within Europe ie between two European airports. Five million flights may have to be cancelled.
Food in the shops will not be cheaper, as tariffs will have been imposed on imported food. So food in the shops will be more expensive.
We will not save the money, as we have a legal obligation to pay it.
Amazingly he got a round of applause for that nonsense.
The most truthful thing he says, comes right at the very end where he says "Ive got to find out where I am going here"
Purely with Brexit in mind, I have no respect for the man whatsoever, if it were a matter of opinions, and I disagreed with his, I would just be happy to argue about them.
However he has embarked on a Brexit tour assuring the general public that his lies are in fact the truth, and giving them a false sense of security.
He should stick to pubs.
However, airlines operating inside the EU (between member countries like France and Germany for example, without going through the UK) will have to comply with EU majority ownership rules. These rules say that the majority of shareholders in an airline have to be based in the EU—UK shareholders will no longer count towards that threshold after 29 March 2019. In order to operate flights within the EU, air carriers with UK shareholders will have to change their ownership structure to ensure they meet that threshold.
this is on youguv. If the UK leaves the EU in March 2019 with no agreement in place, UK and EU licensed airlines would lose the automatic right to operate air services between the UK and the EU without seeking advance permission. This would mean that airlines operating between the UK and the EU would need to seek individual permissions to operate. EU-licensed airlines would lose the ability to operate wholly within the UK (for example from Heathrow to Edinburgh) and UK-licensed airlines would lose the ability to operate intra-EU air services (for example from Milan to Paris).
As many as 5 million airline tickets could be canceled in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to the aviation trade group International Air Transport Association (IATA). In the event of a hard Brexit, the number of flights between the UK and the rest of Europe would be capped at 2018’s level, meaning that UK-based carriers could not add any new flights for 2019. That potentially means that UK airlines could not operate thousands of new flights they have scheduled for 2019 and would have to cancel them. IATA’s research estimates that there up to 5 million extra seats on these new flights added by airlines to their 2019 schedules to meet consumer demand. “Many of these will be in the peak summer season when families will be booking holidays,” the group said in a recent statement. “These are at risk if a ‘no deal’ Brexit occurs.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative MP North East Somerset and leading Brexiteer, shot back at the caller, who accused Mr Rees-Mogg’s company, Somerset Capital Management, of opening a new office in the Republic of Ireland to avoid the consequences of Brexit.
The caller accused Mr Rees-Mogg of being “probably the biggest hypocrite that I’ve ever known.”
Mr Rees-Mogg chuckled before replying: “It doesn’t have a new office in Dublin, it has a fund in Dublin.
PROMOTED STORY “We have funds all over the world to meet the requirements of our investors
Jacob Rees-Mogg left co-host Nick Ferrari in stitches with his snappy retort (Image: LBC) If you’re going to make aggressive charges, don’t you think it’s not a bad idea to get your facts right first?
Jacob Rees-Mogg
“Lots of investors like to have a structure that is in an independent jurisdiction, and that’s why we’ve set up a Dublin-based fund.
“It’s been in the pipeline since before we had the vote on leaving the European Union.
“We’ve got a London office and a Singapore office, but we won’t have a Dublin office."
The caller insisted that Mr Rees-Mogg was lying and the company was setting up an office in Dublin, adding: “I’m not going to change my view.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg warns Remainers they are OUTNUMBERED Play Video Mr Rees-Mogg coolly replied: “You come on and you bandy around charges against politicians.
“You then listen to the answer and say you know something that simply isn’t true.
“Can you find some evidence for us setting up an office in Dublin, and can you then send it in?
“If you’re going to make aggressive charges, don’t you think it’s not a bad idea to get your facts right first?”
Mr Rees-Mogg was forced to defend his firm’s decision to set up an investment vehicle in Dublin earlier this month, as critics accused the staunch Brexiteer, who has argued for a no-deal Brexit, of hypocrisy for the move.
He is going around the country telling lies, and clearly hasn't a clue.
