FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

230,000 banking sector jobs at risk because of Brexit

Jump to newest
 

By *isandre OP   TV/TS
over a year ago

Durham

Brexit poses a risk to the global financial system and could spark more than 230,000 job losses, senior City figures have told MPs as they called for clarity on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Xavier Rolet, chief executive of the London Stock Exchange, said Brexit could have an impact on “unimaginably large” contracts which are cleared through the City and which might need to be transferred to the 27 remaining EU member states or other financial centres.

As Rolet called for a five-year transition period for the UK to exit the EU, MPs on the Treasury select committee were told the triggering of article 50 – the formal process initiating departure from the EU – in March could prompt banks to implement contingency plans to shift business out of London.

“The ecosystem in London is a bit like a Jenga tower: you don’t know if you pull one small piece out whether nothing happens or whether it has a more dramatic impact,” said Douglas Flint, chairman of Britain’s biggest bank, HSBC.

Ahead of the 23 June referendum HSBC said it could move 1,000 roles to Paris and Flint told MPs the bank was ready to take “pre-emptive action” before Brexit was completed. He pointed out that HSBC also had operations in Ireland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

The outcome of the referendum has prompted European centres to make a pitch for the daily £440bn of business that is cleared through the City, largely through the London Clearing House, which is operated by the LSE. Rolet said the business was more likely to shift to New York than other European centres and called for a “grand bargain” with the incoming Donald Trump administration to resolve the matter.

If the City did lose its ability to clear transactions denominated in euros – which was a contentious issue even before the Brexit vote – Rolet said 232,000 roles could be lost, citing research by consultants Ernst & Young for the LSE. That report has also been referred to by peers who said last month that thousands of jobs could be lost unless a transition deal could be secured for the UK.

Anthony Browne, chief executive of the British Bankers’ Association, said last year that banks were “quivering over the relocate button”. When asked about this, Flint said: “Nobody wants to push the button. The best outcome for everybody is the preservation of the status quo insofar as possible.”

He said it depended on the bank’s business model. Banks like HSBC which had operations in Europe “can take even longer to push the button,” Flint said, Citibank, he said, had a licence in Ireland but other banks operated in the EU through their London licence and might need to act sooner.

Flint said that some US banks in London were able to transact with big European companies because they used a “passport” from their operations in the UK and were devising contingency plans. Those which did not have access to Europe would start to implement those “pretty much immediately on the triggering of article 50,” said Flint.

Rolet said he was concerned about the “systemic impact” of moving contracts that are guaranteed by the London Clearing House if it was handled too quickly.

The City has been calling for a longer period of transition to prepare for exit from the EU. Asked about this, Rolet said: “Two years is just too short.”A further three years after the two years of negotiation is needed, he added.

Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP who chairs the committee, said: “The unanimity among these leading City figures – about the need for a three-year ‘standstill’ at the end of the article 50 process – is significant. They argued that without such an arrangement, major banks and other financial services firms will take pre-emptive action at a cost, perhaps large, to the sector and the wider economy.”

The vote for Brexit has sparked a debate about special deals for certain parts of the economy after carmaker Nissan announced it would develop its Sunderland plant. But Flint disagreed with the assertion by Labour MP Wes Streeting that this would be a bankers’ Brexit. Along with Rolet, and Allianz vice-chair Elizabeth Corley, he called for clarity on the UK’s hopes for Brexit in the eight to 12 weeks remaining before article 50 is set to be triggered.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I was beginning to think that I was the only one who read that article..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just bar anybody who chooses to leave from doing any business here by removing their licence.

Somebody will come along to fill the gap who'll be willing to pay they're taxes.... That's the very nature of capitalism and competition, for the life of me I cannot understand why we worry so much about a particular business.

It's the market they come for and out of, regulate it and then let capitalism be

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hree steps to heavenMan
over a year ago

Saint Albans


"Brexit poses a risk to the global financial system and could spark more than 230,000 job losses, senior City figures have told MPs as they called for clarity on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Xavier Rolet, chief executive of the London Stock Exchange, said Brexit could have an impact on “unimaginably large” contracts which are cleared through the City and which might need to be transferred to the 27 remaining EU member states or other financial centres.

As Rolet called for a five-year transition period for the UK to exit the EU, MPs on the Treasury select committee were told the triggering of article 50 – the formal process initiating departure from the EU – in March could prompt banks to implement contingency plans to shift business out of London.

“The ecosystem in London is a bit like a Jenga tower: you don’t know if you pull one small piece out whether nothing happens or whether it has a more dramatic impact,” said Douglas Flint, chairman of Britain’s biggest bank, HSBC.

