If CFOs were the only ones with a vote the result would not be in question. Unfortunately (from my perspective at least) those with more modest titles seem to have a different opinion.
EU Referendum | UK residents vote today.
- Thread starter 711
- Start date
- Status
You can't just put the 28% in some holding pattern in which they ultimately favour remaining; Cameron's demands are well enough known at this point as is his likelihood of success, if they believed in him the numbers would be different. But as i alluded to in my earlier reply, the CBI has gotten itself in enough trouble with how it misrepresented the views of the business community.
All that cheap labour right on their doorstep, an exploitable resource in ways good and ill.
The people you mean?
The greed of politicians and failure of Brussels has brought us to this point though.
Last edited:
nor can you assume they will all split to leave:
if you assume 50-50 split then the figures are
76% remain and 20% leave
if you assume they split in line with people who have already made up their mind its
87% remain and 9% leave
Even if 2/3rds of the undecided went with leave the figures would still be
71% remain and 25% leave
CFOs are people too!
But people with a conflict of interest.
What do you mean?
Oh dear, Nick's whole purpose on the cafe is to scour the press for articles he can selectively quote to reinforce his opinions, and he still cocks it up.
All in good humour Nick, keep it up, it's often you that gets a good conversation going.
That the priorities of a CFO for a multinational don't necessarily coincide with what is best for the country and its people in other spheres of life.
Do they care about such events as Libya, Ukraine, Syria, the migrant crisis, and how they reflect upon the EU's leadership and competence? Or matters of sovereignty: justice, TTIP, defence, foreign policy, human rights, tax harmonisation, fisheries e.t.c.
Oh dear, Nick's whole purpose on the cafe is to scour the press for articles he can selectively quote to reinforce his opinions, and he still cocks it up.
All in good humour Nick, keep it up, it's often you that gets a good conversation going.
The story was always going to be one of shifting trends, and this has borne out in the data: from June where 74% of CFO's unconditionally supported Britain's continued membership of the European Union, to the most recent figure of 62%. Uncertainty and doubt are increasing, albeit from a fairly low starting point.
But scour? I don't have the time. Stephanie Baker has been a regular contributor on the BBC's Dateline London throughout the past twelve months, and has often spoken a lot of sense IMO.
Last edited:
Interesting, doesn't change my mind but I didn't know that - thanks. 4.4% of money paid out incorrectly seems like a lot, but don't know what you could compare it with to know if that is acceptable or not.
I dont think that is really a conflict of interests Nick. Everyone has their own perspective on any political question, informed by their personal and professional circumstances. CFOs are just people with a particular perspective, they will vote as people, according to their perspective, weighing up what they think is best for their company and the economy as a whole, against what they think best in other areas such as immigration. Whether they vote stay or leave will be the product of their assessment of all these areas, the same as everyone else's would be.
I'd be more willing to those CFO's if they didn't spend half their fecking time working out new ways to avoid tax.
To be honest I am less inclined to blame CFOs / companies for that than the governments who are unwilling to work together to create cross border rules that would eliminate it. The system actually demands companies consider the interests of their shareholders above all else, and those interests are best served by finding the most efficient, legal tax arrangements they can. if a company behaved "morally" by paying bigger tax bills, they would in all likelihood be punished by their shareholders for doing so. As far as I understand it, and I am not an expert on this, "Europe" as an entity has made more effort to find a solution to this than the UK has. The UK (and Ireland ) has actually used its influence to undermine such efforts. For example, in May the FT wrote an article with the headline Brussels Seeks EU-Wide Corporate Tax Base To Tackle Tax Avoidance, in which it reports that the Commission was looking to find a solution to this exact problem (as neatly explained in the headline) with the UK and Ireland the two countries named opposing the plan.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Also seeing that Tory rebellion is likely to be far smaller than previously thought on this. Think it's beginning to settle on a small but clear decision to remain.
It sounds like this in work benefits emergency brake could be implemented immediately upon a stay vote... Or at least that's what Cameron wants. If that is the case you can see how the stay vote will probably carry enough anti immigration sentiment to bring a lot of the wavering votes with it
If we voted to leave we wouldn't need the brake anyway and the brake itself is not want people want to see from his negotiations. Cameron's just trying to convince people that it'll sort out all their concerns. It won't though and they'll recognise that.
The living wage is meant to take a lot of workers out of in-work benefits anyway, and there will still be plenty of people wanting to come to Britain for the wages, not the benefits. It may appeal to sentiment a little but it won't take long for people to see it will make little or no actual difference to immigration.