The fact that much of what he was saying wasn't true was pointed out to him in the first pub.
He ends up discouraging questions, because he has been found out.
Despite this, some members of the public, haven't seen through him and are still regarding him as credible.
This is what is dangerous. some of the public are believing his lies.
These are not opinions, these are lies that are being presented as the truth.
In the second pub his opening statement is all lies.
The ports wont block up. A lie. The Governments own report says that freight trade could drop by between 75% and 87% for up 6 months. So the ports will block up. We have to find, and train 8,000 customs officials to cope with the extra checks. We cant do this before March, so there will be delays.
Planes will fly. It would be true to say that some planes will fly. However in his no deal scenario, some of them wont. There will not be a problem for planes flying into Europe, provided an agreement is reached. However there will be a problem for our planes flying within Europe ie between two European airports. Five million flights may have to be cancelled.
Food in the shops will not be cheaper, as tariffs will have been imposed on imported food. So food in the shops will be more expensive.
We will not save the money, as we have a legal obligation to pay it.
Amazingly he got a round of applause for that nonsense.
The most truthful thing he says, comes right at the very end where he says "Ive got to find out where I am going here"
Purely with Brexit in mind, I have no respect for the man whatsoever, if it were a matter of opinions, and I disagreed with his, I would just be happy to argue about them.
However he has embarked on a Brexit tour assuring the general public that his lies are in fact the truth, and giving them a false sense of security.
He should stick to pubs.
However, airlines operating inside the EU (between member countries like France and Germany for example, without going through the UK) will have to comply with EU majority ownership rules. These rules say that the majority of shareholders in an airline have to be based in the EU—UK shareholders will no longer count towards that threshold after 29 March 2019. In order to operate flights within the EU, air carriers with UK shareholders will have to change their ownership structure to ensure they meet that threshold.
this is on youguv. If the UK leaves the EU in March 2019 with no agreement in place, UK and EU licensed airlines would lose the automatic right to operate air services between the UK and the EU without seeking advance permission. This would mean that airlines operating between the UK and the EU would need to seek individual permissions to operate. EU-licensed airlines would lose the ability to operate wholly within the UK (for example from Heathrow to Edinburgh) and UK-licensed airlines would lose the ability to operate intra-EU air services (for example from Milan to Paris).
As many as 5 million airline tickets could be canceled in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to the aviation trade group International Air Transport Association (IATA). In the event of a hard Brexit, the number of flights between the UK and the rest of Europe would be capped at 2018’s level, meaning that UK-based carriers could not add any new flights for 2019. That potentially means that UK airlines could not operate thousands of new flights they have scheduled for 2019 and would have to cancel them. IATA’s research estimates that there up to 5 million extra seats on these new flights added by airlines to their 2019 schedules to meet consumer demand. “Many of these will be in the peak summer season when families will be booking holidays,” the group said in a recent statement. “These are at risk if a ‘no deal’ Brexit occurs.”
Note the bolded bits at the top.....it's not a lie , it's an opinion ! , also pay attention to your own quote regarding the governments report saying " could" ...then you need to google the word " could " and realise that is not the same as " will " . Also I fail to see how an opinion that port freight trade will drop and ports will block up correlate.
Dyson reported a record £631m of earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation for the year to December 31, up 41 per cent compared to 2015. It did not disclose pre-tax profits, but revenue rose 45 pe
Well done for what? Paying tax like Joe public do? Should every business be applauded for paying tax? Particularly interested in the bit at the end “ It did not disclose pre-tax profits. If you think they payed the same percentage as you or I, then I suggest you’re living in la la land.
Or well done for starting up a new venture outside of the UK ( As Brexit looms) ?
If every business packed up and moved abroad post Brexit, shall we applaud them for paying their tax in the past, and ignore the fact that potential jobs are lost?