Ahead of the 23 June referendum HSBC said it could move 1,000 roles to Paris and Flint told MPs the bank was ready to take “pre-emptive action” before Brexit was completed. He pointed out that HSBC also had operations in Ireland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

The outcome of the referendum has prompted European centres to make a pitch for the daily £440bn of business that is cleared through the City, largely through the London Clearing House, which is operated by the LSE. Rolet said the business was more likely to shift to New York than other European centres and called for a “grand bargain” with the incoming Donald Trump administration to resolve the matter.

If the City did lose its ability to clear transactions denominated in euros – which was a contentious issue even before the Brexit vote – Rolet said 232,000 roles could be lost, citing research by consultants Ernst & Young for the LSE. That report has also been referred to by peers who said last month that thousands of jobs could be lost unless a transition deal could be secured for the UK.

Anthony Browne, chief executive of the British Bankers’ Association, said last year that banks were “quivering over the relocate button”. When asked about this, Flint said: “Nobody wants to push the button. The best outcome for everybody is the preservation of the status quo insofar as possible.”

He said it depended on the bank’s business model. Banks like HSBC which had operations in Europe “can take even longer to push the button,” Flint said, Citibank, he said, had a licence in Ireland but other banks operated in the EU through their London licence and might need to act sooner.

Flint said that some US banks in London were able to transact with big European companies because they used a “passport” from their operations in the UK and were devising contingency plans. Those which did not have access to Europe would start to implement those “pretty much immediately on the triggering of article 50,” said Flint.

Rolet said he was concerned about the “systemic impact” of moving contracts that are guaranteed by the London Clearing House if it was handled too quickly.

The City has been calling for a longer period of transition to prepare for exit from the EU. Asked about this, Rolet said: “Two years is just too short.”A further three years after the two years of negotiation is needed, he added.

Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP who chairs the committee, said: “The unanimity among these leading City figures – about the need for a three-year ‘standstill’ at the end of the article 50 process – is significant. They argued that without such an arrangement, major banks and other financial services firms will take pre-emptive action at a cost, perhaps large, to the sector and the wider economy.”

The vote for Brexit has sparked a debate about special deals for certain parts of the economy after carmaker Nissan announced it would develop its Sunderland plant. But Flint disagreed with the assertion by Labour MP Wes Streeting that this would be a bankers’ Brexit. Along with Rolet, and Allianz vice-chair Elizabeth Corley, he called for clarity on the UK’s hopes for Brexit in the eight to 12 weeks remaining before article 50 is set to be triggered."
Considering how tbe economy is performing at the moment , we are best just to ignore the merchants of doom and doom.

There are of course those who delight themselves with bad news .

The line real time recorder of performance the FTSE 1OO does not seem bothered and has held at it highest level ever for nine days in a row. This has not happened since 1987.

And as previously mentioned new jobs from Snapchat .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have considered this long and hard for ten seconds and have come to the conclusion that it's bolox

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isandre OP   TV/TS
over a year ago

Durham

'Considering how tbe economy is performing at the moment , we are best just to ignore the merchants of doom and doom.'

So, just to be clear then, your argument here is that our strong economic performance within the EU and all of its associated trading conditions is proof that we were right all along to have voted to get out of it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I have considered this long and hard for ten seconds and have come to the conclusion that it's bolox "
Great thanks for that i will spend the next 10 seconds looking for a fuck to give.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Just bar anybody who chooses to leave from doing any business here by removing their licence.

Somebody will come along to fill the gap who'll be willing to pay they're taxes.... That's the very nature of capitalism and competition, for the life of me I cannot understand why we worry so much about a particular business.

It's the market they come for and out of, regulate it and then let capitalism be"

Just watched Donald Trump's press conference on sky news. He said that companies who want to take production and jobs out of the USA, example he used was car companies, will then have to pay a 'border tax' if they then want to sell those cars back into the USA. In particular he mentioned Ford and Chrysler who were due to sack American employees, close down American plants and shift production to Mexico. Now they have decided to stay in the USA because they realise they don't want to pay the border tax to sell their cars into America.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Mr Carney seems to be a liitle less pessimistic than he was.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago

Barbados


"Just bar anybody who chooses to leave from doing any business here by removing their licence.

Somebody will come along to fill the gap who'll be willing to pay they're taxes.... That's the very nature of capitalism and competition, for the life of me I cannot understand why we worry so much about a particular business.

