Slashdot Mirror


Bank of England Accidentally E-mails Top-Secret "Brexit" Plan To the Guardian

schwit1 writes: The first rule of "Project Bookend" is that you don't talk about "Project Bookend." In retrospect, maybe the first rule should have been "you don't accidentally e-mail 'Project Bookend' to a news agency," because as the Guardian reports, one of its editors opened his inbox and was surprised to find a message from the BOE's Head of Press Jeremy Harrison outlining the UK financial market equivalent of the Manhattan project. Project Bookend is a secret (or 'was' a secret) initiative undertaken by the BOE to study what the fallout might be from a potential 'Brexit', but if anyone asked what Sir Jon Cunliffe and a few senior staffers were up to, they were instructed to say that they were busy investigating "a broad range of European economic issues." And if you haven't heard the term before, "Brexit" refers to the possibility of Britain leaving the EU -- one of the possible outcomes of an upcoming referendum.

8 of 396 comments (clear)

  1. Yes to Brexit by ThePhilips · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think UK should leave EU completely. Sooner better.

    P.S. I live in Germany.

    --
    All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    1. Re:Yes to Brexit by ThePhilips · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Start with kicking out Greece. It's a money pit.

      I also favor Greece exit.

      It is very similar situation as with UK politically: EU is constantly used as a scapegoat to justify the crap they do internally. A point of time comes when population is simply way too alienated toward the EU.

      IMO, Greece is long beyond the point and UK is just tipping over. Reading the UK newspapers, the amount of arrogant BS about EU is astounding. (I follow politics reluctantly, but even I know enough about EU organization to call BS literally 100% of what people say about EU in UK.) They are definitely on their way out of EU. It is not the question of "if" - it is the question of "when".

      The EU itself has grown to a colossus of well-paid politicians striving for more power than they can get in their home countries.

      That is inevitable. (Compare to Amis complaining about the Feds.)

      But that's the price of making out of many different pieces something bigger and hopefully better.

      So far, personally, I hadn't experienced anything EU did to affect negatively my life. That while there are some positives (like for example cheaper imports) which affect my daily positively.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    2. Re:Yes to Brexit by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most rational people recognize Britain should be part of the EU.

      Why? I haven't made up my mind yet, but I'm erring on the side of leaving for entirely rational reasons.

      In short, I think the UK and much of continental Europe have different long term goals. The Eurozone nations have opted for a degree of financial integration that the UK doesn't want or need. Obviously that hasn't worked out very well recently, at least for the economically stronger EU nations, so there is little reason for the UK to join in the foreseeable future. I think the wider EU is also heading for a more centralised, federalised system of legislation and broader government, which again the UK does not generally want to join. I suspect that in the long term these two fundamental types of integration will prove to be inseparable, and those who want to be part of the EU will increasingly lose sovereignty over things like taxation, weakening national governments in favour of ever-more-powerful central EU authorities. That's OK if it really is what they want, but I don't think it is what the UK is looking for in its relationship with its European neighbours.

      On the other hand, the UK and many other EU nations are valuable trading partners for each other, so maintaining a liberal trading environment is in everyone's interests. This was what our previous generation actually signed up for by joining the predecessors of the current EU, of course. I think many in the UK also value things like the the European Convention on Human Rights (even if our current administration do not like it) and would be happy to remain a signatory, but that is a different European system, not part of the EU. Similarly I think those from the UK who often travel to Europe or vice versa would see merit in the UK joining the Schengen Area (even though again our current administration are probably strongly against it).

      As things stand, it may be that the best way of everybody getting as close as possible to achieving their own goals is for the UK and EU to separate amicably, and then for the UK to establish alternative agreements for mutual benefit with the EU and/or individual member states in those areas where everyone's interests do align. It would no doubt be painful for everyone in the short term, but this might be a having to break eggs to make omelettes situation.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    3. Re:Yes to Brexit by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think Greece better fits as a province of Turkey.

      I start from your last sentence because i don't think people should waste time reading my reply to a person like you.

      Greece does not belong into EU either - what other EU country does have 10% of its population as civil servants? Even Bulgaria is better than that.

      Based on OECD, Employment in general government as a percentage of the labour force:
      Greece 7%,
      Germany 11%,
      USA 15%,
      UK 18%,
      France 22%
      (note: i put USA in for our non-European friend in Slashdot to compare)
      source

      And why not? Greece does not belong into the Euro-zone because they have falsified their papers. Corruption, cheating, nepotism and tax evasion is Greek national past time after all.

      I don't deny any of this accusations, and i can accept that we Greeks are the worste people on the world, BUT: don't believe everything you read.

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    4. Re:Yes to Brexit by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Most rational people recognize Britain should be part of the EU.

      Why? I haven't made up my mind yet, but I'm erring on the side of leaving for entirely rational reasons.