The business continues to invest millions in this country when others have jumped ship big style . People want to keep knocking that , don't whinge when they decide , enoughs , enough . Incidentally , how much tax have you paid this year ? While we are at it as you seem keen to point out the relevance to Brexit ...dysons tax liabilities or company policies don't really have anything to do with it either .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47015517 Well done Sir Dyson.If you think they payed the same percentage as you or I, then I suggest you’re living in la la land.
Or well done for starting up a new venture outside of the UK ( As Brexit looms) ?
If every business packed up and moved abroad post Brexit, shall we applaud them for paying their tax in the past, and ignore the fact that potential jobs are lost?
What percentage of tax did Sir Dyson pay ? (i am assuming you know). Blatant lie Sir Dyson has not packed up his business and moved abroad.
The above comment , to avoid any confusion , was my comment in response to @tomgoodun ...unfortunately when you have a chain following on from someone who doesn't know how to complete the basics of quoting , this is what happens
Comments
But you somehow managed to not post the beginning of the article, which gives the full story.
I wonder how that happened?
The bit that said "They have done nothing wrong" particularly took my eye.
British firms warned on Zimbabwe
Some of Britain's biggest companies have been warned the "game is changing" when it comes to investing in Zimbabwe.
Foreign office minister Lord Malloch Brown told firms such as BP, Barclays and Tesco they would find it harder to operate there as sanctions tightened.
He also urged MPs with shares in such companies to "look very carefully at their investment portfolios".
Robert Mugabe is to be sworn in as the President of Zimbabwe after an election in which he was the only candidate.
Lord Malloch Brown is flying to Egypt to join an African Union meeting which will discuss the election.
He said there were "practical difficulties" for Britain in responding to an Italian call to shut embassies in Harare, because of the 14,000 British citizens currently in Zimbabwe.
All of these British and other companies will find that actually the knot is tightening
Lord Malloch Brown
Foreign office minister
But he said all measures were being considered including tougher economic sanctions
"You start with political and economic pressures and you work up through the repertoire, but what you cannot accept is the status quo continuing. President Mugabe has to go," he told BBC1's Andrew Marr show
'Matter of conscience'
Asked what this meant for British firms, he said: "These companies until now have been in the law as it currently stands, they shouldn't get the opprobrium for having somehow breached the law or been sanctions-busting.
"The actions didn't govern the activities they were involved in.
"But now the game is changing. Now, as I've said, everything is on the table and I think you will see, initially, not just deepened measures against these individuals who surround Mugabe, to hit their global wealth wherever it is.
But now the game is changing. Now, as I've said, everything is on the table and I think you will see, initially, not just deepened measures against these individuals who surround Mugabe, to hit their global wealth wherever it is.
"But you will see measures against companies, international companies that trade with government entities, have government bank accounts.
"I think all of these British and other companies will find that actually the knot is tightening and that a lot of activities they can do until now, they won't be able to do going forward."
Asked about British MPs with investments in Zimbabwe, he said that up until now they had done nothing wrong "we are going to move the goalposts".
"I think they, as a matter of conscience and, frankly, political good judgement are going to want to look carefully at their investment portfolios," he added.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7479634.stm
Its called Morals.
But you somehow managed to not post the beginning of the article, which gives the full story.
I wonder how that happened?
The bit that said "They have done nothing wrong" particularly took my eye.
Legally they did nothing wrong, and i never said they did, it was their morals i am questioning, you dont seem to have a problem with that.
But JRM opening a satellite office in Ireland is wrong in your twisted opinion.
Zimbabwe ( as far as I’m aware) has nothing to do with Brexit.
If you can point out how this is in relation to Brexit, please carry on.
Do i need your permission to post on this thread ?
I wonder how that happened?
The bit that said "They have done nothing wrong" particularly took my eye.
Legally they did nothing wrong, and i never said they did, it was their morals i am questioning, you dont seem to have a problem with that.
But JRM opening a satellite office in Ireland is wrong in your twisted opinion.
I am not sure if you cant, or don't want to see what Lord Snooty has done.
