Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

put the way we would all think of it .....

£ will currently buy € 1.283
a year ago it was about € 1.41

Yes and i remember the exchange rate a few years ago, when it was
down to around the 1.13 euro area...

"WE"?

Do you mean wee, wee, wee?

I remember that too granny, the elixir of life they was calling it then, helps exports etc.

Funny how things change.


Talking of change:

The stay group is fooked, all the polls are turning against, which is some doing seeing as they only ask the Highgate hooligans what they think, forget the bloke in the street.

Here is a vote of confidence for the "exiters".

uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-property-idUKKCN0YR0EG?feedType=nl&feedName=ukmorningdigest&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=UK%20Morning%20Digest%202016-06-07&utm_term=UK%20Morning%20Digest


Investors add Brexit clauses to British property deals before EU vote
BY ANA NICOLACI DA COSTA AND ESHA VAISH



Commercial property investors are writing clauses into contracts giving buyers the right to walk away from real estate deals if Britain votes to leave the European Union this month, as a way to unfreeze a sector stalled by uncertainty over Brexit.

Transactions in commercial property fell by 40 percent in the first quarter, according to the Bank of England, with many buyers and sellers waiting to see the outcome of the June 23 referendum in case an exit vote hurts property prices.

In one example from a commercial transaction seen by Reuters, a clause sets a deadline after the vote when the buyer would be permitted to terminate the contract if the referendum results in a decision to leave.

Sellers too are taking legal precautions, seeking language in contracts to ensure that Brexit will not be considered a "material adverse change" that would annul a deal.

Paul Firth, head of real estate at law firm Irwin Mitchell LLP, said a significant percent of the firm's "bigger investment deals" with values ranging from 10 to 80 million pounds either included Brexit clauses, or purchasers had sought to negotiate that they be included.

He said the use of such clauses had increased in recent weeks as the referendum date draws closer.

"(Investors) fear that the value and return on investment properties may decline and that it may not be as good an investment if Britain withdraws from the EU," he said.

Since commercial real estate deals are usually confidential, it was not possible to determine precisely how common such clauses are.

However, half of the 24 law firms, brokerages and commercial property firms Reuters spoke to said they had used Brexit clauses, brokered a deal with such a clause or had requests to include them in at least one deal. Some of the others said they had seen them.

Prime Minister David Cameron and other politicians supporting the campaign to stay in the EU say a vote to leave would damage the economy and cause property prices to fall. Those campaigning to exit say any such threat is overblown and Britain can prosper outside the EU.

But whether overblown or not, it is a risk some buyers seem unwilling to take.

Guarantees are being offered not only for commercial property but also for homes. An invitation to a May 25 launch of some floors of Two Fifty One, a 41-storey luxury apartment tower going up in south London's gentrifying Elephant and Castle district, offered buyers a "money back Brexit guarantee pledge".

Buyers attending the launch would not have to exchange contracts until July 6 and could withdraw their offer and get their deposits back if they were unhappy with the outcome of the vote, said Martin Lent, chief executive of SCM, the development manager for the project by residential developer Oakmayne.

In commercial property, Brexit clauses are more common in higher value deals where the risks are greater, said Andrew Friend, director of a UK property fund at Henderson, one of Europe's largest investment managers.

Interesting C+P from II.

"If there is a vote to leave there will be thousands of beaurocrats, and many consultants tied up for years negotiating terms of the divorce - we may not like to eurocrats we are paying for, but this would be a real gravy train for many civil servants."

It should take about 4years to disentangle, which means about 10years in practice.

he don't half gibber on that one ........ clearly nothing else to keep him occupied and perhaps his family won't speak to him either

There is no shortage of 'crats, there are thousands of them filling in €U forms, simply divert them onto something usefull.

the fact that it takes forever and a day for the eurocrats to knock together even a sensible trade deal, shows how badly in need of radical reform the whole structure is ...... and it will get ever worse as membership grows almost like japanese knotweed

Accepted that reform is needed, as with all dynamically developing organisation.

Doesn't mean one should stamp one's feet like petulant children who are not getting all their own way and demonstrate by throwing their toys out of the pram.

In any organisation, there has to be "give and take" for it to be successful, negotiate it.

Also, I can see there may be a need for an EU "Defence Force" especially with America seeming to wish to withdraw from being the World's Policeman.

I would prefer a "force" representing an entity I belong to, than residing on the outside of such a entity.

Whether or for how long NATO will exist, I don't know.

Neither do I know whether Putin has thoughts of expanding his regime.

PS.

What "democratic" vote do we have on the running and rules of NATO. Is the UK in charge of the "actions" of "Nato"?

nothing wrong with voting in either direction
it's a personal viewpoint ....... personal being a bit too much emphasised by some posters

Read back through some of the rubbish you have posted.

This is supposed to make sense.


http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/jun/07/france-wrong-imprison-ghanian-woman-enter-britain-illegaly-eu-court-rules

Instead of France just locking the woman up she should have been returned
to her country of origin, but its easier for France and the EU who
have a no return policy, in general just to lock/contain them just like in the
French manner of excepting the camps on the French coasts,
when the French authorities should be processing them and if they have
no right to be there, returned to their own countries...

The remain campaign MPs outnumber the leave group by 3 to 1. Firstly, as a group they may vote against a leave result in the referendum. Secondly, if we do leave then only parliament has the power to accept any trade agreements that may be negotiated.

There could be several trade agreements on offer, such as Norway's, Canada's, Switzerland's, Iceland's or WTO rules. Parliament will choose the one that the majority of MPs want. That means the MPs who are 3 to 1 in favour of the EU. It is very likely that they will choose a Norway type deal which will allow free movement of people just as we have now. It won't matter how tough the negotiators are or what deal they recommend. The pro EU MPs will decide.

In these justices dept, ie: Home office etc and the French equivalent ,
they're supposed to be intelligent people and should be able to see
where the problems could arise, but also done the right thing at the
begining.

Many Remain MPs 'expect' that the likely economic shock following a Brexit vote would increase pressure on any post-referendum Conservative government to seek access to the single market outside the EU.
Labour MP Stephen Kinnock told the BBC "If the British people voted to leave the EU that's one thing. "But can we really say that they voted for the devastation and destruction of the entire exporting sector of our economy? I don't think you can necessarily say that there's a democratic mandate for that."
Kinnock . That family again. Mam and dad go into the Lords hand in hand each day, pass Go and collect 600 quid to supplement their various pensions, then meet up with the kids who are also living off the exchequer, for a free lunch. Nice. Champagne socialists.

Reality is that the Tories still have a overall majority and must respect the referendum in deed and spirit. If MPs start to play silly buggers the out MPs can bring the government to its knees in quick time and force another general election.