It's the market they come for and out of, regulate it and then let capitalism be

Just watched Donald Trump's press conference on sky news. He said that companies who want to take production and jobs out of the USA, example he used was car companies, will then have to pay a 'border tax' if they then want to sell those cars back into the USA. In particular he mentioned Ford and Chrysler who were due to sack American employees, close down American plants and shift production to Mexico. Now they have decided to stay in the USA because they realise they don't want to pay the border tax to sell their cars into America. "

Apart from the fact that the car that Ford were going to make in Mexico wasn't intended for the US market. And their CEO explicitly stated that their move was nothing to do with Trump and they would have done the same in he hadn't won, and they were planning to do it anyway.

-Matt

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Just bar anybody who chooses to leave from doing any business here by removing their licence.

Somebody will come along to fill the gap who'll be willing to pay they're taxes.... That's the very nature of capitalism and competition, for the life of me I cannot understand why we worry so much about a particular business.

It's the market they come for and out of, regulate it and then let capitalism be

Just watched Donald Trump's press conference on sky news. He said that companies who want to take production and jobs out of the USA, example he used was car companies, will then have to pay a 'border tax' if they then want to sell those cars back into the USA. In particular he mentioned Ford and Chrysler who were due to sack American employees, close down American plants and shift production to Mexico. Now they have decided to stay in the USA because they realise they don't want to pay the border tax to sell their cars into America.

Apart from the fact that the car that Ford were going to make in Mexico wasn't intended for the US market. And their CEO explicitly stated that their move was nothing to do with Trump and they would have done the same in he hadn't won, and they were planning to do it anyway.

-Matt"

Would that only be the first model of car produced in the Mexican plant? Cars have a limited shelf life before the public get bored and want a new model. Who is to say Ford would not want to sell future models made at Mexican plants into the American market?

Irrelevant now anyway as Ford is staying in America and Chrysler too.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"Just bar anybody who chooses to leave from doing any business here by removing their licence.

Somebody will come along to fill the gap who'll be willing to pay they're taxes.... That's the very nature of capitalism and competition, for the life of me I cannot understand why we worry so much about a particular business.

It's the market they come for and out of, regulate it and then let capitalism be

Just watched Donald Trump's press conference on sky news. He said that companies who want to take production and jobs out of the USA, example he used was car companies, will then have to pay a 'border tax' if they then want to sell those cars back into the USA. In particular he mentioned Ford and Chrysler who were due to sack American employees, close down American plants and shift production to Mexico. Now they have decided to stay in the USA because they realise they don't want to pay the border tax to sell their cars into America. "

I don't like the banks. We're overly reliant on the finance sector though.

If there's no business to do from the loss of passporting rights then I can't see why they wouldn't cut jobs. If there's no business to do, no one new will turn up.

This car tax would break existing trade treaties, which deters any trust in any country thinking about negotiating one with you in the future over anything as you are untrustworthy.

You blackmail your companies into making political rather than business decisions.

The cost of all of your stuff goes up.

Mexico is likely to retaliate with their own tariffs so you sell less of your stuff.

Everyone gets poorer.

Is there a different mechanism at work?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just bar anybody who chooses to leave from doing any business here by removing their licence.

Somebody will come along to fill the gap who'll be willing to pay they're taxes.... That's the very nature of capitalism and competition, for the life of me I cannot understand why we worry so much about a particular business.

It's the market they come for and out of, regulate it and then let capitalism be

Just watched Donald Trump's press conference on sky news. He said that companies who want to take production and jobs out of the USA, example he used was car companies, will then have to pay a 'border tax' if they then want to sell those cars back into the USA. In particular he mentioned Ford and Chrysler who were due to sack American employees, close down American plants and shift production to Mexico. Now they have decided to stay in the USA because they realise they don't want to pay the border tax to sell their cars into America.

I don't like the banks. We're overly reliant on the finance sector though.

If there's no business to do from the loss of passporting rights then I can't see why they wouldn't cut jobs. If there's no business to do, no one new will turn up.

This car tax would break existing trade treaties, which deters any trust in any country thinking about negotiating one with you in the future over anything as you are untrustworthy.

You blackmail your companies into making political rather than business decisions.

The cost of all of your stuff goes up.

Mexico is likely to retaliate with their own tariffs so you sell less of your stuff.

Everyone gets poorer.

Is there a different mechanism at work?"

Isn't this what the EU does and why everyone is getting poorer?

What mechanism can be used by the EU to increase the level of trade that they do and to lower the high rates of unemployment they have created?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top