He is The Chairman of The ERG Group, and the most vociferous of The Brexiteers. He swears by no deal, and says the country will be better off leaving, even though he has been recorded saying that this may take 50 years.
If the country is going to be better off out, then why would he suddenly open an office in Ireland? Unless it was for the purpose of EU access. Every time another business threatens, or decides to move to Europe. He writes it off as project fear. So what does he know, or think that is going to happen, that makes the expenditure associated with opening the Irish office worthwhile. Whatever it is he certainly is not informing the public.
This in my view is hypocritical, and I am not interested in your view.
On the other matter.
Firstly the article clearly states that they had done nothing wrong, but the goalposts were being moved. So the rules were changing.
Should I feel guilty for filling up my car with Shell, or BP petrol.
Some of the other companies mentioned were the likes of Tesco, and Barclays Bank.
I used to have an account with Barclays, and still have two credit cards with them. Was I in the wrong?
One of my friends worked for BP his whole life.
I used to work for a company that spent millions every year with a company that was owned by Rio Tinto.
Do you really think that the millions of people that own shares in Tesco, BP, and Barclays think that they have somehow assisted Robert Mugabe in some way.
These are stock market quoted companies.
If you buy shares in Tesco, you own shares in the company,
You cant buy shares in Tescos Harare branch.
That's all I have to say to you. I don't intend to reply to any more of your posts.
I don't intend insulting you, and wish you all the best on the forum, but please don't send me any posts, because I seriously wont be replying.
Mark Francois on Brexit being attacked, esp. by industry bosses
Thousands of British companies have already triggered emergency plans to cope with a no-deal Brexit, with many gearing up to move operations abroad if the UK crashes out of the EU, according to the British Chambers of Commerce.
Before a crucial week in parliament, in which MPs will try to wrest control from Theresa May’s government in order to delay Brexit and avoid a no-deal outcome, the BCC said it believed companies that had already gone ahead with their plans represented the “tip of the iceberg” and that many of its 75,000 members were already spending vital funds to prepare for a disorderly exit.
It said that in recent days alone, it had been told that 35 firms had activated plans to move operations out of the UK, or were stockpiling goods to combat the worst effects of Brexit.
Matt Griffith, director of policy at the BCC’s west of England branch, said that many more companies had acted to protect themselves since May’s Brexit deal was decisively rejected by MPs in the Commons earlier this month.
He said: “Since the defeat for the prime minister’s deal, we have seen a sharp increase in companies taking actions to try and protect themselves from the worst effects of a no-deal Brexit. No deal has gone from being one of several possible scenarios to a firm date in the diary.”
Labour MP Yvette Cooper has revealed to the Observer that two major employers in her West Yorkshire constituency – luxury goods manufacturer Burberry and confectioner Haribo – had both written to her, warning of the damaging effects of no deal on their UK operations. Burberry employs 750 people in Castleford, and Haribo 700 across her constituency.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/26/brexit-british-firms-mass-exodus-no-deal
More than dozen amendments have been tabled for Brexit update to Commons
Downing Street fears that Speaker John Bercow will side with the Brexit blockers
Theresa May is expected to demand changes to the Northern Irish backstop
Major threat to Brexit is Labour’s Yvette Cooper's amendment that would let Parliament seize control of Brexit if Mrs May does not pass deal by next month
Theresa May faces an all-out assault on Tuesday as hundreds of ‘Brexit blocker’ MPs try to grab control and delay Britain’s departure from the EU.
The Prime Minister is braced for a series of crippling attempts to destroy her wafer-thin grip on the Commons from Labour and Tory Remainers, with Downing Street expecting defeat over its battle to keep a No Deal option.
More than a dozen amendments have been tabled for the Brexit update to the Commons that was forced on Mrs May by Tory Remainer Dominic Grieve.
And Downing Street fears that Speaker John Bercow will side with the Brexit blockers by ignoring attempts by Mrs May to use her own amendments to unite her party and her DUP allies behind changes to her Brussels deal.
