New cabinet

a1ex2001 · 14 Jul 2016 at 05:03

Hikari Kisugi said:
Why should we have stuck with things as they were?
Since the public clearly voted for change

I wonder if this is purely a Brexit cabinet, in place for three an a bit years, get us out, get us to the next election intact, and then she runs, wins, burns them all?
It does looks like she has stacked the deck full of brexiters, and will assume they can sing from that hymnsheet for a time.

This is a backside covering cabinet with plenty of leave favouring people in place to take the can for the compromises ahead although I'm not sure that will be enough to save May come the next election!

GAC · 14 Jul 2016 at 05:19

a1ex2001 said:
This is a backside covering cabinet with plenty of leave favouring people in place to take the can for the compromises ahead although I'm not sure that will be enough to save May come the next election!

may i borrow that crystal ball for this weekends lotto numbers please. honestly she's not even been pm for 24 hours and she's already being voted out at the next election lol

BaronVonDuncs · 14 Jul 2016 at 05:50

Hikari Kisugi said:
A trade deal with America, such as TTIP, and the inherent flaws it might have brought are a great thing to avoid.
Allowing companies to sue governments for policy chnages that hurt profit margins seems a ridiculous way to start doing business, look at how much the world has chnaged in the past thirty years.
Old telecoms companies sueing the govt as they sell mobile phone licences which would hurt the old companies profits. Situations such at that would be insane.
I hope we never acquire a govt willing to implement such a short term stupid, long term blind policy.

USA always puts ISDS provisions in its trade treaties, it is part of NAFTA as well which Canada has found out to its cost. Ironically in the EU we had more chance of avoiding it as a lot of countries are skeptical about ISDS provisions and the EU is big enough to push back at the USA as its a bigger market in GDP terms than the USA. Tiny pitiful little Brexit England won't have a chance of pushing back so expect to see every trade treaty with the USA come with ISDS provisions, besides the Tories are not actually against it. So we got back control so we could give it to secret corporate run international courts that allow multinationals to sue governments for anything that damages their profits. Awesome! another stonking win for Brexit.

McPhee · 14 Jul 2016 at 06:22

BaronVonDuncs said:
USA always puts ISDS provisions in its trade treaties, it is part of NAFTA as well which Canada has found out to its cost. Ironically in the EU we had more chance of avoiding it as a lot of countries are skeptical about ISDS provisions and the EU is big enough to push back at the USA as its a bigger market in GDP terms than the USA. Tiny pitiful little Brexit England won't have a chance of pushing back so expect to see every trade treaty with the USA come with ISDS provisions, besides the Tories are not actually against it. So we got back control so we could give it to secret corporate run international courts that allow multinationals to sue governments for anything that damages their profits. Awesome! another stonking win for Brexit.

I think you're missing the obvious here...

We don't need to have a tariff-free trade agreement with the USA. It isn't essential.If an acceptable deal cannot be reached, a deal won't happen. The primary difference is it's now up to the UK to decide what constitutes an acceptable deal.

BaronVonDuncs · 14 Jul 2016 at 06:31

satchef1 said:
I think you're missing the obvious here...

We don't need to have a tariff-free trade agreement with the USA. It isn't essential.If an acceptable deal cannot be reached, a deal won't happen. The primary difference is it's now up to the UK to decide what constitutes an acceptable deal.

No deal means less trade, add in non tariff barriers and the effect of distance (rule of thumb if distance doubles trade falls by a half) and you are talking about a possibly substantial reduction in UK income. Right now the USA is 17% of our trade.

The point is that whilst in theory you might have choice in reality you have none. Its like going into a shop and renting a washing machine the contract terms suck balls but you can't vary them and if you really need the machine you are pretty stuck, so you sign up to the contract. In theory its a legal contract that is a mutual agreement that you chose to enter into freely but in reality circumstances so constrained your freedom of choice that it is only de jure and not de facto freedom.

So we will basically be able to agree to whatever terms the USA drops on us or we can cut off our own ears in protest. Hooray we took back control!

HEADRAT · 14 Jul 2016 at 06:35

OK I'm not a Boris fan, he comes over as a buffoon and this will lead to people underestimating him (me included)

I absolutely sure he's a very intelligent man, he's obviously got this role for some reason, I can't see Mrs May giving him the role because she thinks he's funny

You could have course take the view that May has put him in this position to fail, that will destroy his chances of ever challenging May for her job.

McPhee · 14 Jul 2016 at 06:50

BaronVonDuncs said:
No deal means less trade, add in non tariff barriers and the effect of distance (rule of thumb if distance doubles trade falls by a half) and you are talking about a possibly substantial reduction in UK income. Right now the USA is 17% of our trade.

The point is that whilst in theory you might have choice in reality you have none. Its like going into a shop and renting a washing machine the contract terms suck balls but you can't vary them and if you really need the machine you are pretty stuck, so you sign up to the contract. In theory its a legal contract that is a mutual agreement that you chose to enter into freely but in reality circumstances so constrained your freedom of choice that it is only de jure and not de facto freedom.