      In short, I think the UK and much of continental Europe have different long term goals. The Eurozone nations have opted for a degree of financial integration that the UK doesn't want or need. Obviously that hasn't worked out very well recently, at least for the economically stronger EU nations, so there is little reason for the UK to join in the foreseeable future. I think the wider EU is also heading for a more centralised, federalised system of legislation and broader government, which again the UK does not generally want to join. I suspect that in the long term these two fundamental types of integration will prove to be inseparable, and those who want to be part of the EU will increasingly lose sovereignty over things like taxation, weakening national governments in favour of ever-more-powerful central EU authorities. That's OK if it really is what they want, but I don't think it is what the UK is looking for in its relationship with its European neighbours.

      On the other hand, the UK and many other EU nations are valuable trading partners for each other, so maintaining a liberal trading environment is in everyone's interests. This was what our previous generation actually signed up for by joining the predecessors of the current EU, of course. I think many in the UK also value things like the the European Convention on Human Rights (even if our current administration do not like it) and would be happy to remain a signatory, but that is a different European system, not part of the EU. Similarly I think those from the UK who often travel to Europe or vice versa would see merit in the UK joining the Schengen Area (even though again our current administration are probably strongly against it).

      As things stand, it may be that the best way of everybody getting as close as possible to achieving their own goals is for the UK and EU to separate amicably, and then for the UK to establish alternative agreements for mutual benefit with the EU and/or individual member states in those areas where everyone's interests do align. It would no doubt be painful for everyone in the short term, but this might be a having to break eggs to make omelettes situation.

      Somebody has been attending UKP rallies, "...separate amicably..." that is has to be one of my favourite Nigel Farage quotes. In other words you want the UK to enjoy all the economic advantages of EU membership without any of the burdens and preferably outside the EU? The Americans have a saying: "There is no such thing as free lunch". What motivation would the other EU nations have to give Britain all the economic advantages it used to enjoy once Britain leaves the EU without any of the perceived shortcomings such as political and economic integration? At the very least:

      1) Giving a Britain outside the EU a 'special deal' would be opening the door to every eurosceptic wing nut and velvet fascist in the EU to demand the same special treatment. That would be worse than the Brexit alone since it would effectively be the end of the EU and exactly the effect that the likes of Putin would like to see. Which is also why the Russians support parties like Front National and the Party for Freedom in one way or another. The smart machiavellian thing to do is let Britan Brexit if it really wants to and then give them a rough time.
      2) There are plenty of countries willing to fill the political vacuum that Britain leaves in the EU, first among them being Poland. It is pretty revealing that when the Ukraine crisis hit it was German France and Poland that took centre stage when a decade ago it would have been Britain, France and Germany. If Britan Brexits in some fit of nationalistic intoxication Britain would to a large extent be an overseer in the decision making process that will determine the political and economic future

    5. Re:Yes to Brexit by Mendy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      3) Since it depends upon the eurozone for at least half of it's exports. The toll barriers resulting from a Brexit would induce British business to move significant portions of their production into the common market area.

      Britain is one of the few countries within the EU that exports more to countries outside it than to ones in it, albeit by a small margin. One of the arguments for leaving is that the regulations required by the EU (which may have protectionist origins) make it harder to compete outside of it with faster growing world economies.

    6. Re:Yes to Brexit by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is a saying that goes "share your wealth with us or we will share our poverty with you". The whole point of the EU is that the stronger members bring up the poorer members so that they don't dissolve into financial chaos which tends to have other inconvenient outputs.

      That's actually the problem with the EU. Poverty doesn't go away just because you reduce trade barriers. If it did, NAFTA would've turned Mexico into a shining beacon of democracy. You need political and legal reform to disperse the conditions that are causing the poverty.

      The EU does take some steps towards this - e.g. harmonizing product standards. But for the most part the EU countries are insisting on political independence. That's like trying to hitch up a bunch of horses of different athletic ability to a single wagon under the premise that the faster horses will bring the slower horses up to speed. What really ends up happening is the slower horses end up getting dragged along, and the faster horses end up having to work harder (e.g. Germany and Greece). You need to condition the horses until they're of similar fitness (i.e. political reform until they're of similar economic strength) before you think about hitching them all to the same wagon.

      The U.S. tried what is basically the EU approach in the 1700s when it first won independence from Britain. Mostly because of the bad aftertaste of the overreaching British Monarchy, each state wanted to govern itself as if they were separate countries. That lasted about a decade before it became obvious it wasn't working, and a stronger central government was needed if there was to be a union.

  2. As a Finn by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am very much in support of Britain leaving the EU. Later, if and when Scotland gains independence, I would be happy to see them join. But britain, with their retrograde social policies like expensive higher education, weakening unions etc. should stay the fuck away from the Western world.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.