Mrs May is expected to give ground on Brexiteer demands to return to the EU and demand changes to the Northern Irish backstop, with several backbench amendments tabled.
Amendments with Government support would usually be called by the Speaker, but Mr Bercow has repeatedly shown he is prepared to ignore such conventions.
More than a dozen amendments have been tabled for the Brexit update to the Commons that was forced on Mrs May by Tory Remainer Dominic Grieve, right. A major threat to Brexit has also emerged from Labour’s Yvette Cooper, left, whose amendment would let Parliament seize control of Brexit if Mrs May does not pass her deal by next month
Last night some MPs were even urging an orchestrated Commons walk-out to try to destroy Mr Bercow’s authority.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6636057/Theresa-faces-assault-Tuesdays-critical-Commons-vote.html
The government is gaming the use of drastic powers to halt unrest if the UK crashes out of the EU
Whitehall officials have been gaming a state of emergency and even the introduction of martial law in the event of disorder after a no-deal Brexit, it has emerged.
Mandarins are considering how to use the sweeping powers available under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 to stop any civil disobedience resulting from the nation leaving the EU on March 29.
Curfews, bans on travel, confiscation of property and, most drastic, the deployment of the armed forces to quell rioting are among the measures available to ministers under the legislation.
They can also amend any act of parliament, except the Human Rights Act, for a maximum of 21 days.
Robert MacFarlane, the deputy director of the Civil Contingencies Secretariat, has been involved in discussions about the practicalities…
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/uk-ready-to-declare-martial-law-to-avert-no-deal-brexit-chaos-bfqgzzlrw
JEREMY Corbyn is fighting a grassroots crisis amid claims about 150,000 Labour members have deserted the party over the leader’s stance on Brexit
Mr Corbyn has repeatedly said Brexit would still go ahead if he won a general election prompting vast swathes of Remainers to defect to the pro-EU Liberal Democrats and Green Party. The exodus is so entrenched senior party activists have resorted to questioning deserters over why they are leaving. Labour sources have told The Times the overwhelming response is because of Jeremy Corbyn’s handling of Brexit.
Most who have left are in favour of holding a second referendum, an option Mr Corbyn has only gone as far as to say is “on the table” rather than committing to as Labour Remainers are demanding.
There are claims some regional Labour parties have lost up to a third of their membership since 2016 with about 150,000 members quitting the party in the last 12 months - a figure the party has denied.
But there was a further spike in resignations after Mr Corbyn demanded a general election saying overturning Brexit would not be a manifesto pledge.
Some who have left Labour have blamed the People’s Vote campaign for showing up Mr Corbyn non-committal to a second referendum which they see as the best way of keeping Britain in the European Union.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1078187/brexit-news-labour-membership-exodus-jeremy-corbyn-crisis-brexit-latest-second-referendum
He is going around the country telling lies, and clearly hasn't a clue.
The fact that much of what he was saying wasn't true was pointed out to him in the first pub.
He ends up discouraging questions, because he has been found out.
Despite this, some members of the public, haven't seen through him and are still regarding him as credible.
This is what is dangerous. some of the public are believing his lies.
These are not opinions, these are lies that are being presented as the truth.
In the second pub his opening statement is all lies.
The ports wont block up. A lie. The Governments own report says that freight trade could drop by between 75% and 87% for up 6 months. So the ports will block up. We have to find, and train 8,000 customs officials to cope with the extra checks. We cant do this before March, so there will be delays.
Planes will fly. It would be true to say that some planes will fly. However in his no deal scenario, some of them wont. There will not be a problem for planes flying into Europe, provided an agreement is reached. However there will be a problem for our planes flying within Europe ie between two European airports. Five million flights may have to be cancelled.
Food in the shops will not be cheaper, as tariffs will have been imposed on imported food. So food in the shops will be more expensive.
We will not save the money, as we have a legal obligation to pay it.