So we will basically be able to agree to whatever terms the USA drops on us or we can cut off our own ears in protest. Hooray we took back control!

You haven't really explained why we have to sign a free-trade agreement with them at all. The status quo is surely an option if we aren't keen on the terms of any FTA deal?

And it's time to get over the butt-hurt over Brexit now. It's pretty clear that we're leaving. Our new PM has said we're going. She's appointed a team to negotiate our exit. And she's said there will be no early election. Game over.

JBod · 14 Jul 2016 at 06:55

With May as Prime Minister, her cabinet choice and the general Brexit vote the country is an international laughing stock, may as well put the comedian in charge of our foreign relations.

Funny to think the best government we have had in recent memory was a coalition. Almost like we need voting reform.

HEADRAT · 14 Jul 2016 at 06:58

All we need now is Trump as President and we'll have reached a new low in world politics

BaronVonDuncs · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:05

satchef1 said:
You haven't really explained why we have to sign a free-trade agreement with them at all. The status quo is surely an option if we aren't keen on the terms of any FTA deal?

And it's time to get over the butt-hurt over Brexit now. It's pretty clear that we're leaving. Our new PM has said we're going. She's appointed a team to negotiate our exit. And she's said there will be no early election. Game over.

Free trade deals mean lower to no tariffs and potentially lower non-tariff barriers to trade this means more trade takes place and more trade means more income for UK. Why is that so hard to understand? Have a look at Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage and then try some of Paul Krugman's work on trade.

It is not about being butt hurt over Brexit it is about understanding that the reality of it is really bad and extremely complex. To the point that my opinion is that it is a bad decision that should be re-thought. In a democracy (which the UK sort of is) I can hold such a view and express it as much as I wish and campaign, or take any action within the law to promote my view. So you get over your arrogant fascistic assumption that a one time plebiscite means all discussion is ended and start dealing with the genuine real questions that this massive political and economic blunder is going to deliver on the UK.

No1newts · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:15

Jono8 said:
Indeed. The fact HIGNFY has not been on over the last few weeks is hugely disappointing.

Also the Bugle ending. I can imagine the titanic meltdown John Oliver would be having this last month

tempted to get Twitter just to bug them both to do a one off special edition for this hypershambles.

swain90 · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:16

Came here expecting document management systems...left disappointed;

http://www.opentree.co.uk/solutions/cabinet/

Mynight · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:19

swain90 said:
Came here expecting document management systems...left disappointed;

http://www.opentree.co.uk/solutions/cabinet/

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that

.

Cosimo · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:22

Boris the first FS this century to start a war...

PlacidCasual · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:26

In Fox and Johnson, May has chosen 2 of tbe most internationally recognisable Conservatives at her disposal both of whom have significant followings within the party. They will be high profile in their roles and should help heal the party.

Davis is marmite but he is a serious conviction politician, he is serious about leaving the EU but has none of the referendum baggage other senior Conservative leavers have.

Hammond and Fallon must be trusted by May as unshowy and reliable which is probably all she is after.

Its a good cabinet, it has a lot of name recognition and experience, it should calm things down.

a1ex2001 · 14 Jul 2016 at 07:47

GAC said:
may i borrow that crystal ball for this weekends lotto numbers please. honestly she's not even been pm for 24 hours and she's already being voted out at the next election lol

I would have said the same who ever was leader it will be an incredibly difficult job to get through this process and not leave a lot of people very disappointed you don't need crystal ball to know that! I haven't said she won't pull it off but it would be a master stroke and I would expect casualties on the way!

FishFluff · 14 Jul 2016 at 08:27

Steedie said:
yes, exactly that...

Go on then, actually answer my question?

Hades · 14 Jul 2016 at 08:31

If Hillary Clinton becomes president then Boris' first meeting with her will be interesting

She’s got dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital.

Tunney · 14 Jul 2016 at 09:20

Hades said:
If Hillary Clinton becomes president then Boris' first meeting with her will be interesting

What he said about Obama ...

BoJo said:
Some said it was a snub to Britain. Some said it was a symbol of the part-Kenyan President’s ancestral dislike of the British empire – of which Churchill had been such a fervent defender

... and Trump ...

BoJo said:
The only reason I wouldn't visit some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump

... isn't any better.

wildman · 14 Jul 2016 at 09:23

Dimi said:
I do wonder if she got rid of Osbourne because she doesn't want to be aligned to his austerity message?

I doubt we'll hear the word again under the new chancellor.

you won't hear the word, but the actions will be the same. People will always hate on Osborne, but Hammond will just give us more of the same, unless he goes all Labour on the country and just recklessly spends while borrowing a ton of money at higher rates due to the UK's waning credit rating