It's more about the theatre of it than anything. He can come back with something that a few months ago the EU was saying wasn't likely to be granted, the idea that immigrants come here to live on benefits will be starved of oxygen, all the main political players that could have backed exit will be campaigning to stay in (based on recent reports that Gove and Johnson will be going with Remain), resulting in most waverers going with the safe option of staying in. People that wanted bigger limits on freedom of movement were never voting to stay in anyway.
I respectfully disagree as in the mind of people who have a problem with the immigration figures I would be surprised if exactly the same attitude existed towards migrants who earn enough to pay taxes but don't receive benefits compared to those who are a net negative contributor to hmrc as they revieve more in benefits than hmrc collects.
If any brake will only apply to new or existing eu migration will be interesting as if it's only new surely the danger is a sudden influx under the existing scheme
It's one concern though... As is overall economic stability and as such I think it will be enough to convince enough people
But it will be close... And heated and I imagine it will dominate the airwaves and this forum for several months before (and after) any vote
No-one I have spoken to save for those of you on here, has the intention of voting to remain in the EU. Be they friends or family, in their 20s or 60s, the sentiment toward the EU is pretty cool.
This so-called victory on migrant benefits is a complete red herring, any serving politician who claims to have been swayed by such was never in my view a genuine supporter of the Leave movement. Westminster will be as powerless as it was before, so what we see are Tory ministers being stupidly harsh on non-Europeans with something to offer. The Out campaign should broaden the debate to include British sovereignty and EU incompetence: expose the weakness of Cameron's argument and show him to be the dissembler that he is.
This so-called victory on migrant benefits is a complete red herring, any serving politician who claims to have been swayed by such was never in my view a genuine supporter of the Leave movement. Westminster will be as powerless as it was before, so what we see are Tory ministers being stupidly harsh on non-Europeans with something to offer. The Out campaign should broaden the debate to include British sovereignty and EU incompetence: expose the weakness of Cameron's argument and show him to be the dissembler that he is.
Last edited:
Similarly over 90% of my work colleagues, friends and family are likely to vote stay... Probably more indicative of the self selecting nature of our own networks as most polls put the figures much closer to an even split than our experience indicates.
Can't think why. The EU offers the general population very little of what it wants yet gives it an abundance of what it doesn't want.
Well I run the uk division of a European company... The free movement of capital is pretty essential to my employees jobs and they are plenty intelligent enough to understand that. I have cousins working in Spain and others who have spent time in Italy and France, friends working at German companies and others with Polish wife's... So as I say I think it will be a close election, hardfought to the point of some animosity, many have made their mind up already but the ability to get that vote out and to persuade any undecided will probably be critical in deciding the outcome... My guess would be stay but that it will be close
Different circles Nick. I only know one person who's said they'll vote to leave, and I imagine that everyone I work with is going to vote to stay. I'm only tempted to vote 'leave' as it might increase my chances of owning property in London before I retire.
Well, of course, i wasn't suggesting that such was representative of the polls at this point. Although the demographics involved do give a Eurosceptic like myself some cause for hope.Different circles Nick. I only know one person who's said they'll vote to leave, and I imagine that everyone I work with is going to vote to stay. I'm only tempted to vote 'leave' as it might increase my chances of owning property in London before I retire.
Another part of the debate, which admittedly the Leave campaign has played down thus far, is the emotional and visionary aspect of a new Britain outside of a stagnating European Union. Right now, it is easier to make a positive case for a globally minded UK, than the continuance of its status as a peripheral member of the EU. Even the trade argument is becoming one of diminishing returns for Brussels: Britain's reliance upon Europe is on a consistent and increasingly downward curve.
Nick's a right-wing Tory. Who would have guessed?
We need more info to be able to decide imo. If we get a 'smooth divorce', granted EEA status like Norway then fine.
If it's bitter and we have to renegotiate every trade treaty and tariff with each individual EU member it will be very economically damaging.
Reread his posts. He has no love for the current Tory party, but hates Corbyn more.
Don't turn pompous Jips. It's a running thing that I think Nick's more right-wing than he admits to. I like him really.
He voted for the Greens!
Reread his posts. (voted green my arse)
I think he mostly did it as a wild story to tell at the pub
Bloody hell, rare I'm called pompous! He defo has 'Tory leanings'. He's a good guy, agreed. Erudite poster.
Who is Manuel btw?
Still can't make up my mind.
So to get eea status Norway Norway has had to pay but gets no say in the rules yet still has to implement the vast majority... I'm not sure that's quite as good a deal as we currently have!
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-reality-uk-voters-seduced-by-norwegian-model
Spanish waiter in Fawlty Towers. His beloved hamster was really a rat.
Interesting read and yep, doesn't sound the good deal people say.
Doesn't mean we have to have a Norway deal, we can negotiate our own deal.
- Status