Amazingly he got a round of applause for that nonsense.
The most truthful thing he says, comes right at the very end where he says "Ive got to find out where I am going here"
Purely with Brexit in mind, I have no respect for the man whatsoever, if it were a matter of opinions, and I disagreed with his, I would just be happy to argue about them.
However he has embarked on a Brexit tour assuring the general public that his lies are in fact the truth, and giving them a false sense of security.
He should stick to pubs.
However, airlines operating inside the EU (between member countries like France and Germany for example, without going through the UK) will have to comply with EU majority ownership rules. These rules say that the majority of shareholders in an airline have to be based in the EU—UK shareholders will no longer count towards that threshold after 29 March 2019. In order to operate flights within the EU, air carriers with UK shareholders will have to change their ownership structure to ensure they meet that threshold.
this is on youguv.
If the UK leaves the EU in March 2019 with no agreement in place, UK and EU licensed airlines would lose the automatic right to operate air services between the UK and the EU without seeking advance permission. This would mean that airlines operating between the UK and the EU would need to seek individual permissions to operate. EU-licensed airlines would lose the ability to operate wholly within the UK (for example from Heathrow to Edinburgh) and UK-licensed airlines would lose the ability to operate intra-EU air services (for example from Milan to Paris).
As many as 5 million airline tickets could be canceled in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to the aviation trade group International Air Transport Association (IATA).
In the event of a hard Brexit, the number of flights between the UK and the rest of Europe would be capped at 2018’s level, meaning that UK-based carriers could not add any new flights for 2019. That potentially means that UK airlines could not operate thousands of new flights they have scheduled for 2019 and would have to cancel them.
IATA’s research estimates that there up to 5 million extra seats on these new flights added by airlines to their 2019 schedules to meet consumer demand. “Many of these will be in the peak summer season when families will be booking holidays,” the group said in a recent statement. “These are at risk if a ‘no deal’ Brexit occurs.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Conservative MP North East Somerset and leading Brexiteer, shot back at the caller, who accused Mr Rees-Mogg’s company, Somerset Capital Management, of opening a new office in the Republic of Ireland to avoid the consequences of Brexit.
The caller accused Mr Rees-Mogg of being “probably the biggest hypocrite that I’ve ever known.”
Mr Rees-Mogg chuckled before replying: “It doesn’t have a new office in Dublin, it has a fund in Dublin.
PROMOTED STORY
“We have funds all over the world to meet the requirements of our investors
Jacob Rees-Mogg left co-host Nick Ferrari in stitches with his snappy retort (Image: LBC)
If you’re going to make aggressive charges, don’t you think it’s not a bad idea to get your facts right first?
Jacob Rees-Mogg
“Lots of investors like to have a structure that is in an independent jurisdiction, and that’s why we’ve set up a Dublin-based fund.
“It’s been in the pipeline since before we had the vote on leaving the European Union.
“We’ve got a London office and a Singapore office, but we won’t have a Dublin office."
The caller insisted that Mr Rees-Mogg was lying and the company was setting up an office in Dublin, adding: “I’m not going to change my view.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg warns Remainers they are OUTNUMBERED
Play Video
Mr Rees-Mogg coolly replied: “You come on and you bandy around charges against politicians.
“You then listen to the answer and say you know something that simply isn’t true.
“Can you find some evidence for us setting up an office in Dublin, and can you then send it in?
“If you’re going to make aggressive charges, don’t you think it’s not a bad idea to get your facts right first?”
Mr Rees-Mogg was forced to defend his firm’s decision to set up an investment vehicle in Dublin earlier this month, as critics accused the staunch Brexiteer, who has argued for a no-deal Brexit, of hypocrisy for the move.
The whole story.
Well done Sir Dyson.
The above comment , to avoid any confusion , was my comment in response to @tomgoodun ...unfortunately when you have a chain following on from someone who doesn't know how to complete the basics of quoting , this is what happens